COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEMS ARE USEFUL IN ANY CASE INVOLVING MORE THAN 10,000 DOCUMENTS. BECAUSE OF THEIR HIGH COSTS, THESE SYSTEMS HAVE RAISED THE ISSUES OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH PARTIES SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE EACH OTHER'S SYSTEMS, AND HENCE THE ROLE COURTS SHOULD PLAY IN THE SETTING UP AND CONTROL OF A SYSTEM AVAILABLE TO ALL PARTIES. THE TWO BASIC SYSTEM DESIGN METHODS ARE THE FULL TEXT METHOD AND THE INDEX METHOD. PROCEDURAL RULES AND COMMON LAW PROTECTING TRIAL PREPARATION MATERIALS ('WORK PRODUCT') HAVE LED TO THE CLAIM THAT COMPUTER SYSTEMS ARE IMMUNE FROM DISCOVERY. NEVERTHELESS, EXCEPTIONS TO THIS IMMUNITY CAN BE BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL NEED OR INABILITY TO OBTAIN AN EQUIVALENT WITHOUT UNDUE HARDSHIP, EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF OPINION WORK PRODUCTS. (THE MENTAL IMPRESSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, OR LEGAL THEORIES OF AN ATTORNEY. THE IBM PERIPHERALS CASE FILED IN 1973 IS AN EXAMPLE OF COMPETING INTERESTS INVOLVED IN ATTEMPTS TO DISCOVER AN OPPONENT'S COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEM, AS WELL AS OF THE BASIC ISSUES OF EXPERTISE, TIME, COST, POSSIBILITY OF DUPLICATING THE SYSTEM, AND AMOUNT OF OPINION WORK PRODUCT INVOLVED. IBM FORCEFULLY ARGUED THAT ITS SELECTION PROCESS INVOLVED NOT ONLY A CLERICAL LISTING OF DESIGNATED DOCUMENTS, BUT ALSO AN ANALYSIS BY LAWYERS. TO PROMOTE THE EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEMS, COST SHIFTING SHOULD BE USED BY COURTS TO PREVENT PARTIES FROM RECEIVING FREE ACCESS TO OTHERS' DATABASES, AND COURT-ADMINISTERED JOINT SYSTEMS SHARED BY ALL PARTIES, WITH BOTH COMMON AND INDIVIDUAL FILES, SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED. EXTENSIVE FOOTNOTES WHICH INCLUDE REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (CFW)