Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ubiquitous news of law firm data breaches, even among BigLaw, spotlights a treasure trove of trade secrets, confidential and strategic transactions, and sensitive client information — all of which might be stolen from law firms for ransom, sale, insider trading, blackmail or hacktivist purposes. No wonder law firms are perceived to be attractive targets of cyber-attacks. Attractive? You can't help that. Easy? Not so fast. Don't let your firm be an attractive AND easy target!
With developing and aggressive governmental policies to combat cyber warfare alongside ethical and legal obligations to protect clients' technical, private and privileged information, lawyers must be competent and reasonable in their practice. For example, among the last things you need is an inadvertent electronic disclosure of confidential client data such as a customer list when working on a 363 sale. Your technical competence and the reasonableness of your efforts to thwart such a leak could lead to questioning by a governmental agency as well as to suffering punitive consequences.
What was seen to be reasonable at any given point is likely to change quickly with a new ruling or the enactment of a law. In fact, while technological competency was addressed back in 2012 with an amendment to MRPC 1.1, Florida, as of Jan. 1, 2017, was the first state to require technology related CLE courses. In adopting the bar association's proposal for mandatory technology CLEs, the Florida Supreme Court opined that competent representation may involve a lawyer's association with, or retention of, a non-lawyer adviser with established technological competence in the relevant field. Additionally, the court said, in order to maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should engage in continuing study and education, including an understanding of the risks and benefits associated with the use of technology.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
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?