如果以「E-discovery」或「Electronic discovery」的英文關鍵字鍵入 Google 中搜尋，
可以找到數量多到看也看不完的資料，以及大量以討論這個議題為主的網站和部落格。
雖然新法的生效時間為 2006 年 12 月，但自 1999 年左右，開始研擬修法之際，甚至更 早前，美國的產、官、學界即熱烈的參與這項議題的討論。畢竟，新法對實務之影響可 謂極為重大，無形中也加重了企業以及訴訟代理人之責任。
反觀國內，在資料蒐集的過程中，幾乎可以說完全找不到任何詳細討論本議題的相 關資料。從這裏即可以窺見，國內環境對美國民事訴訟認知上的落差。隨著明碁、以及 最近的華碩案，相信台灣企業未來因為違反證據開示，而受到制裁的情況，將有可能愈 來愈多。
美國聯邦民事訴訟程序法第一條所揭櫫的精神：「每件民事訴訟皆應確保獲得公 正、迅速與不昂貴之判決242。」因此，高昂的訴訟費用，已不符合美國聯邦民事訴訟程 序法之立法目的。但每一個經驗豐富的律師都了解，證據開示程序的爭議，在現今的商 業訴訟中，已成為一個不可預知的黑洞。無止境的爭議不但會延宕訴訟的進行，亦會增 加訴訟成本，甚至受到法院課以罰金，或不利益的判決結果。證據開示程序畢竟不是訴 訟爭議的本體，但是如果忽略它，卻有可能因而左右案件的成敗。
當然，在新法施行未久的今日，在缺乏足夠的案例參考下，如何規劃方不致違反美 國聯邦民事訴訟程序法的規定，其實仍是個疑問。然而，企業只要平時能做最好的準備，
面臨訴訟時，僅需將精力放在爭端本身即可，毋須過分擔心其他的旁枝末節會影響訴訟 結果，相信如此必能將成本及不必要的爭端減至最低。
242 FED.R.CIV.P. 1. “…They should be construed and administered to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action.”
參考文獻
一、 中文書籍
1. Arthur Best 著，蔡秋明、蔡兆誠、郭乃嘉譯，證據法入門—美國證據法評釋及實例 解說 Evidence：example and explanations，元照出版社，2002 年。
2. William Burnham 著，林利芝譯，英美法導論 Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States (Second Edition)，元照出版社，2002 年。
3. 周延鵬，虎與狐的智慧力，天下遠見出版股份有限公司，2006 年 3 月一版一刷。
二、 中文期刋或報告
1. 王曉玟，智財戰換中國半導體江山，台積電不消滅中芯的秘密，天下雜誌，第 440 期，2010 年 1 月，available at
<http://www.cw.com.tw/article/index.jsp?page=1&id=40105> (last visited Mar. 1, 2010) 2. 古筱玫等，美國專利侵權訴訟對台灣半導體業營運的影響，培訓科技背景跨領域高
級人材計劃—95 海外培訓成果發表會。
3. 李育菁等，台灣企業對美國專利訴訟之 e-Discovery 程序的因應，培訓科技背景跨領 域高級人材計劃—96 海外培訓成果發表會。
4. 師安寧，民事訴訟證據制度中的若干法理學問題，abailable at
<http://big5.chinalawinfo.com/article.chinalawinfo.com/Article_Detail.asp?ArticleID=34 006&Type=mod> (last visited Apr. 12, 2009)
5. 馬傲秋，美國專利侵權訴訟蒐證程序之研究，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士班 論文。民國 97 年 7 月。
6. 馮浩庭，美國專利訴訟程序之研究—現況、困境與美國國會之修法回應，47 期學員 法學研究報告，司法官訓練所。
7. 劉玉中，民事訴訟上證據收集之研究，國立台北大學法學系博士論文，民國 94 年 7 月。
8. Cooper, John L. & Fisher, Jeffrey M.,「Discovery of Electronically Stored Information」， 月旦法學雜誌，第 140 期，2007 年 1 月。
三、 英文書籍
1. HEWITT,LESTER L.,PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATION:ASTEP-BY-STEP GUIDE FROM DISPUTE THROUGH TRIAL FOR EXECUTIVES,WITNESSES AND IN-HOUSE COUNSEL, ASPATORE, (2005).
