The press release is short on technical details, and leaves me with a few questions, but the idea of a single web server version of a hosted review platform like CaseVantage does have me intrigued.
Obviously, I’m concerned about the performance of one server running the entire platform and back end SQL databases. I’m also concerned about the effect running productions or trying to image on the fly would have with just a single server to perform all of those features.
On the other hand, one of the biggest challenges with trying to use in-house review tools, like Summation or Concordance, is that once you hit a practical size limit in any individual case, you have to teach attorneys a different platform than the one they use in-house. If you were able to host a simplified version of the same platform, you would lose that objection to using a hosted review platform.
You’d still have the objections over the use of the “free” (if only in theory) in house tool, and the one the host is going to charge the firm for, but having them be the same product would, I think, actually make it easier to charge a similar per GB rate for hosting client data in smaller cases. Or maybe that’s just my impression.
What do you think? Are you as intrigued as I am? Do you happen to have more information on the technical details? I’d love to hear your take!
Follow these topics: LitigationSupport