Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Following months of debate, the U.S. Senate has delayed voting on the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, S. 754 (CISA), ahead of its summer recess. As part of an agreement reached on Aug. 5, the Act will be back on the Hill this month and will carry a number of new amendments when it resurfaces. The bill was introduced in March.
If passed, CISA would offer incentives to organizations that shared details with the government and others concerning threat patterns or breaches they've identified. Incentives include protection from investigation and subsequent lawsuits.
But while supporters say the information provided in these exchanges would aid in the identification and protection from certain threats, privacy advocates warn that sharing large volumes of information without explicit instructions to remove personally identifiable information would do more harm than good.
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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?