Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Key Tech Terms to Know: Archives, Backups, Disaster Recovery and “as-a-Service”
Law firms today are inundated with new data protection and recovery methodologies from vendors. It's a hot market because technologists in law firms are under intense pressure to protect sensitive client data and clients are now holding their firms to higher standards than ever. However, IT leaders are struggling to make sense of what they need to have, both to meet client demands and stay ahead of the ever-evolving threat landscape.
For this reason, below are a few essential definitions, intended to provide clarity and guidance to firms that are exploring how to improve their data compliance, protection and recovery posture.
Definitions and Differences
Archive: A collection of historical business records that are immutable and unchangeable, which must be retained for future reference should you ever need to produce evidence (perhaps when legal or regulatory questions arise). Archiving refers to the process of moving data that is no longer in active use to a separate storage device. Many organizations define archive data as any copies older than 120 days, whereas some may archive immediately when a matter is closed. Typically, archive data can be located online in to-disk format or offline in to-tape format.
Archive-as-a-Service (AaaS): Also emphasizes maintaining a historical record, but unlike the “archive” definition above, a vendor is helping you with the act and storage of the archive data. It's typically assumed the storage is in a second datacenter managed by the vendor.
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.