Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Personal Information Protection Law of the People's Republic of China (PIPL) went into effect on Nov. 1 and brought with it a suite of new requirements and lingering questions. Organizations already complying with the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will find familiar many requirements of the PIPL, but GDPR veterans and newcomers will both need to pay close attention to the unique privacy rules of the most populous country in the world. This article touches upon a few of the points that organizations need to be aware of as they begin adapting their compliance programs according to the PIPL.
The PIPL uses its own terminology that is similar to words and phrases utilized heavily in the GDPR. For example, the PIPL refers to "personal information handlers" as organizations and individuals that, in personal information handling activities, autonomously decide handling purposes and handling activities. Those familiar with GDPR will see the similarities between the PIPL's "personal information handlers" and the GDPR's "data controllers."
Like the GDPR requires of data controllers, the PIPL requires that data handlers have a valid legal basis to collect personal information. Consent is key unless the data collection is necessary to fulfill a contract with the individual or certain other conditions are met. But limitations on data collection are only the beginning for PIPL compliance, as the law imposes a variety of additional burdens on businesses interested in the Chinese market.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
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.