2. PAUL,GEORGE L.&NEARON,BRUCE H.,THE DISCOVERY REVOLUTION,AMERICAN BAR
ASSOCIATION,(2006).
3. PARK,ROGER C.,LEONARD,DAVID P.,STEVEN H.GOLDBERG,EVIDENCE LAW,SECOND
EDITION.THOMSON, (2004).
四、 英文期刋或報告
1. Acello, Richard, Working through a thicket of E-discovery Rules—Morgan Stanley case shows Expensive Risks in Noncompliance, ABA Journal C report, (Oct. 21, 2005) 2. Allman, Thomas Y. & Prasad, Ashish S., The Forgotten Cousin: State Rulemaking and
Electronic Discovery, Practising Law Institute, October-December, 2007.
3. Awsumb, Shannon M., Navigation E-discovery: How to Avoid Common Pitfalls.
Bench&Bar of Minnesota. (Oct. 2008). available at <www.mnbar.org> (last visited Mar.
13, 2009).
4. Brom, Thomas, e-Discovery Options, California Lawyer, available at
<http://www.callawyer.com/story.cfm?eid=898726&evid=1> (last visited Nov.6, 2009) 5. Burbank, Stephen B., The Rules Enabling Act of 1934, 130 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1015, 1043-98
(1982).
6. Cucu, Lucia, The Requirement for Metadata Production Under Williama v. Sprint/United Management Co.: An Unnecessary Burden for Litigants Engaged in Electronic Discovery, 93 Cornell L. Rev. 221, 93 CNLLR 221.
7. Davis, Greg & Barker, Robert M., The legal implications of electronic document retention - includes bibliography, Business Horizons, May-June, 1995, available at
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1038/is_n3_v38/ai_16889365/?tag=content;col1>
(last visited Nov. 24, 2009)
8. Dore, Michael, Document production and inspection—Discovery of electronic materials, 2 L. of Toxic Torts § 22:7 (2009)
9. Duff, James C. The Rulemaking Process: A Summary for the Bench and Bar (Oct. 2007), avaviable at <http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/proceduresum.htm> (last visited Dec. 7, 2009).
10. Hon Francis, James C. (S.D.N.Y) & Hon. Schenkier, Sidney I. (N.D. ILL) Surviving E-Discovery, availablw at
<www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/MagJ0608.ppt/$file/MagJ0608.ppt> (last visited Dec.7, 2009).
11. Garrie, Daniel B., Armstrong, Matthew J., Adler, Ervin, Burdett, William R., Routt, Thomas J., Electronic Discovery and the Challenge Posed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, UCLA Journal of Law and Technology, Spring 2005.
12. Gonsowski, Dean, ECA：European Cockpit Association or Early Case Assessment? (Mar.
4, 2009), available at
<http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2009/03/04/eca-european-cockpit-as sociation-or-early-case-assessment/> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
13. Hilaly, Aaref, Shakeout In the Litigation Support Industry (Mar. 16, 2009), available at
<http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2009/03/16/shakeout-in-the-litigatio n-support-industry/> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
14. Howard, Geoff & Weisburst, Seth, Trends in Electronic Discovery After the December 1,
2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Electronic Discovery and Retention Guidance for Corporate Counsel 2007, at 17, Practising Law Institute, October-December, 2007.
15. Isom, David K., Electronic Discovery Primer for Judges, available at
<http://fclr.org/2005fedctslrev1.htm.> (last visited Mar. 13, 2009).
16. Isom, David K. The Burden of Discovering Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information:
Rules 26(b)(2)(B) & 54(d)(1)(D), Federal Court Law Review, (April 2008).
