Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The GDPR: Teeth, and Considerations for Corporate Legal Counsel and Discovery Teams
The struggle is real. With the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) set to take effect in May of 2018, the serious implications for corporate legal counsel and e-discovery teams are difficult to deny. Among other aspects of its broad reach, the GDPR extends compliance requirements to both data controllers and “processors,” a distinction that certainly includes e-discovery data processing in the context of litigation and investigations. Complicating matters further, the Regulation affords data subjects the “right to be forgotten,” a key aspect that affords individuals that right to request erasure or removal of data from systems and databases, presenting potential new challenges for the collection and hold of data in connection with U.S. discovery requirements.
In addition, the GDPR imposes certain organizational requirements, accountability measures, breach notification requirements and processing system assessments, not to mention specific limitations around the transfer of personal data to third party countries not deemed to provide adequate personal data protections (here's looking at you, Uncle Sam). And all of this is backed by some serious teeth: a tiered financial penalty regime stretching up to 4% of annual global revenue turnover. That can make for some astronomical numbers, and while it's unlikely that such steep fines will be commonplace, it is clear that there is a concentrated effort on the part of regulators to place a level of seriousness around data protection and privacy compliance that rivals anti-trust considerations. The purported penalty scheme and steep financial consequence of non-compliance to the GDPR is, without question, an effort to get companies of all stripes to stand up and take notice.
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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
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
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
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
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.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
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.