Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Given the ever-increasing amount of data that is collected and the sensitivity surrounding the use of personal data for market research and e-commerce purposes, Web site owners need to be aware of how they use the information they have collected and their obligations to the individuals concerned. In Europe, the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 1995 (Directive) aims to provide a working balance between the needs of data users and the public by facilitating and encouraging the free movement of personal data, while at the same time respecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals ' notably their right to privacy. The Directive is intended to harmonize the position in European member states that, in the past, afforded different levels of protection to individuals. In particular, the Directive gives national regulators powers to control what type of data can be processed abroad and allows them to halt exports of personal data to countries deemed not have adequate protection, such as the United States.
Features
Recent court rulings in e-commerce.
Features
Particularly during the last 2 years, the onerous task of filtering e-mail messages has grown to become a business and operational necessity ' largely because of the influx of spam, as well as regulations and legislation mandating retention of e-communications such as e-mail and, increasingly, instant messages. Coupled with the traditional reasons for filtering ' malicious code attached to or embedded within the message, and inappropriate or sensitive message content ' filtering technologies and the market are experiencing radical change. This shift makes purchasing and implementation decisions difficult, but e-commerce enterprises, especially new and fledgling ones, must be on guard against attack, whether inadvertent or deliberate, and they must meet regulatory requirements.
Features
Computer security issues are commanding rapidly increasing attention from companies, due to increases in both targeted attacks from hackers, and Internet viruses and worms that affect numerous computer systems simultaneously. For both types of attacks, an important line of defense for a company is to make sure that its computers run only updated software, including the use of "patches" to repair identified security holes. Computer security experts have long recommended prompt installation of patches, invoking the old saw that "a stitch in time saves nine." This article suggests that risks of legal liability for companies that do not apply security patches promptly are significant and increasing.
Features
While Canada-U.S. trade relations have been historically close, and cross-border trade greatly liberalized since the entry into force of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement in 1988 and the NAFTA in 1994, the complex area of trade in defense products remains highly regulated and subject, in certain respects, to important restrictions. Significant regulatory pitfalls exist for companies with continentally integrated operations in the form of export permit requirements for items that are transferred across (and frequently back across) the U.S.-Canada border. Corporate non-compliance with these requirements, even though unintentional, can lead potentially to heavy penalties under both U.S. and Canadian law.
Most employers have come to realize that personal use of the Internet at work by employees can decrease productivity, and that employees downloading inappropriate material can lead to hostile work environment claims. What many employers have not yet thought about is the potentially explosive problems facing them as the music industry continues its crackdown on those who illegally download and share pirated music files over the Internet.
When corporate employees engage in criminal wrongdoing, the result is often civil litigation against their employer. The criminal conviction of such employees, whether by trial or plea, or their invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination, can have serious adverse consequences in related civil litigations against their employer, even if the employee (or former employee) is not a party. This article discusses the use of such evidence against corporations.
Features
Depending on the circumstances and the law, parties on either side of an entertainment suit may ask a court for an award of attorney fees. Following are recent court rulings that deal with this and related concerns. In this and future issues, <i>Entertainment Law & Finance</i> will report on such relevant rulings in Attorney-Fee Updates.
The Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Seven, decided that claims over the use of computer-altered likenesses of the plaintiffs in children's television programming were covered by the Uniform Single Publication Act (USPA), Calif. Civ. Code Sec. 3425.1 <i>et seq.</i> Thus, the claims were barred by California's relevant two-year statute of limitations. <i>Long v. The Walt Disney Co.</i>, B164750.