Video Conferencing

The Latest Technology Trends: Hubs and Improved Bandwidth

By Samuel Solomon

THERE has been a dramatic increase in the use of videoconferencing systems, for a variety of reasons that run from post-Sept. 11 travel skittishness to the reduced cost and greater availability of videoconferencing systems and network facilities; improved quality; and an emerging "critical mass" of users and facilities.

Remote participation in legal/judicial proceedings via video conferencing already is a reality for oral argument, trials, hearings, depositions and arraignments. Likewise, law firms are using videoconferencing for meetings with out-of-area experts, potential clients, and adjunct offices.

But for most firms, the next step is to migrate from traditional systems, such as "rollabout" carts or designated rooms, to a hub approach that more cost-effective and flexible.

Traditional Systems

Traditional systems are based on technology that has been refined in other industries and brought into legal environments without modification. These generic systems work well in other industries where most conferences are peer-to-peer, but are not well-suited to the dynamics and protocol of court proceedings and the legal market.

Optimally, a video system be tailored to the location (e.g., courtroom, chambers, office); application (e.g., oral argument, trial, training, conferences); and usage (Will two cases take place concurrently? Do you need a "galley" for observers?)

Hub-based systems offer this ability to customize. They use a central "hub," with extensions to each "endpoint" -- e.g., courtroom, chamber or conference room. The hub contains all of the network transmission and video switching/mixing equipment, while the "endpoints" contain only audio/video and conference control equipment.

The hub approach has several key advantages over the traditional approaches:

* Sophisticated, expensive network transmission equipment is never installed in a courtroom, conference room, or judge's chamber, rather in a secure communications room or data center.

* Network transmission lines (i.e., ISDN, T1, etc.) do not run to endpoints, only to the hub.

* Multiple locations throughout the courthouse can make use of the hub system on an as-needed basis via ordinary building wiring, so local "endpoints" can be added, changed or removed as needed without significant additional expenditure.

* Multiple remote sites can participate in a single case simultaneously.

* Images from multiple cameras can be mixed on a single screen so the image output to a remote site can include a mix of judges, attorneys, timer lights, documents, remote witness, etc.

* "Endpoints" within the building can conference with each other, enabling local conferencing, overflow observation of courtroom proceedings and the inclusion of a sensitive witnesses (such as children) from a separate room in the building.

* Because the endpoint configurations can be varied, a wide variety of configurations and applications can be supported. This flexibility comes at a fraction of the price that would be required to provision a separate traditional system for each of these configurations.

Sam Solomon is chief executive officer of Doar Inc., a litigation support and trial services firm located in Lynbrook, N.Y. He is a contributing author of A Handbook on Courtroom Technology: A Lawyer's Guide, just published by N.I.T.A. Press.