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.

Organizational Values & Coronavirus Business Risks | Join Our Webinar June 18

May 19th, 2020|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Employment, HB Risk Notes|Tags: , , , |

Webinar: June 18, 2020 2:00 pm ET 60 mins. CLE: 1+ Complimentary with registration. Get: +CLE +Materials +Recording +Answers! Also available to subscribers of the West LegalEdcenter. Register there! Email us your: Speaker questions CLE questions Speaker: Professor Edward L. Queen Ph.D. , J.D. Director Ethics and Servant Leadership: Emory Center for Ethics Emory University Organizational Values & Coronavirus Business Risks Properly Balancing Stakeholder Concerns Thursday, June 18, 2020 | 2pm ET | 1pm CT | 12pm MT | 11am PT  The pandemic brings with it complex liability concerns, stakeholder demands and legal duties.  We will take a closer look.  The current pandemic confronts businesses, nonprofit organizations, governments, and the legal profession with innumerable ethical challenges.  Management issues and liability concerns, stakeholder demands and legal duties become even more complex in an environment of uncertainty and one where the consequences could result in serious illness or even death.  This program seeks to engage the participants in thinking through these challenges and developing processes of ethical response to them.  Managers must acknowledge and address the framework of fear associated with the pandemic, ranging from fear of contagion and death to fears of unemployment, child care, and the duties of home-schooling.  Additionally, as the economy reopens there must be serious attention to the [...]

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 [...]

Canna Law Blog Reviews Hemp-CBD Regulations State-by-State, Week-by-Week

July 22nd, 2019|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes|Tags: , , , , |

“When it comes to hemp, few states have embraced it like Colorado,” writes Harris Bricken attorney Daniel Shortt. “If you buy a product containing hemp, in any state across the country, it likely came from Colorado.” The state has allocated more than 12,000 acres of outdoor space and 2.35 million square feet of indoor space to hemp cultivation, according to Marijuana Business Daily. Shortt and his colleagues are working their way through a state-by-state series on the Canna Law Blog™, titled Hemp-CBD Across State Lines. The Harris Bricken team has covered Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas and California, and added Colorado to the list yesterday, July 21. The firm’s series covers state regulatory activity following the enactment of the federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, aka “The Farm Bill,” which removed hemp and its derivatives from the definition of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. The bill gave the USDA regulatory authority over hemp cultivation at the federal level, but states may maintain primary regulatory authority over the crop cultivated within their borders by submitting a plan to the USDA, Shortt explains. Read the Canna Law Blog's Colorado post and follow this series, updated weekly. Related Webinar This Week The Harris Bricken law firm has been on the forefront of the law regarding cannabis and related products for years. Three Harris Bricken [...]

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

Wells Fargo Proposes to Settle Auto Insurance Case for $386M — Yahoo!

June 26th, 2019|Categories: Class Actions, Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Insurance|Tags: , , , |

In 2017 customers of Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) filed a class action lawsuit alleging the bank forced unwanted auto insurance without permission from the customers. Currently WFC plans to pay around $386 million to settle the 2017 class action lawsuit. The high payout is due to the sheer number of customers affected. About 270,000 WFC customers were "pushed into delinquency " and "almost 25,000 wrongful vehicle repossessions." In addition to the class action settlement, WFC will be reaching out to individual customers offering financial service recovery, and restructuring their leadership teams. WFC is still seeing a decrease in sales and their numbers. In six months WFC shares "lost 4.5% against 6.5% growth recorded by the industry." Read the complete post on Yahoo! here.

