Frequently Asked Questions
What’s the business case for Intraspexion™
“Companies worldwide spend $3 trillion a year trying to prevent, detect and deal with some kind of misconduct. If you can just capture one-tenth of one percent, it’s a $3 billion idea.” (Bennett B. Borden, partner & Chief Data Scientist, Drinker Biddle & Reath, July 2015.)
With litigation risk in mind, the average cost of commercial tort litigation, per a Towers Watson report for 2001–2010, is $160 billion per year. But what does that translate to in terms of cost per case? Intraspexion CEO Nick Brestoff shows in his book Preventing Litigation: An Early Warning System that the cost of litigation is about $350,000 to $400,000 per case. (This represents payouts for settlements and verdicts, defense attorneys fees, and administrative costs.) By avoiding just one average lawsuit per quarter, your company will preserve over $1.4 to $1.6 Million of its annual net profit.
What about privacy?
Introductory note: In this or any other FAQ, or in other places on Intraspexion’s website, readers are advised that Intraspexion is not entitled to practice law or give legal advice. Readers must NOT rely on any discussion of a legal issue without consulting with their own attorney. However, to access and read the appellate decisions cited in these FAQs, we recommend Google Scholar.
We are aware that the act of monitoring internal emails raises a significant privacy issue. While it is not our purpose to provide our clients (or potential clients) with legal advice on this or any other issue, we have considered the subject of privacy (in this context) at some length.
There is at least one case holding that an enterprise can limit its employees’ expectation of privacy by having clear policies about which the employees know and accept. In Holmes v. Petrovich Dev. Co., LLC, 191 Cal. App. 4th 1047, 1068–71 (2011), the California Court of Appeal held that an employee had no expectation of privacy in emails she sent to her attorney from a company computer because the company had a policy against using computers for personal reasons and the policy stated that the company could monitor all emails. The court in Holmes emphasized that the computer used to send the emails “belong[ed] to the [company],” that the company had a policy against using its computers for personal reasons, and that the employee was “aware of and agree[d] to these conditions.” Id. at 1068; see also id. at 1068–69 (“Holmes used her employer’s company e-mail account after being warned that it was to be used only for company business, that e-mails were not private, and that the company would randomly and periodically monitor its technology resources to ensure compliance with the policy.”).
Since privacy is an significant right, a court may distinguish Holmes. Suppose, for example, that employee never reads or agrees to the “no privacy” policy or agrees to the policy but someone in authority undermines the policy by conduct; or that the company knows the employee is using a company device, e.g., a smart phone, for personal purposes, pays to use it, and the company does not enforce the policy. In such cases, Holmes may be held not to apply. See, e.g., Mintz v. Mark Bartelstein & Assoc., Inc., 885 F. Supp. 2d 987, 998 (2012).
For a more in-depth discussion of the privacy issue, including a list of the policies used by the employer in Holmes, please see our White Paper on Privacy under Resources.
Is your software patented?
Yes. On January 24, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued U.S. Pat. No. 9,552,548 for “Using Classified Text and Deep Learning Algorithms to Identify Risk and Provide Early Warning” to Nelson E. (Nick) Brestoff, Intraspexion's founder and CEO. He assigned the patent to Intraspexion. As of May 2017, six (6) continuations-in-part are pending and all of them have been granted expedited review on the merits.
While some of the software in our System is proprietary and we treat that coding as our confidential “trade secret” intellectual property, we are proud to say that portions of our System are powered by dtSearch® and that our Deep Learning software originated with Google as TensorFlow. TensorFlow is an open source software library for machine intelligence. TensorFlow, the TensorFlow logo and any related marks are trademarks of Google Inc. TensorFlow is included in the System under an Apache 2.0 license, the terms of which are incorporated herein in full by this reference.