Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Over the past three years, one of the hottest class action litigation trends in the United States has been Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. BIPA requires entities that collect biometric information or identifiers to obtain prior written consent, provide notice of biometric privacy practices, and maintain reasonable security features to protect any collected data. Although BIPA was enacted in 2008, the law went largely unnoticed until 2016, leading many companies to unknowingly operate outside of strict compliance with the law for nearly a decade. Unfortunately, this could be a costly mistake, as BIPA provides a private right of action as well as statutory damages of up to $5,000 per violation.
At the same time, in a perfect storm for plaintiffs' attorneys, the use of biometric information grew exponentially. Aside from high-tech uses for biometric information, such as the facial recognition technology at issue in the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Patel v. Facebook Inc., 932 F.3d 1264 (9th Cir. 2019), employers increasingly implemented biometric finger or hand print scanners to track their employees' attendance and hours. The increased use of biometric information combined with the plaintiffs' bar's discovery of a long-neglected privacy statute with a private right of action has resulted in hundreds class action lawsuits under BIPA in the last three years. The lion's share of these lawsuits have been brought by hourly employees against their employers, or ex-employers.
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 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.
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.
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.
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
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.