17. Johnson, Molly Treadway, Withers, Kenneth J., & Dunn, Meghan A., A Qualitative Study of Issues Raised By the Discovery of Computer-Based Information in Civil Litigation, (Sep. 13, 2002).
18. Joshi, Ashish, Clawback Agreement In Commercial Litigation: Can You Unring A Bell?
(Mar. 03, 2009.) available at <http://www.articlealley.com/article_806623_18.html> (last visited Dec. 7, 2009).
19. Leafstrand, Kurt, Five Electronic Discovery Questions with Tom Gelbmann (Mar. 6, 2009), available at
<http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-blog/2009/03/06/five-electronic-discover y-questions-with-tom-gelbmann/> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
20. Levine, Dan, 'Heads Will Have to Roll' Over McAfee E-Mails, (Sep. 19 2008), available at <http://www.law.com/jsp/legaltechnology/pubArticleLT.jsp?id=1202424628254> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
21. Marcus, Richard L., Discovery Containment Redux, 39 B.C. L. Rev. 747 (1998).
22. Marcus, Richard L., E-Discovery & Beyond: Toward Brave New World or 1984? , 25 Rev.
Litig. 633 (2006).
23. Miller, Professor Arthur R., comments of Federal Magistrate Judges Association (04-CV-127). Harvard Law Sch., (04-CV-219) (04-CV-221).
24. Noyes, Henry S., Good Cause Is Bad Medicine for the New E-Discovery Rules, 21 Harv.
J.L & Tech. 49 (2007).
25. Rothstein, Barbara J., Hedges, Ronald J., and Wiggins, Elizabeth C., Managing Discovery of Electronic Information: A Package guide for Judges, Federal Judicial Center, 2007.
26. Judge Scheindlin, Shira A., S.D.N.Y., FAQ’s of E-Discovery, Federal Judges Association Newsletter, Nov. 29, 2006.
27. Segal, Perry L., Back to the Future - Reebok v. Tristar, 1996 (the "Jerry Maguire" case), (Nov. 19, 2008), available at
<http://www.ediscoverycalifornia.com/insights/2008/11/back-to-the-future-reebok-v-trista r-1996-the-jerry-maguire-case.html> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
28. Segal, Perry L., Disaster, Recovery and e-Discovery - What You Don't Know CAN Hurt You (Nov. 24, 2008), available at
<http://www.ediscoverycalifornia.com/insights/2008/11/disaster-recovery-and-ediscovery-what-you-dont-know-can-hurt-you.html> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
29. Segal, Perry L., I Can’t Really go to Jail over this…Can I? (Dec. 11, 2008), available at
<http://www.ediscoverycalifornia.com/insights/2008/12/i-cant-really-go-to-jail-over-thisc an-i.html> (last visited Mar. 18, 2009)
30. Segal, Perry L., Testing 1-2-3...Are you 'Really' Ready for a Litigation Request? (Nov. 25, 2008), available at
<http://www.ediscoverycalifornia.com/insights/2008/11/testing-123are-you-really-ready-f or-a-litigation-request.html> (last visited Mar. 17, 2009)
31. Shapiro, Ari, E-Mail, the workplace and the electronic paper trail. June 18, 2008, available at <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91363363> (last visited Nov. 6, 2009)
32. Shields, Marjorie A., Discovery of Delete E-mail and Other Deleted Electronic Records, American Law Reports ALR 6th, 27 A.L.R.6th 565 (Originally published in 2007).
33. Shnier, Clifford F., Where angeks fear to tread, (Sep. 5, 2008), available at
<http://www.insidecounsel.com/News/2008/9/Pages/Where-angels-fear-to-tread.aspx>
(last visited Nov. 16, 2009)
34. Sigler, Sonya, 2009 Prediction and Trends, available at
<http://ralphlosey.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/2009-predictions-and-trends/> (last visited on Dec. 7, 2009)
35. Stempel, Jeffrey W., Politics and Sociology in Federal Civil Rulemaking: Errors of Scope, 52 ALA. L. REV. 529, 535-40 (2001).
