Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Lessons Learned: Issues Exposed in the Aftermath of the Hewlett-Packard Debacle
'What began as an investigation with the best intentions has ended up turning in a direction we could not possibly have anticipated.' Mark Hurd, CEO Hewlett-Packard.
On Sept. 5, 2006, Newsweek published a story about Hewlett-Packard's Chairman Patricia Dunn's use of a private investigation firm to locate the source of leaks of confidential corporate information. As the story unfolded, the public learned the following: After confidential information appeared in news publications in 2005, certain officers and certain members of the board of directors of Hewlett-Packard ('HP') authorized the launch of two investigations, the first in 2005, and the next in 2006, to locate the source of the information leaks. The basis for the investigations was that the information leaked to the press was known only to board members. Certain officers and directors collectively comprised the 'HP investigation team' in the secret investigation of the leaks to the media. In devising its plan, the HP investigation team sought the assistance of a top investigator, Ron DeLia, head of Security OutSourcing Solutions, Inc. ('SOS'), with whom Hewlett-Packard previously had worked on unrelated matters. DeLia allegedly encouraged the HP investigation team to use pretexting or 'social engineering' to obtain private cell phone and phone records of certain targeted individuals, among other things.
Pretexting is the act of creating and using an invented scenario to obtain information from or about a target, usually over the telephone. It usually involves some prior research and the use of pieces of known information (eg, mother's maiden name, birthday, Social Security Number) to convince the target company that the individual seeking the information is, in fact, the legitimate owner of the information. Misrepresenting anything about oneself in order to improperly obtain another's information is, by definition, pretexting.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?