Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b><i>Online Extra:</b></i> Much Ado About 'Minimum Standards' for DFS Cybersecurity Regulation
Editor's Note:'On Sept. 13, 2016, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced New York State Department of Financial Services Proposed 23 NYCRR 500 'Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies.' The proposed regulation were published on Sept. 28, and this article has been'updated with any changes made after the draft release in conjunction with Mayor Cuomo's announcement.'
The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) made headlines on September 13 by announcing a 'first-in-the-nation,' comprehensive cybersecurity regulation, which will mandate 16 'minimum standards' for the 4,000+ institutions operating under DFS jurisdiction. From a practical perspective, the proposed regulation adopts or aligns with guidance from the'2014 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Framework, portions of the'Fair Trade Commission's 2015 Start with Security'program, as well as the basic requirements that banks have established and enforced for their third party vendors for several years. In short, there is nothing revolutionary or innovative in the proposed regulation. Indeed, the DFS acknowledges that 'many firms have proactively increased their cybersecurity programs with great success,' and its own 2013 survey found that 90% of institutions (and 98% of large institutions) had implemented a comprehensive information security framework. Notwithstanding sensational headlines, a review of the volume of'significant breaches'at financial institutions over the last decade supports the conclusion that financial institutions are taking cybersecurity extremely seriously; large data breaches occur less and less frequently, and the root cause seldom is poor security. All of this begs the questions ' why the need for New York's proposed regulation, and what will be the practical impact for financial and other institutions across the country?
The'Devil is in the Details
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 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?