Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Message Is Clear: Assess Your Information Governance Practices In Light of DOJ and SEC Crackdown on Use of Personal Devices and Messaging Apps
Regulators increasingly are scrutinizing employee use of personal devices and third-party messaging apps ― in particular, but not only, ephemeral apps where messages automatically disappear ― as employees continue to conduct business on multiple platforms and concurrent channels of communication. The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently issued its most comprehensive guidance to date on its expectations that companies preserve all business communications conducted on personal devices and messaging apps. And the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) continue to aggressively enforce their recordkeeping rules against regulated entities that do not properly preserve their electronic business communications. Notably, while the SEC and CFTC have been focused on regulated entities, the DOJ's guidance applies to all businesses.
This article summarizes the DOJ's recent guidance and the SEC's enforcement trends and priorities in this area, and it provides information governance best practices companies can implement now to ensure they are meeting regulators' expectations and recordkeeping rules.
DOJ Policy
The DOJ's focus on individuals using personal devices and messaging apps for business purposes is not new. As far back as 2017, the DOJ issued guidance that companies under investigation for alleged Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations would be ineligible for full cooperation credit unless they prohibited employees' use of ephemeral messaging. However, after noting that many companies use ephemeral messaging for legitimate business purposes, the DOJ subsequently instead required companies using ephemeral messaging to maintain controls that ensure information is retained pursuant to appropriate retention policies and legal requirements.
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.