Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Most companies have experienced or will experience a data breach. Increasingly, companies also face the risks associated with mass arbitration weaponized by the overwhelming volume of claims after a breach. This article explores:
Arbitration can provide an effective and efficient means of resolving disputes for all parties involved. The prospect of efficient, out-of-court resolution has prompted many companies to insert a binding arbitration clause in most of their consumer contracts. Following the Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, companies have included consumer-friendly and conscionable arbitration provisions that require the company to pay any arbitration filing fees regardless of which party initiates the arbitration. These arbitrations usually come packaged with class action and jury trial waivers.
The widespread use of consumer arbitration clauses, coupled with the liberal federal policy favoring arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act, has drawn the ire of many plaintiffs' attorneys, who are effectively blocked from pursuing many consumer actions or class actions in court. Another subset of the plaintiffs' bar, however, has sought to leverage these arbitration clauses into quick settlements. Enter the mass arbitration.
The typical mass arbitration scheme involves the threat of thousands upon thousands of putative claimants who are ready to file individual claims against a company en masse. This fleet of claimants is typically represented by one firm that solicited them through online advertising or targeted outreach. The firm then approaches the company with an ultimatum: Enter into a global settlement now or face the cost of defending against thousands of claims and their attendant fees in arbitration.
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
In advance of Legalweek '25, a Q&A with conference speaker Ryan Phelan, a partner at Marshall, Gerstein & Borun and founder and moderator of legal blog PatentNext, to discuss how courts and jurisdictions are handling novel technologies, the copyrightability of AI-assisted art, and more.
Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.
This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.