The Future of Cyber Operations and the Government

June 7th, 2019|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

In the forthcoming National Defense Authorization Act the House Armed Services Committee -- specifically the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threat Capabilities -- seeks to amend the annual legislation to ensure that Congress is informed when the executive branch executes offensive or defensive cyber operations. The bill defines offensive or defensive cyber operations as a “sensitive military operation.” The goal of this shared information is additional oversight, especially given the newness of cyber tactics. As reported by journalist Derek B. Johnson of FWC.com, two covert cyber operations have taken place since POTUS announced the new policy. The first was in October 2018, a cyber operation with a goal of informing Russian operatives not to meddle with the midterm election. The second took place the following November in which the U.S. Cyber Command blocked access to Russian Internet Research Agency post election. While these two operations have been called “mild” in some critiques, former White House Director of Cyber Infrastructure Protection under President George W. Bush, Jason Healey, believes this highly specialized tactic is ideal since it presents the least potential for collateral damage. While Healey warns against grand and overt attacks, he states that sometimes "conflict is straightforward and you just have to stop adversaries from punching you in the mouth.” Read the complete post by Derek B. Johnson on FCW.com [...]

The New York Privacy Act Would Allow Direct Action

June 5th, 2019|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

The New York Privacy Act,  introduced last month by state Sen. Kevin Thomas, advocates for consumer agency over their personal data and would give New Yorkers the right to sue companies directly for privacy violations. Thomas wants companies to put customer data protection ahead of their budgetary and business goals.   The bill summary reads: "Enacts the NY privacy act to require companies to disclose their methods of de-identifying personal information, to place special safeguards around data sharing and to allow consumers to obtain the names of all entities with whom their information is shared; creates a special account to fund a new office of privacy and data protection." "Fiduciaries, like an attorney or a doctor, hold onto your information. They don't share it, unless there is a need for the purpose for which they collected it,” Thomas said. “That's not what's going on here with these data companies and these data brokers. They're sharing it, and we're getting targeted.” Pushback from the tech industry has been swift. John Olsen, Director of the Internet Association, said, “The NY Privacy Act, in its current form, is unworkable for businesses that want to comply and fails to provide New York residents meaningful control over how their data is collected, used, and protected." Facebook also chimed in saying they would have to shut down Facebook [...]

CannaLawBlog — Legalizing Cannabis Cash

June 5th, 2019|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Law Firm Operations|Tags: , , , , |

On May 20, 2019 banking associations from all 50 states and 1 territory sent a letter to Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee urging them to conduct hearings on the merits of providing cannabis-related business access to banking services. CannaLawBlog highlighted the primary concerns of the letter in a recent post: "Again, the primary concern expressed was that current law forces state-legal businesses to operate on a cash basis, which poses a safety risk, complicates enforcement efforts, and could damage local economies." The banking associations wanted to emphasize their neutrality on the legality of cannabis, rather they wanted to show strength as a national community and validate, support, and respect those communities that have voted for legalized recreational marijuana. Read the complete post by HarrisBricken attorney Jihee Ahn on The CannaLawBlog.

Top Five Things to Know if You’re Building Your Cannabis Empire Through M&A — CannaLawBlog

May 7th, 2019|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes|Tags: , , , , |

Cannabis is associated with calm. Joining the industry is anything but. Hilary Bricken already has nearly a decade of experience in the field of cannabis law. She founded the Canna Law Blog in 2010, which now has several contributors from the Harris Bricken firm and is easily one of the best out there. Her latest post offers insights on companies who wish to build their cannabis business through mergers and acquisitions. In her May 6 post, titled "Top Five Things to Know if You're Building Your Cannabis Empire Through M&A," she writes:  "It’s no secret that multiple state-by-state operators are building their cannabis empires through aggressive mergers and acquisitions. Last year, our cannabis business attorneys closed more than $100 million in cannabis company acquisitions, and that shows no signs of stopping in 2019. Cannabis M&A is not your run-of-the-mill business dealing though, and working from boilerplate, rote M&A documents is hugely dangerous. In addition, diligence is oftentimes like a regulatory spiderweb laden with liabilities that other businesses do not face. In addition, the barriers to entry in the cannabis industry are increasingly high, tedious, and protectionist, which can really torture business deals." Bricken writes that "if you find yourself turning into a larger multi-state operator though acquiring cannabis businesses," there are at least five things you should know. Read on for what she has to [...]

Go to Top