Collection, use, and storage of personal data. Data breach, data privacy, artificial intelligence.

European Union’s Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield

August 25th, 2020|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Risk Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

European Union's Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield The Court of Justice for the European Union has invalidated the EU-US Privacy Shield as an approved mechanism for transferring personal data from the European Union to the United States. The Privacy Shield had been in place since October 2015, and enabled U.S. companies to more easily receive personal data from EU entities. The decision by the court “leaves many companies scrambling to implement alternative mechanisms to safeguard personal data transfers to the U.S.," says Sten-Erik Hoidal of Frederikson & Byron, P.A. With the invalidation of the privacy shield, companies are essentially left to decide on their own how data will be lawfully transferred. Attorneys from Perkins Coie recommend companies “consider amending any data processing addenda (DPAs) which companies have signed with vendors or customers to incorporate the EU Standard Contract Clauses.” Moving forward, U.S. and European companies will now attempt to create a new deal that complies with the privacy standards for transferring digital information. The first large company to weigh in on the decision, Microsoft tells customers that they “can continue to use Microsoft services in full compliance with European law” and that the ruling “does not change the data flows of our services to Consumers.”   Photo by Tabrez Syed on Unsplash Send Us Your News

Microsoft Sued Over Data Sharing in Class Action

July 26th, 2020|Categories: Class Actions, Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , |

Microsoft Sued Over Data Sharing in Class Action Consumers, including individuals and companies, filed a class action complaint  against Microsoft in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming the company shared consumer data without consent to subcontractors and third parties, including Facebook, despite policies that stated otherwise.  The plaintiffs accused Microsoft of “misrepresenting its privacy and security practices, violating federal and state law, and illegally sharing and using its business-class Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft Exchange customers’ data.”  Read more from Law Street Media: https://lawstreetmedia.com/tech/microsoft-sued-over-data-sharing-in-class-action/

Facial Recognition Update July 2020

July 17th, 2020|Categories: Class Actions, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , |

Facial Recognition Technology -- Emerging After Decades of Development -- Draws Lawsuits and Proposed Bans  We sometimes forget that not all of the technical wizards who transformed our world were young “geniuses” jacked up on Starbucks, their shirttails hanging out in the ping-pong section of their open concept offices. Woody Bledsoe was born 99 years ago. As a young son of a sharecropper he demonstrated exceptional mathematical capabilities. Early in his career he had a dream: A machine that could think like a human, converse like one, and even recognize faces. This was as far back as the 1950s. This mathematician and computer scientist would go on to teach for decades at the University of Austin where he worked to advance automated reasoning and artificial intelligence. But what was his role in the development of the technology exactly? Did he perform work for a CIA front? And why, in his old age and suffering from the cruelty of ALS that would ultimately kill him in 1995, did he ask his son to set fire to a stack of old papers? Take a look at “The Secret History of Facial Recognition” written by Shaun Raviv for Wired Magazine, which explores why, among other things, “the record of [Blesdoe’s] role all but vanished.” If there isn’t a movie script in the works there probably will be soon.   Today facial recognition is used in such innocent and handy ways as pointing out [...]

Tech’s Big Four Will Testify Before Antitrust Subcommittee

July 13th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Emerging Litigation & Risk, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Four Technology Giants’ CEOs Will Testify Before Congress in On-going Antitrust Investigation Executives from Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google will appear (either virtually, as they are permitted to, or in person) before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee on July 27, 2020. According to its press release, the Subcommittee has been scrutinizing the companies’ dominance in their respective digital spheres and the “adequacy of existing antitrust laws and enforcement,” since June 2019. The hearing will enable legislators to question the executives about possible antitrust abuses, which have been the focus of many federal, state, and foreign regulatory inquiries. For example, Representatives may inquire about Amazon’s treatment of third-party merchants who sell products on its e-commerce platform, Google’s highly profitable ad business, Apple’s App Store terms that infringe on the rights of third-party app developers, and Facebook’s leverage of previously acquired companies to solidify its social media dominance, according to a July 1, 2020 New York Times article by David McCabe. The hearing may serve as the crowning piece of the Subcommittee’s antitrust probe. As the Subcommittee’s press release stated, the CEOs’ “forthcoming” testimony is “essential” to completion of the investigation.

