Live from Legal IT 3.0: Craig Ball, computer forensics expert
This post comes a day after Legal IT 3.0 concluded, but we wanted to be sure to get you the answers from Texas trial lawyer and computer forensics expert Craig Ball, another attendee and speaker.
Craig gave his popular presentation, "Power Persuasion (using PowerPoint in novel ways to increase attention of your audience)" and also presented on e-discovery, "Ten Nerdy Things You Need to Know about E-Discovery."
Read more of our email exchange with Craig after the jump.
Lisa Kennelly: What are your overall impressions of the conference?
Craig Ball: I found it a well run conference built on engaging topics and capable speakers. If any legal tech conference deserves to be called "classy," it's this one. Really nice, bright volunteer staff.
You will only derive maximum value from this conference if you are bilingual in English and French. Some speakers—including [yesterday] morning's keynote—delivered their presentations exclusively in French, without translation.
Lisa Kennelly: What session or panel have you found most interesting or compelling?
Craig Ball: I really can't single out any program over another. I go to so many of these events, that there isn't much I haven't heard before. Consequently, I'm a poor arbiter. All I saw were well prepared, but no barn burners.
Lisa Kennelly: Do you see any difference between Canada and the US in terms of their respective legal communities' openness or willingness to embrace technology and social media?
Craig Ball: My impression is that Canadian lawyers' embrace of technology resembles the status of forensic technology among lawyers in the States as it was perhaps ten years ago. It's a bit of a time tunnel, but not necessarily backward. No one seems particularly unhappy with the state of affairs; and if it ain't broke, no hurry to grab the tiger's tail that is e-discovery.
There is very little execution on electronic discovery, although the discipline is finding recognition in the Rules. The Sedona Conference has a lot of stroke here—perhaps more than in the States. Judges are receptive to EDD, but lawyers are not driving EDD issues into court here. My sense is that some judges are almost longing to grapple with some of the e-ddiscovery issues like those seen in the U.S. The paucity of juries and small size and collegiality of the bar may account for the lack of issues making it to court. I think I've worked in buildings with more lawyers in them than in all of Nova Scotia.
