Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Computer Forensics Docket Sheet
Court Orders Gov't To Give Defendant
Hard Drive Mirror Image
In a criminal proceeding, the government seized the defendant's computer to search for evidence that the defendant unlawfully transferred obscene pictures over the Internet. After the seizure, the defendant requested that the government provide him with a mirror image of his computer hard drive to allow his computer forensics expert to examine the drive for potential evidence. In an affidavit, the forensics expert declared he planned to form an opinion, based on his examination of the hard drive, as to whether the defendant knowingly received the obscene images. The expert stated that a mirror image was necessary so he could perform his analysis in his own laboratory, using his own computer forensics software and hardware, which might be difficult to transport to another location. The government objected, declaring the defense forensics expert could review the mirror image only under its supervision. Determining that the hard drive could contain relevant dates, times and circumstances surrounding the receipt of the pictures, the court ordered the government to produce the mirror image. United States v. Alexander, 2004 WL 2095701 (E.D.Mich. Sept. 14, 2004).
Michele C.S. Lange Charity Delich E-Discovery Case Law Update Computer Forensics www.krollontrack.com e-Discovery Law & Strategy [email protected]
Court Orders Gov't To Give Defendant
Hard Drive Mirror Image
In a criminal proceeding, the government seized the defendant's computer to search for evidence that the defendant unlawfully transferred obscene pictures over the Internet. After the seizure, the defendant requested that the government provide him with a mirror image of his computer hard drive to allow his computer forensics expert to examine the drive for potential evidence. In an affidavit, the forensics expert declared he planned to form an opinion, based on his examination of the hard drive, as to whether the defendant knowingly received the obscene images. The expert stated that a mirror image was necessary so he could perform his analysis in his own laboratory, using his own computer forensics software and hardware, which might be difficult to transport to another location. The government objected, declaring the defense forensics expert could review the mirror image only under its supervision. Determining that the hard drive could contain relevant dates, times and circumstances surrounding the receipt of the pictures, the court ordered the government to produce the mirror image. United States v. Alexander, 2004 WL 2095701 (E.D.Mich. Sept. 14, 2004).
Michele C.S. Lange Charity Delich E-Discovery Case Law Update Computer Forensics www.krollontrack.com e-Discovery Law & Strategy [email protected]
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.