The Dark Net: Anonymity, Infrastructure, and the Future

July 10th, 2020|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Register Webinar Info Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2020 United States 8am PT | 10am CT | 11am ET United Kingdom 4pm BST Get CLE or CPE, a complete set of materials, and answers to your questions! Email us your: Speaker questions CLE questions Topics Covered Physical and Logical Topology and Method of Data Transmission Using the Dark Net for Threat Hunting Hacking Groups and Malicious Hackers   The Future of The Dark Net and Anonymity The Dark Net: Anonymity, Infrastructure, and the Future Is the Dark Web Getting Darker?  Wed., Aug. 5, 2020 | Produced for Access Data by HB Litigation Conferences The web, however singular it may seem from behind an everyday user’s computer or smartphone screen, comprises three distinctive parts: the public net (or web), the deep net, and the dark net. Though the dark net contains some innocuous content and is used for legitimate purposes, it also operates as a platform for illegal marketplaces. These offer almost anything a criminal or cybercriminal might want to buy or sell like malware, exploits, hackers-for-hire, information lifted from data breaches, censored content, and goods like drugs, guns, and other contraband. Observers report that the dark web is getting darker, meaning hardcore criminals make up a greater percentage of its user base. Exploits and [...]

Contract Drafting Fundamentals

July 2nd, 2020|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Law Firm Operations, Technology Law|Tags: , , |

Register Now Contract Drafting Fundamentals: What I Wish They Taught Me in Law School Speaker: Will Marshall | Partner UBM Law LLP Date: Thursday | July 23, 2020 Time: 2pm ET 1pm CT 12pm MT 11am PT Duration: 75 minutes Price: Early Bird Registration: $75 After July 14: $95 Special: Complimentary with discount code! What you get: CLE credit Course materials Webinar recording Answers to your questions! Contact CLE Manager Get practical insights on contract drafting. For new and seasoned attorneys alike, this 75-minute program will cover core, practical aspects of contract drafting, including a broad range of fundamental concepts, skills, and tips.  The program is designed to make you a more deliberate drafter and improve your ability to assess the purpose and effectiveness of each provision in your contract.  We will discuss not only what is on the page, but external dynamics that affect drafting and negotiation. Finally, we will reserve time to answer your questions. I am offering this program for free to my network to help you develop these foundational skills. If you haven't received it, please contact me directly for the complimentary pass code.  -- Will Marshall,  Partner, UBM Law Group LLP Key topics:  The goals and challenges of good drafting. The anatomy and building blocks of a contract. Categories [...]

The Intersection of Privacy and Antitrust Webinar Now Available On-Demand on the West LegalEdcenter

April 2nd, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Featured On-Demand, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Available as part of your subscription to The Thomson Reuters West LegalEdcenter®. Don't subscribe to the West LegalEdcenter? This webinar is still available directly from HB. Take it now! Questions for speakers Questions@LitigationConferences.com CLE questions CLE@LitigationConferences.com Check out the MoginRubin blog for more insights on antitrust and privacy law. What attorneys and companies need to know about the increasing interplay between these critical areas of the law.  Highly publicized cases and investigations in the U.S. and Europe of big technology, e-commerce, and social media companies demonstrate how anti-competition laws are being used to scrutinize and challenge not only how these corporations conduct themselves in the marketplace, but the very core of their colossal success: the mass collection and utilization of user data. Are the privacy and antitrust worlds beginning to cross over? Or do they simply run parallel while addressing entirely different types of conduct? Whatever the answer, data is the raw material that drives the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon, so how it is handled is a critical question when counseling clients on mergers and acquisitions. Moderator Daniel J.  Mogin | Managing Partner, MoginRubin LLP Speakers Jennifer M. Oliver, CIPP/US | Partner, MoginRubin LLP Thomas N. Dahdouh | Director, Western Region, Federal Trade Commission Franklin M. Rubinstein | Partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Randi W. Singer, CIPP/US, CIPT [...]

