Open Questions About Carter's Upholding of Peck

Hello world! We're doing an unscientific poll about your reaction to Judge Carter's decision to uphold Judge Peck's approval of predictive coding software. Some important questions are below. If you have opinions, then please email me (ekoblentz-at-alm-dot-com) -- especially if you're a CIO, lit support specialist, or service provider. (Note: your emails must identify who you are, but if you need to remain anonymous in publication, then indicate that.)

• Do you expect the decision to impact clients' interest in using predictive coding? If so, how?
• Companies that makes predictive coding software are now likely to say, "We told you so"; what pitfalls should clients beware?

If you're a skeptic, then what other advancements/decisions/innovations would you like to see before using predictive coding?

What would it take to convince keyword-search Tories that assisted-review rebels are right?

What would it take to convince assisted-review rebels that there remains lessons to be learned from keyword-search Tories?

Do you anticipate the same epic battle happening with any other litigation technologies?

Someday, da Silva Moore may be looked back upon as the Scopes Monkey Trial of litigation technology. What’s it mean to you?

Suppose there’s a case where the software goes haywire; is it worth the risk?