36. Walter, Aaron L., The New Face of Electronic Discovery: Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure May Tame Electronic Discovery’s Wild West, available at
<http://www.law.uga.edu/news/advocate/fall2005/walter.pdf> (last visited Dec. 7, 2009).
37. Willging, Thomas E., Past and Potential uses of Empirical Research in Civil Rulemaking, Notre Dame Law Review, May. 28, 2002.
38. Withers, Kenneth J., Annotated Case Law on Electronic Discovery (Jun. 1, 2006),
available at <http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/ElecDi09.pdf/$file/ElecDi09.pdf>
(last visited Mar. 19, 2009)
39. Zito, Robert J.A., What to Do With Privileged Information in E-Mails, (May 30, 2008), New York Law Journal, available at
<http://www.law.com/jsp/legaltechnology/pubArticleLT.jsp?id=1202421787208> (last visited Nov. 16, 2009)
40. Document Retention & Destruction Policies for Digital Data, What you don’t know can hurt you, (2004). available at
<http://www.lexisnexis.com/applieddiscovery/lawlibrary/whitePapers/ADI_WP_DocRete ntionDestruction.pdf> (last visited Dec. 7, 2009.)
41. Electronic Discovery and Computer Forensics Case Law, available at
<http://www.krollontrack.com/library/topic.pdf> (last visited Dec. 7, 2009.)
42. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure –Numbering Scheme Reference Guide, available at
<http://www.krollontrack.com/library/frcpupdater_krollontrack2008.pdf> (last visited Dec.
7, 2009)
43. Letter from Arthur R. Miller, Professor, Harvard Law Sch., to Peter G. McCabe, Sec'y.
Comm. on Rules of Practice & Procedure, Judicial Conference of the U.S. 2 (Feb. 10, 2005), available at <http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/e-discovery/04-CV-219.pdf> (last visited Nov. 24, 2009)
44. Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence, Federal Rules Decisions, Comments by February 1, 1999, 181 F.R.D. 18.
45. State Court Rules and Statutes Regarding Electronically Stored Information, (Oct. 2009), available at <http://www.krollontrack.com/library/staterules_krollontrack_oct2009.pdf>
(last visited Oct. 28, 2009) 五、 其他
案例
1. Kamatani v. Benq Corp. Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2005 WL 2455825 (E.D.Tex.).
2. Qualcomm v. Broadcom, 2008 WL 66932 (S.D.Cal., Jan 7, 2008).
3. Qualcomm v. Broadcom, 2008 WL 638108 (S.D.Cal., March 05, 2008).
4. Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385 (1947).
5. Thompson v. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 199 F.R.D. 168, 171 (D. Md. 2001).
6. Crown Life Ins. Co. v. Craig, 995 F.2d 1376, 1383 (7th Cir. 1993).
7. Nat'l Union Elec. Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., 494 F. Supp. 1257, 1259 (E.D. Pa. 1980).
8. Scotts Co. LLC v. Liberty Mut. Inc. Co., 2007 WL 1723509 (S.D. Ohio 2007).
9. Convlove, Inc. v. Compaq Computer Corp., 223 F.R.D. 162, 175 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).
10. Treppel v. Biovail Corp., 249 F.R.D. 111, 2008 WL 866594 (S.D.N.Y. April 2, 2008).
11. Toussie v. County of Suffolk, No. CV 01-6716, 2007 WL 4565160 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2007).
12. Baker v. Gerould, 2008 WL 850236 (W.D.N.Y Mar. 27, 2008).
13. Auto Club Family Ins. Co. v. Ahner, Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2007 WL 2480322 (E.D.
La.).
14. Rowe Entm’t, Inc. v. William Morris Agency, Inc., 205 F.R.D. 421 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
15. Mikron Ind., Inc. v. Hurd Windows & Doors, Inc., 2008 WL 1805727 (W.D. Wash.).
16. Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 358 (1978).
