Psystar case reveals Apple's shaky e-mail retention policy

21.11.2008

However, Apple claims in the Psystar document that its policy is fine because once the company anticipated litigation:

[Apple] identified a group of employees who could potentially have documents relevant to the issues reasonably evident in this action. Apple then provided those individuals with a document retention notice which included a request for the retention of any relevant documents.

Psystar's antitrust claim has been dismissed, but Apple is . Apple's weak e-discovery practices could very well come back to haunt the company.

If you're interested in learning more about e-discovery, the relevant court case for e-document retention is Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC. LexisNexis gives a of what is legally required from a corporation.

For even more information, The Sedona Conference a series of guidelines which, while not legally required, are a good "best practices" guide to document preservation.