Ultimately, clients should feel free to indulge in their desire to save space and an initial contract, provided that the duplication practices mentioned above are respected and all other relevant evidence and other legal requirements are met. Customers should also be aware that, to the extent that the media must meet certain legal standards for storing electronic records, their choice of material is essential for the admissibility of a duplicate data set. Given the diversity of legal and technological nuances to be taken into account, it is always preferable, if in doubt, to seek the direction of a qualified and experienced lawyer to avoid possible legal pitfalls. The above article reflects the national trend in the United States and, to ensure that your company has complied with government and/or country rules, it is again best to contact a qualified and experienced lawyer who practices in your jurisdiction. If read together and interpreted by most states, ure and UPA allow duplicates to obtain the same weight of proof as the originals, as long as these copies are properly created, maintained and authenticated. This is why customers are encouraged to use certain practices to copy their business documents: the basic basis for authorizing digital duplication by states is in the URE, which allows copies produced in the form of commercial documents to be included in the exhibits „to the same extent as the original“.“ Duplication is permitted by any technique that „reproduces exactly the original.“ Similarly, under the UPA, duplicate recordings are permitted as originals in court or administrative proceedings, provided that the duplicate was produced by a „process that faithfully reproduces the original.“ The UPA authorizes the destruction of original documents, unless retention is required by law (i.e. wills, negotiation documents and copyrights). Therefore, the law authorizes the destruction of original documents subject to specific evidential requirements. While there are many hurdles that a business document must overcome to be admitted into evidence in court, there is an obstacle that many clients regularly inquire about – the legality and admissibility of digital copies rather than original documents. While lawyers recognize this as a better evidentiator problem, a legal doctrine that says original evidence is greater than a copy, for clients it is a question of whether they should keep a original signed contract or whether they can save space in their filing cabinets and rely on a scanned copy on their hard drive.

Although government laws on the admissibility of evidence are different, states have generally adopted the language of uniform rules of evidence („URE“) and/or the Uniform Photographic Copies of Business and Public Records as the Knowledge Act („UPA“). For the purposes of this article, the differences between the EER and the UPA are not significant or relevant. As a result, there is a federal consensus that a digital copy can generally overcome a better evidenti challenge and be admitted as an original document.