Archive for the ‘records retention’ Category

“A recent proposal will mandate the current and future governors of New York to use an email archiving solution that will offer permanent access to important documents, the Times Union reports.

The most recent proposal marks the second-consecutive year New York lawmakers have passed legislation that creates more strict regulations forcing governors to submit emails to state archives. The bill’s proponents have stressed the historical benefits of integrating a government email archiving solution.

In the case of Arteria Prop. Pty Ltd. v. Universal Funding V.T.O., Inc., 2008 WL 4513696 (D.N.J. Oct. 1, 2008) the court made an interesting statement in reference to how website content should be treated in litigation:

A recent research by Applied Research has shown that almost 90% of organizations see value in having a data plan, however less than half of those actually has a plan in place.  In my experience even the plans that are in place are lacking or inadequate.  A lot of organizations, when they plan for a data retention plan, only think about the obvious, which is tapes and email, however valuable data, or electronic records, are in much more data repositories than many organizations realize. 

Many (but not all) corporate legal types consider ESI retention management as the legal hold process. Not a bad thought but really falls short of a true corporate definition of the term. To records managers ESI retention management refers to the systematic retention and disposition of the organizations electronic business records; either for the day to day running of the business, regulatory compliance or litigation support. And in this case I believe the records managers are right.

Time and time again we see news stories and legal case writes ups where it has become obvious employees still have no idea that an email is not a private communication. I find most employees, even corporate legal department types, still consider an email is like a verbal conversation in a parking lot; once its ended, it doesn’t exist anymore (unless it was recorded).

The acquisition of Mimosa Systems by Iron Mountain last February was a big piece of the puzzle in Iron Mountains’ digital strategy –  dubbed Digital 2.0.   This acquisition also brought changes for me personally.  In my new role at Iron Mountain I am going to focus on evangelizing the Digital 2.0 vision and product set, a task that I’m both exited about and also don’t underestimate.  For quite a few people, Iron Mountain is the company that moves those boxes in trucks they see driving around. You see them in New York, London and Amsterdam, etc.  For many though, it has largely gone unnoticed that Iron Mountain has been building up a major set of digital offerings for customers, from online backup of PCs and Servers to digital archiving and even technology escrow management.

Over the years, including just recently, I have been asked by potential customers how the Mimosa NearPoint content archive controls the disposition of ESI after it has reached the end of its retention period. Specifically they want to know how the system allows a records manager to approve the deletion of the records. I am constantly amazed at this question.

Attention all Federal Agencies, legislation authored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) that strengthens the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was approved by the Senate on October 20 and is set to become law shortly. Leahy introduced the OPEN FOIA Act earlier this year, and pushed for its inclusion in the 2010 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, which was passed by the Senate by a vote of 79-19. The House of Representatives has already passed the bill, clearing the way for President Obama to sign it into law.