Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Get a (Law) Firm Grip on Data Breaches
Law firms are as much at risk for cyber attacks as any other industry, a point emphasized in a recent internal report at a major bank that warned employees about the threat of attacks on the networks and websites of big law firms, according to the New York Times. See http:// tinyurl.com/pcdxvw5. Because of the lack of reporting requirements in the industry, it is unclear how many breaches have actually occurred. Law firms have been relatively unwilling to share information about their security breaches because of potential concerns about how that information would affect their credibility. In fact, digital security at many law firms, despite improvements, generally remains below the standards set for other industries. Fortunately, law firms are now recognizing the risk and beginning to take preventive action. This article describes some of the reasons law firms are cyber-attack targets, steps they can take to reduce their risk, and what clients are doing to encourage law firms in those efforts.
Law Firms As Targets
It should not be a surprise that law firms are ripe targets for breaches. Their data and document repositories may contain a variety of sensitive information ' not only traditionally privileged information, but also competitive information related to their clients' business strategies and other forms of private data held in connection with client work. For example, a law firm may not accept credit cards, but it may have payment card information as part of a matter it is handling. Similarly, while a law firm may not be a covered entity under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA; http://1.usa.gov/1jSFZpy), it might be considered a “business associate” under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH; http://bit.ly/1JSv6lK) because of the services it provides to HIPAA-covered entities.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.