主页
所有资源
视频和网络研讨会

Interview - Ben Rusch of Consilio on the practical problems of collecting data in the EU

Written by admin

Updated: Apr 12, 2021

Authors
More from the author

Ben Rusch, interviewed by Chris Dale for the eDisclosure Information Project, is a solicitor and Vice President of Document Review Services at Consilio in London. He took part in a panel discussion on privacy, data protection and cross-border discovery which Chris moderated at ILTA 2017 in Las Vegas, where his subject was the practical problems of collecting data in the EU. This aspect gets relatively little coverage compared with discussion about the legal difficulties, and Chris wanted to hear more from him as someone who deals with these issues daily.

Two issues come up in the this interview. One is to do with practical things like getting hold of equipment and premises. The other is about the added implications which EU privacy and data protection rules and expectations put in the way of those who are used to how things work in the US.

Ben Rusch says that the practicalities of procuring equipment are often overlooked. In most US cities it is easy enough to get your hands on rented computers and related equipment at short notice. That is far from the case in many EU countries, even before you get to other questions like office space, the quality of infrastructure like broadband, and the availability of suitably qualified people.

This there is also more form-filling and box-ticking in many EU countries and this has knock-on effects on an exercise which the clients would like to start immediately.

EU privacy and data protection requirements add another layer of formality as companies must seek the consent of custodians and (in some countries) the cooperation of the Workers Council.

The real problem, often, comes down to how corporate data has been kept. Many companies do not observe distinctions between personal and corporate data and, while some private information is susceptible to automated redaction (Social Security numbers and email addresses, for example) others, such as religious beliefs, are not.

While technology can cover much of the ground, a high proportion of it has to be dealt with by in-country review using teams of reviewers.

This, when added to the practical problems referred to by Ben Rusch, can slow the process down. The critical thing is to manage the expectations of clients, lawyers, opponents and courts so that everyone involved is aware of the potential sources of delay, and then to bring a combination of technology and human skills to the problem as soon as possible.

Ben Rusch, interviewed by Chris Dale for the eDisclosure Information Project, is a solicitor and Vice President of Document Review Services at Consilio in London. He took part in a panel discussion on privacy, data protection and cross-border discovery which Chris moderated at ILTA 2017 in Las Vegas, where his subject was the practical problems of collecting data in the EU. This aspect gets relatively little coverage compared with discussion about the legal difficulties, and Chris wanted to hear more from him as someone who deals with these issues daily.

Two issues come up in the this interview. One is to do with practical things like getting hold of equipment and premises. The other is about the added implications which EU privacy and data protection rules and expectations put in the way of those who are used to how things work in the US.

Ben Rusch says that the practicalities of procuring equipment are often overlooked. In most US cities it is easy enough to get your hands on rented computers and related equipment at short notice. That is far from the case in many EU countries, even before you get to other questions like office space, the quality of infrastructure like broadband, and the availability of suitably qualified people.

This there is also more form-filling and box-ticking in many EU countries and this has knock-on effects on an exercise which the clients would like to start immediately.

EU privacy and data protection requirements add another layer of formality as companies must seek the consent of custodians and (in some countries) the cooperation of the Workers Council.

The real problem, often, comes down to how corporate data has been kept. Many companies do not observe distinctions between personal and corporate data and, while some private information is susceptible to automated redaction (Social Security numbers and email addresses, for example) others, such as religious beliefs, are not.

While technology can cover much of the ground, a high proportion of it has to be dealt with by in-country review using teams of reviewers.

This, when added to the practical problems referred to by Ben Rusch, can slow the process down. The critical thing is to manage the expectations of clients, lawyers, opponents and courts so that everyone involved is aware of the potential sources of delay, and then to bring a combination of technology and human skills to the problem as soon as possible.

Fill out the form below to download the complete insight.

Philippines
Pitcairn
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Réunion
Saint Barthélemy
Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Martin (French part)
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Sign up for Consilio updates

不管怎么样,我们都很友善,祝你好运。在悲惨的情绪中,人们对各种各样的恐惧感情有独钟的感觉。
谢谢!您提交的内容已收到!
单击 “注册” 即表示您确认您同意我们的 隐私政策
哎哟!提交表单时出了点问题。