The new provisions of F.R.E. 902 bring the rule into the digital age, streamlining the process of authenticating electronically stored information and admitting it into evidence.
On Feb. 21, 2018, the SEC voted unanimously to approve a statement and interpretive guidance to assist the public in preparing disclosures about cybersecurity risks and incidents. The new guidance expands upon previous guidance provided in October of 2011.
In this roundtable discussion, two law firm partners and two GCs share their experience and insight on the evolving nature of e-discovery and its intersection with AI, cybersecurity and privacy.
Many companies remain overwhelmed by the prospect of developing a cybersecurity program. Too many still see cyber crime as an IT issue, and simply defer to that department. Cybersecurity is most definitely an information security issue and it must be treated as such. Failure to recognize this concept almost ensures a weak cybersecurity program that remains highly vulnerable to breaches.
Data privacy is one of the most important issues facing corporations, and amidst the challenges of protecting customer data, the regulatory landscape that oversees it is shifting on an almost daily basis. With changes occurring at such a rapid pace across all corners of the globe, it's not surprising that organizations are increasingly finding themselves inadequately prepared to deal with these regulations.
<b><i>The race is on to develop the best technology for autonomous vehicles, but there are also drives to increase regulation around the data these cars and trucks collect.</b></i><p>Clearly, it's an exciting time to be in the autonomous car industry, and the race is on to develop the best tech first. But with an increasingly complex legal landscape, lawyers need to focus on compliance with evolving data privacy regulations.
For the fourth time, Exterro has conducted an in-depth survey of federal judges in order to understand better how they see e-discovery law and practice changing.
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Insiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.