The Intersection of Antitrust & Privacy | A MoginRubin Webinar | 10.31.2019

September 14th, 2019|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

[two-fifths-first] Recorded: Oct. 31, 2019 Duration: 100 minutes Presented by:  MoginRubin LLP Produced by: HB Litigation Conferences The Panel Moderator Daniel J.  Mogin | Managing Partner, MoginRubin LLP Speakers Jennifer M. Oliver, CIPP/US | Partner, MoginRubin LLP Thomas N. Dahdouh | Director, Western Region, Federal Trade Commission Franklin M. Rubinstein | Partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Randi W. Singer, CIPP/US, CIPT | Partner, Weil, Gotshal & Manges Contributor Dina Srinivasan | Independent Researcher & Author of The Antitrust Case Against Facebook Dina was unable to present but we thank her for her content contributions.  What you will get: At least 1 hour of CLE credit. Answers to your questions via email. The opportunity to share with others on your team. The complete Powerpoint. The Antitrust Case Against Facebook Dina Srinivasan's statement to the House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law The Chicago Booth School Stigler Center Committee on Digital Platforms Final Report Write to us at CLE@LitigationConferences.com to: Ask about CLE Request the materials Send a question for the speakers [/two-fifths-first][three-fifths] Market Behavior and Data-Driven Market Power Highly publicized cases and investigations in the U.S. and Europe of big technology, e-commerce, and social media companies demonstrate how anti-competition laws are being used to scrutinize and challenge not only how these corporations conduct themselves in the [...]

Setting the record straight on cyber insurance claim denials and the ‘war exclusion’

July 22nd, 2019|Categories: HB Risk Notes, Insurance, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

Is insurance coverage for cyber claims barred by a war exclusion?  Judy Selby and Peter McLaughlin asked this question in a recent post for IAPP. Two corporate giants, Mondelez International and Merck, made the headlines recently as they sustained serious damage as a result of a NotPetya infection, an encrypting ransomware. They have each filed declaratory judgments after their carriers denied their claims. Reports of these insurance disputes have led to concerns that cyber incidents involving state actors would not be covered by cyber policies with war exclusions. The Verizon 2019 Data Breach Investigations Report attributes 23% of breaches  to nation-states or state-affiliated players. "These state-sponsored attacks typically range from theft or espionage to financial gain; however, some attacks appear to have been driven by grudge or by swatting a neighbor," Selby and McLaughlin write. "[P]erhaps we are viewing this through an old lens. Insurance has often been purchased to address hazards. Specifically, an organization obtains a policy to counter the slim risk of a fire, flood or other catastrophe. Fred Kaplan wrote an article for Slate in April in which he argues the inevitability of attacks – state-sponsored or otherwise – means that we should view cyber insurance more like we do health insurance: coverage against the inevitable, rather than against a hazard risk." Read on for what else Selby [...]

Cyber Captive Survey 2019 — AON

June 26th, 2019|Categories: HB Risk Notes, Insurance, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Aon’s Cyber Captive Survey 2019 says that the rapid growth in the captive market of cyber-specific policies underscores that cyber is one of the primary risks for organizations across the world driven by an increasingly complex operational, technological and regulatory environment. Key findings include: Healthcare and energy industries are leading the way, with 19% and 15% of organizations in these industries utilizing captives for cyber coverage respectively. 41% of captives surveyed are incubating cyber risk. The range in limits of cover taken out is up to USD$100 million. An estimated 34% of all captives will be writing cyber in five years’ time. Read the complete report here! 

Nevada to try limited banking for cash-heavy pot industry — ElkoDaily.com

June 26th, 2019|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Most marijuana dispensaries are forced to handle massive amounts of cash. Business owners are paying their employees with envelopes full of dollar bills, and bringing duffle bags full of money to government buildings to pay their taxes. That could all change with the new Nevada state law that allows dispensaries to offer a cashless option. This program will be tested for three years before being considered as a permanent feature. State Treasurer Zach Conine likened the system to gift cards or digital apps such as Venmo and said the program would not include broader banking services like loans. Since marijuana is still not legal federally, states are on their own with coming up with a cashless option. Hawaii took similar steps and included a debit payment app, which has spread to other states as well. California lawmakers are also devising a cashless system by creating a class of banks specifically for the industry. This temporary law is set to take place by July 1, 2020 with the hopes of easing transactions and lessen cash handling for customers and businesses Read the complete post by Michelle L. Price on ElkoDaily.com here! 

First Class Action Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Victims of First American Title Company Data Breach — Yahoo!

June 26th, 2019|Categories: Class Actions, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

"Gibbs Law Group LLP has filed the first nationwide class action lawsuit accusing First American Title Company of failing to properly secure 885 million sensitive customer files, instead choosing to store them in a 'woefully insecure,'” publicly-accessible system. “First American has turned the American dream of home ownership into a financial security nightmare for its customers,” according to the complaint. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that First American Title Company was negligent, and violated its contracts with customers, in the way it stored their personal information, which included bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, financial and tax records, and photos of their drivers’ licenses. "This grave lapse in security resulted in publicly exposing hundreds of millions of customers’ personal files, leaving them vulnerable to identify theft and other cybercrimes," the plaintiffs maintain.  Read the complete Press Release on Yahoo! here

Go to Top