Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Mobile Mayhem: Smartphones and Security (Or the Lack Thereof)

By Adam Cohen
November 30, 2015

It's a mobile jungle out there, and your corporate data is too valuable to just bungle through it.

Little computers, generically called “mobile devices,” are everywhere, like creatures sharing our environment with non-digital animals and insects. They come in all shapes and sizes: tablets as big as flat-screen TVs; wearable technology such as the Apple Watch, fitness bracelet or Bluetooth headset; and the undisputed king of mobile devices, our inseparable personal parasite ' the smartphone. Not only do these devices share our “physical” environment, they permeate our information technology environment. Connected in the atmosphere of the Internet, mobile devices breathe by inhaling and exhaling data, which travels across the globe, nearly instantaneously.

The Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policy approach to employee devices is rampant, although of course adoption and implementation varies widely depending on industry regulatory environment and other variables. BYOD implementation can come in a wide variety of different formulations, but it essentially means that employees are choosing their own hardware and, to one degree or another, mixing personal and business use on a device. Some of these devices are like domesticated animals or tamed pets ' corporate-issued and configured, and strictly controlled by corporate IT. Others are only partially domesticated ' personally selected and purchased devices with corporate information management in the form of “mobile device management” or other controls. But most are just plain wild ' personal devices with no control from employers other than perhaps some unmonitored, unenforced, and mostly unread policy guidance.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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? Image

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 Image

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?