<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: If You Think E-Discovery Does Not Matter, Think Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2007/09/27/if-you-think-e-discovery-does-not-matter-think-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2007/09/27/if-you-think-e-discovery-does-not-matter-think-again/</link>
	<description>thoughts about the evolution of e-discovery</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 05:21:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua Konkle</title>
		<link>http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2007/09/27/if-you-think-e-discovery-does-not-matter-think-again/comment-page-1/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua Konkle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://staging.clearwellsystems.com/wordpress/?p=29#comment-20</guid>
		<description>Great post Aaref and thanks for your follow-ups on my other posts :-)&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;This is sounding like the Morgan case with Perelman from 2005 (overturned in March of this year).&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Process is fundamental issue with eDiscovery, in fact it holds true for things like disaster recovery.    Both require dedication by IT to help solve the business problem, the latter being risk and the former being liability.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Good find and thanks for sharing.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Sincerely&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;JK</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post Aaref and thanks for your follow-ups on my other posts <img src='http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>This is sounding like the Morgan case with Perelman from 2005 (overturned in March of this year).</p>
<p>Process is fundamental issue with eDiscovery, in fact it holds true for things like disaster recovery.    Both require dedication by IT to help solve the business problem, the latter being risk and the former being liability.</p>
<p>Good find and thanks for sharing.</p>
<p>Sincerely</p>
<p>JK</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2007/09/27/if-you-think-e-discovery-does-not-matter-think-again/comment-page-1/#comment-19</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://staging.clearwellsystems.com/wordpress/?p=29#comment-19</guid>
		<description>When you look at all the implications and consequences of ignoring e-discovery, it seems like such a no-brainer for general counsels. What&#039;s the barrier here? Why are the leading in-house counsels at the large enterprise level still turning a blind eye to these challenges?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you look at all the implications and consequences of ignoring e-discovery, it seems like such a no-brainer for general counsels. What&#8217;s the barrier here? Why are the leading in-house counsels at the large enterprise level still turning a blind eye to these challenges?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

