As someone responding to an eDiscovery request, the flip side of that statement is, of course, true. Kelly goes into some detail, but for my M365 folks: if you’re going to argue that the version of the document when shared is too difficult to collect, you will need to show your work. That will need to include a whole lot more than saying you don’t know how to do it, or that it’s difficult.
Would you be interested in getting together over a Teams channel to discuss M365, eDiscovery, and other related topics with other subscribers? Perhaps even schedule some chats on occasion? (Paid subscribers, I’ve got some ideas just for you as well.) If you are interested, sign up here. If there’s enough interest, we will definitely get this going in the next few weeks.)
One of the tools he mentions is the Audit log, and I agree. It can be difficult in SharePoint and OneDrive to determine who saw a document and who didn’t, because there are often so many changes being made at once. It’s easy to get lost in an avalanche of versions and permissions that leave doubt as to whether something was even shared with a user during the time in question.
That’s where the audit log comes in. However, just because events are logged doesn’t mean they will still be there months from now. If you’re in a highly litigious industry, the retention and preservation of audit log data might be something worth considering.
Just a little light conversation about eDiscovery, Microsoft 365, Copilot, etc., before you head out to your holiday weekend.
