Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Privacy Shield Scheme: Should Your Company Join?
The Privacy Shield scheme was proposed in February 2016 to replace the Safe Harbor scheme, which was struck down by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the first Schrems case (Schrems 1) in October 2015.
The announcement of the creation of Privacy Shield in February 2016 was premature. But an announcement had to be made at the time, as a deadline set by the Article 29 Working Party (WP29) had expired at the end of January 2016. In February of that year, the EU Commission said it hoped that Privacy Shield would be finalized by the beginning of May 2016. Even that seemed ambitious, in part because of the criticism that Privacy Shield received from WP29 in April 2016, inter alia, that it did not offer adequate protection.
The Privacy Shield scheme eventually opened for business on Aug. 1, 2016. The objective of this framework is to protect the fundamental rights of anyone in the EU whose personal data is transferred to the U.S., and to bring legal clarity for businesses relying on transatlantic data transfers. It remains to be seen if the new deal can be a lasting solution. Meanwhile, however, more than 2,300 companies have joined Privacy Shield. These include Ernst & Young, Facebook (for non HR data only), Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Rackspace, Salesforce, ServiceNow, St Jude Medical and Workday.
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.