Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The UK's Court of Appeal gave a very important judgment earlier this year in the so-called Vidal-Hall case concerning Google's Internet behavior tracking through a browser. The court found that: first, misuse of private information is now classified as a tort, thereby in this case enabling proceedings to be issued against a party outside the jurisdiction of the UK; and, second, financial compensation for distress caused by breaches of the Data Protection Act 1998, 1998 c. 29 (DPA 1998) may now be claimed, despite there being no monetary loss, the UK legal provision that had to date prevented this having now been disapplied by the Court of Appeal.
This case is particularly important because litigation for data protection infringements is rising steadily and following this ruling, the legal footing upon which to obtain compensation in court claims for data protection infringements has, for the moment at least, moved forward significantly and may pave the way in general for class actions. But, permission to appeal the Court of Appeal's ruling to the highest court in the UK, the Supreme Court, has just been allowed by that latter court, and so we will have to wait and see before drawing any final conclusions.
The Case
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?