Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
While much of the privacy community has been focused — for good reason — on the COVID-19 public health emergency, plaintiffs' counsel have started to lay the groundwork for a broad private right of action under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), Cal. Civ. Code §§1798.100 to 1798.198.
The first part of this article provides an overview of how the CCPA addresses private rights of action. The second section summarizes recent class action complaints that attempt to use CCPA violations as the basis for class-wide claims, either via claims asserted directly under the CCPA or through the California Unfair Competition Law. The third and final part provides suggestions for prioritizing activity in CCPA compliance programs in this new litigation environment.
The California Consumer Privacy Act was the end product of a negotiation with the backers of a proposed ballot initiative, Californians for Consumer Privacy, that, if successful, would have granted California residents the right to be notified of and to opt out from sales of personal information. See, The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, Ballot Initiative No. 17-0027, draft stamped as received by California Attorney General on Oct. 9, 2017. One of the primary objectives of the business community in supporting the negotiations was to eliminate a proposed private right of action. See, California Senate, Senate Judiciary Committee, Tuesday, April 9th, 2019 at 3:34:00-3:39:25. The final statute, a product of compromise on both sides, promised to limit any private right of action to claims for certain data security incidents resulting from a failure to comply with pre-existing standards of California law. See, Cal. Civ. Code §1798.81.5. Privacy attorneys and litigators were, however, quickly skeptical about whether the compromise language would be effective to preclude broader class action suits.
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.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.