Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Introducing the Cybersecurity Reference Model
Cybersecurity is a rapidly maturing discipline and industry that has been thrust into the limelight of social consciousness and vernacular with globally publicized events such as the Sony hacks, breaches at JPMC, Democratic National Convention email leaks, and not to be overlooked, the critically acclaimed world of Mr. Robot, which chronicles the lives and events of a post-apocalyptic cyber-hacked society. Cybersecurity has penetrated our everyday existence, entertainment, and individual concern, but little has been written to help the legal community understand the roles and opportunities within this burgeoning corner of the job market.
Not since the explosion of e-discovery at the turn of the millennium has a new wave of fear, knowledge, technology, compliance requirement, budgetary spend, talent demand and job opportunity hit the legal community as it has in recent years with cybersecurity. The effect that cybersecurity will have on the legal job market will have stark similarities to the boom of e-discovery in terms of opportunity volume, but there will also be radical differences on how these two disciplines have and will continue to change the landscape of the legal industry.
The EDRM (Electronic Discovery Reference Model), created and fostered by George Socha and Tom Gelbmann, has served as a phenomenal lexicon and cost-based approach to viewing and discussing the e-discovery lifecycle. In contrast, the TRU Cybersecurity Reference Model™ (CSRM) is a deliberate skills-based guide to the myriad of technical functions and job responsibilities that exist throughout the cyber continuum. The CSRM (pictured below) gives clarity to what skills are required through the information security lifecycle and will be a reference to compartmentalize what stages of the model are in high growth and demand.
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.