Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Untangling the Costs of Cyber Breach Recovery (and Strategies to Avoid Overbilling)
The global average cost of a data breach has surged 10% in the past year, reaching a record high $4.88 million. While operational downtime and lost customers remain major contributors, a growing portion of these costs stem from inefficient post-breach responses, particularly non-compliance with regulatory standards and the fines that come along with that. With regulatory pressure mounting, companies are leaning harder on legal professionals to steer them through the post-breach maze — ensuring that every notification is compliant, every deadline is met, and every dollar spent is strategic. In a landscape where one misstep can mean millions, navigating cyber recovery has become as much a legal challenge as a technical one.
The Cost of Improper Notification
Non-compliance, in the context of a breach, goes beyond failing to meet privacy, security, and data-handling regulations ahead of the breach (which often contribute to the breach itself). It also includes failure to meet post-breach requirements, particularly those related to notification.
When sensitive data is exposed, companies are legally required to notify affected individuals, businesses, and, in some cases, law enforcement, regulatory bodies, and the media. Every U.S. state has legislation mandating prompt disclosure of breaches involving sensitive personal information, the details of which vary by jurisdiction, industry, and type of data.
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.