Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Cybersecurity Law & StrategyFeaturesCybersecurityPrivacyTechnology Media and Telecom

Synchronizing Legal Hold Requirements With Consumer Requests for Data Deletion

By Mike Hamilton
July 01, 2020

The biggest challenge with any legal hold process is ensuring that potentially relevant data is actually preserved. There are myriad routes you can take to ensure defensible preservation of data, starting with the following three options:

  1. Preservation by Legal Hold
  2. Preservation by In-Place Preservation (aka, locking down data in place)
  3. Preservation by Collection

But with evolving requirements for how data is managed by new data privacy laws like the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), it's become harder to secure data by simply sending a legal hold and assuming the custodian will do their duty to preserve it.

Data Privacy Laws Pose New Risks to Defensible Preservation Practices

Key features of the CCPA and GDPR grant consumers and employees unprecedented rights — including the right to request to know what data a business holds on them and ask that it be deleted. But what if that data requested under these regulations is already required to be saved under a legal hold?

Obviously, deleting data that is this potentially relevant to anticipated or pending litigation (civil or criminal) can have devastating consequences. Therefore, it's imperative that e-discovery professionals collaborate with their privacy colleagues on processes for harmonizing their organizational legal hold obligations with these conflicting data privacy regulations.

This premium content is locked for Cybersecurity Law & Strategy 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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.