Some eDiscovery vendors charge $25–$100 per gigabyte to release your own data when you switch platforms. Here's how egress fees work, what the contract language actually says, and what a mid-matter switch costs.
An eDiscovery data egress fee is a charge for exporting your matter data out of a vendor's platform — either to move it to a different platform or to archive it at matter close. Egress fees are distinct from production fees (which cover converting and delivering documents to opposing counsel) and from processing fees (which cover ingestion). They apply when you want to take your data and leave: the load files, native documents, extracted text, and metadata that constitute the complete matter database.
The practical effect is that vendors who charge egress fees are charging you twice for your own data: once to put it in, and once to take it out. The data itself — your client's emails, contracts, custodian files — was never the vendor's property. But the fee structure treats departure as a billable event, which creates an incentive structure that is misaligned with your interests at exactly the moment you are most motivated to leave: when the platform is not working.
Egress fees are not a minor contract detail. They are the mechanism by which a vendor converts client dissatisfaction into revenue. Understanding how they work, and where to find them in the contract, is due diligence that belongs at procurement — not at the moment you are trying to exit.
Egress fees at legacy vendors range from $25/GB at the low end to $100/GB at the high end, with $40–$60/GB being typical for full-service platforms. On a 100 GB matter, that is $2,500–$10,000 to export your own data. In addition, some vendors charge per-hour fees to produce the load files necessary for ingestion into a new platform ($200–$300/hr, typically 3–8 hours, equaling $600–$2,400). The total cost of leaving a legacy vendor mid-matter — egress plus load file production — frequently runs $5,000–$15,000, on top of whatever it costs to re-ingest the data at the new platform.
Re-ingestion costs vary widely depending on the volume and complexity of the data set and the target platform's pricing model. On a platform charging $100/GB for processing, a 100 GB re-ingest is another $10,000 before you have reviewed a single document. The combined switching cost can exceed what it would have cost to finish the matter on the original platform — which is the point.
| Egress component | Rate range | Cost (100 GB matter) |
|---|---|---|
| Data export fee | $25–$100/GB | $2,500–$10,000 |
| Load file preparation | $200–$300/hr (3–8 hrs) | $600–$2,400 |
| Re-ingestion at new platform | Varies | $2,500–$15,000 |
| Total switching cost | $5,600–$27,400 |
The difference between a vendor who will hold you hostage and one who won't is visible in the contract — if you know what to look for. The critical phrase is whether data export is described as “included at no additional charge” or as “available for an additional fee, to be determined.” The latter language is a reserved right to charge whatever the vendor decides at the time you want to leave.
Contracts that describe egress as “subject to vendor's standard export rates at the time of request” are structuring exit as a variable cost that the vendor controls unilaterally. This language appears frequently in vendor master service agreements and is almost never flagged in the sales negotiation. The salesperson does not bring it up. The contract is drafted to be skimmable enough that a procurement team under time pressure moves past the data portability section without reading it closely.
The language to watch for in the other direction — language that protects you — is explicit: “data export is included at no additional charge,” “client data shall be returned or destroyed upon request at no cost,” or “there are no fees associated with data export or portability.” Those formulations close the door on the egress fee entirely. Everything short of that language leaves it open.
A related clause to check is the data retention period after contract termination. Some vendors retain your data for only 30 days post-termination and charge for the export whether you have time to plan the transition or not. A vendor with a 90-day retention window and a contractually fixed export rate is materially different from one with a 30-day window and a “rates TBD” clause.
The egress fee is most damaging in mid-matter switches — when a client concludes that the platform is not working (review quality issues, missed deadlines, cost overruns) and wants to move to a different vendor before the matter is complete. At this point, the egress fee creates a forced-continuation dynamic: the cost of leaving ($5,000–$27,400) plus the time cost of re-processing data at the new platform can exceed the cost of staying with the original vendor through the end of the matter.
The time cost is the part that rarely shows up in the switching estimate. Re-ingesting 100 GB of documents takes time regardless of cost. If processing takes three to five days and the matter has a discovery deadline in two weeks, the re-ingestion window may not exist. The egress fee and the scheduling constraint work together to keep the client on the original platform even when the original platform is producing demonstrably worse outcomes.
Vendors who structure egress fees this way are using lock-in as a substitute for platform quality. The egress fee is the exit tax that keeps dissatisfied clients at underperforming vendors — not because the vendor has improved, but because leaving is designed to be expensive enough that staying is the path of least resistance. That is not a pricing model; it is a retention strategy that operates at the client's expense.
A vendor who is confident in their platform's quality does not need egress fees to retain clients. Egress fees exist because the vendor knows that a meaningful percentage of their clients would leave if leaving were free. The fee is not a cost-recovery mechanism; cloud storage and data export are not materially expensive operations at the scale that eDiscovery vendors operate. The fee is a retention mechanism structured to look like a cost-recovery mechanism.
Platforms without egress fees are making a different bet: that clients will stay because the product works, not because leaving is too expensive. This is the relevant due diligence question at the procurement stage. Ask the vendor specifically whether data export is included at no additional charge, whether load files are included in the export, and what the exit process looks like. Vendors who cannot answer this question directly — or who describe it as “subject to negotiation” — are vendors who have reserved the right to make leaving difficult.
The negotiation at procurement is the only leverage point you have. Once the data is in the platform and the matter is underway, your leverage is gone. The time to demand free egress language is before you sign, not after you have concluded the vendor is not working. For more on how to evaluate total vendor cost before signing, see our guide to getting an all-in price from your eDiscovery vendor.
The contract language to require: “Data export, including all native files, extracted text, metadata, and load files, is included at no additional charge, at any time, for any reason.” If the vendor will not sign this language, the egress fee is the price of admission.