Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Many corporations around the globe are preparing for May 2018, when Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) enforcement kicks in. The regulation encompasses a wide range of nuanced privacy requirements that can be challenging to operationalize. In particular, requirements around the rights of European data subjects — which include the right to be forgotten and rights to access, rectification and objection to processing — will be some of the most difficult to address.
The GDPR states that individuals should have the right to access their personal data so that they are aware of and can verify the lawfulness of its processing. Requests must be responded to promptly, within one month, leaving companies very little time to perform a task that they may not be equipped to handle. The right to be forgotten provision presents similar challenges, giving EU citizens the option to require erasure of their personal information. No barrier exists for citizens to enact these rights, and some countries are planning campaigns to educate the public on them in the coming year. The most operationally complex new data subject rights are:
Examining what the invocation of a data subject's rights would look like in reality can underscore the importance of this issue. Take the hypothetical example of a medium-sized life insurance company that insures one million customers and must fulfill an average of one data subject access request per insured once every 2,000 years. This conservative estimate equals .05% of one million — or 50,000 requests — per year. Boiling that 50,000 down to the day equals 200 requests per day, or 25 requests per hour for a standard eight-hour work day. Consider the dedicated staff and resources that may be needed to handle such a burden. Organizations in banking, insurance, retail and other industries that involve large volumes of private customer data should realistically prepare for volumes higher than conservative estimates.
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
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.
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 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.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
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.