17. United States v. United Shoe Mach. Corp., 89 F. Supp. 357 (D. Mass. 1950).
18. Ferko v. Nat’l Ass’n for Stock Car Auto Racing, 218. F.R.D. 125 135 (E.D. Tex. 2003).
19. United States v. O’Keefe, 537 F.Supp.2d 14, 2008 WL 449729 (D.D.C. Feb. 18, 2008).
20. United States v. O’Keefe 537 F. Supp.
21. Henry v. Quicken Loans, Inc., Not Reported in F.Supp.2d,2008 WL 474127 (E.D.Mich.
Feb. 15, 2008).
22. Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 251 (D.MD. May 29, 2008).
23. Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co., 230 F.R.D. 640 (D. Kan. 2005).
24. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 217 F.R.D. 309 (S.D.NY. 2003) (“Zubulake I”) 25. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 230 F.R.D. 290 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (“Zubulake II”) 26. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 216 F.R.D. 280 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (“Zubulake III”) 27. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 220 F.R.D. 212 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (“Zubulake IV”) 28. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 229 F.R.D. 422 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (“ZubulakeV”)
29. Consolidated Aluminum Corp. v. Alcoa, Inc.No. 03-1055-C-M2, 2006 WL 2583308, (M.D. La. July 19, 2006).
30. E*Trade Securities LLC v. Deutsche Bank AG, 230 F.R.D. 582 (D. Minn. 2005).
31. Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O'Lakes, Inc.,No. 04-CV-00329-WYD-CBS, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15277 (D. Colo. Mar. 2, 2007).
32. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Jacobson, 827 F.2d 1119 (7th Cir.), 1987 33. Upjohn Co. v. U.S. 383 (1981).
34. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc. v.Coleman Holdings, Inc., 892 So. 2d 496; 2004 Fla. App.
35. Coleman (Parent) Holdings, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley & Co., No. CA 03-5045 AI, 2005 WL 679071 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Mar. 1, 2005)
36. Coleman (Parent) Holdings, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley & Co., No. CA 03-5045 AI, 2005 WL 674885 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Mar. 23, 2005)
37. F&R Sails Inc. v. Ins. Co. of Pa., 2008 WL 2232640 (S.D Cal. Apr. 18, 2008) 38. Hopson v. Mayor of Baltimore, 232 F.R.D. (D.MD.2005).
39. In re Seroquel Prods, Liab. Litig., 244 F.R.D. 650 (M.D.Fla.2007) 40. Equity Analytics. LLC v. Lundin, 248 F.R.D. 331 (D.D.C.2008)
41. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Jacobson, 827 F.2d 1119 (7th Cir.), 1987 42. McCafferty's, Inc., v. Bank of Glen Burnie, 179 F.R.D. 163, 167 (D.Md.1998)
43. Ferko v. Nat’l Ass’n for Stock Car Auto Racing, 218. F.R.D. 125 135 (E.D. Tex. 2003).
44. Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., 494 F. Supp. 1257, 1259 (E.D. Pa. 1980).
45. Anti-Monopoly, Inc. v. Hasbro, Inc. Not Reported in F.Supp., 1995 WL 649934, (Nov, 03, 1995)
網路資源
1. http://ralphlosey.wordpress.com/，last visited Dec. 7, 2009.
2. http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/e-discovery.html，last visited Dec. 7, 2009.
3. http://www.krollontrack.com/, last visited Nov. 7, 2009.
4. http:/www.thesedonaconference.org，last visited Dec. 3, 2009.
5. http://www.insidecounsel.com/, last visited Nov. 13, 2009.
6. http://www.articlealley.com/article_806623_18.html，last visited Nov. 15, 2009.
7. http://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/，last visited Nov. 29, 2009.
8. http://www.lexisnexis.com/applieddiscovery，last visited Dec. 3, 2009.
9. http://www.arma.org/，last visited Dec. 3, 2009.
10. http://www.idc.com.tw/，last visited Dec. 3, 2009.