The upcoming US elections are causing a lot of people to focus on the use of electronic voting systems and the inherent issues that result. At one level this doesn’t have a lot to do with using ELNs, but it is essentially the same problem – how do you use a computer system to record a real-world act, in a way that can’t be subsequently altered. As always it comes down to well designed systems (people + technology) run competently which is surprisingly hard.

Hopefully the ensuing conversation will raise the general level of awareness of the issues involved. Ideally we’ll be able to turn the content up and marketing-speak down….

Couple of representative links: Ars Technica’s guide on how to steal an election (scary reading), and Scott Adams’s tongue-in-cheek but thought provoking post on whether it really matters anyway (which I suspect will offend the easily offended).

 

DRM is beginning to make an entrance into the Enterprise, and whilst at one level the technologies sound attractive I’m not sure the longer term, deeper consequences are all that palatable. I do wonder what the lawyers will think (because a Judge is unlikely to be impressed by arbitrary restrictions imposed by some DRM system) and of course from a long term records perspective DRM is completely toxic.

James Governor’s MonkChips: digital lard for the enterprise: DRM meets document formats: “What I am saying is that DRM creates new escrow challenges, and organisations should know exactly what they are using it for, and why, and what risks they are mitigating, before embarking on an enterprise DRM strategy.”

 

For patent geeks, an interesting overview of how US Patent Law developed to the present day starting from the beginning:

In 1787, with the passage of the Constitution, Congress was empowered to “promote the process of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors, the exclusive rights to their respective writings and discoveries.” (Article 1 § 8)

 

Yet another case of co-inventor issues arising from work in an academic setting is described in Patently-O: Patent Law Blog: Inventorship: Student Denied Co-Inventorship Opportunity (and also here. We’re seeing an increasing interest in PatentSafe from the academic sector, mainly as a quick & cheap way of avoiding such problems. Whilst this sort of dispute doesn’t happen all that often, when it does the legal bills alone would have paid for PatentSafe.

Interestingly, deploying such solutions into academia is rather different from an industrial setting, which caused us to add some additional features. The short version is “less is more”, as this environment doesn’t respond well to top-down imposition of complex systems. So we try to make PatentSafe as invisible as possible.

 

A lot of our work in introducing completely electronic replacements for the Bound Lab Notebook (we use the term “Patent Evidence Creation & Preservation” systems) revolves around talking with IT and helping them understand the implications of being on the front line of possible litigation.

Well, it seems that Congress is prepared to give us a helping hand… the implications should be interesting! From InfoWorld:

Document management systems go to court | InfoWorld | Column | 2005-12-27 | By Ephraim Schwartz: “Two proposed amendments to the federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if passed by Congress, will have a major impact on corporations and their IT departments…. The two proposals are specifically targeted at electronic discovery. First, the proposed amendments to Rule 26 will require attorneys for both parties to a litigation in Federal court to sit down prior to the proceedings to discuss their clients’ document management systems….. The rule also requires each company to designate a spokesperson for its IT group.”

Here’s the full article

© 2011 elnblog.com Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
Private