Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by ars | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

ars·

Presumably it would be better if it was a phone call? Does a legal hold require recording all calls?

> > Which is....a.....theory!

I guess their theory is these ephemeral chats are like phone calls, as opposed to written communication.

View on HN

Something has to go out of it's way to explicitly delete a chat. Phone calls aren't stored by default in the first place. If all phone calls were recorded and deleted after 24 hours, then yes, it would probably be a violation of the legal hold to continue deleting them after 24 hours.

And every time you view a website you make a copy? The implementation can be considered independent from the UX

Voicemails have a copy which are typically deleted after a period of time

If a court determined that someone was intentionally leaving voicemails so that their messages would get destroyed while their company was subject to a legal hold, that would be illegal. I think pretty generally, courts are sympathetic that humans are human, but they're decidedly unsympathetic to malintent.

But if someone were leaving voicemails for just the purpose of communicating?

It would depend. If the voicemails were pertinent to the ongoing litigation, the counsel for the party responsible for the legal hold might be required to ensure those voicemails are retained. The legal hold isn't "preserve anything that's convenient to retain". If they can't be retained, they shouldn't be left, and it's the job of the legal team to make sure that's conveyed.

Wall Street records all calls. Has forever, since long before storage was cheap.

Banks are required to by the SEC

Reply on news.ycombinator.com