On the Case
October 30, 2006
In the legal realm, concern about the security of sensitive data during transport has never been higher. Attorneys from coast to coast have watched the headlines and read countless articles about files and tapes that have been lost or stolen while being moved from Point A to Point B ' during legal discovery activities, perhaps, or to satisfy compliance requirements.<br>As a result, law firms and corporate in-house counsel are investigating more dependable methods for securing information during transit, when it is most vulnerable. Many of these experienced denizens of e-data have concluded that encryption provides the greatest protection throughout the chain of custody, and that this locked-door method of data security can be achieved at a relatively reasonable cost.
Prepare for e-Discovery
October 30, 2006
With state laws governing the capture and securing of evidence ' including electronic data ' the possibility of spoliation is a genuine concern. Not only could evidence subjected to spoliation be inadmissible, but misdemeanor or felony charges could apply to the collector and the contracting party.<br>Identifying electronic evidence, much like in a physical crime scene, starts with drawing increasing concentric circles around the victim or perpetrator. Some care must be taken regarding a company's policies and practices. State and federal law on personal property may be involved if the employee used personal devices legally or illegally in combination with the company's assets, and a warrant or commencement of discovery may be required to access personal property or equipment on private property.
Blogging and the Workplace
October 30, 2006
Blogs can reach millions of readers long before the employer learns about a potentially worrisome posting. No laws specifically regulate blogging per se, and there's virtually no guiding case law. And so, employers must look elsewhere for guidance on balancing employees' interest in life away from work and ensuring that employees' blogging doesn't damage business interests; that elsewhere is a new destination on the company document roster: a blogging policy.
'No Sublicense' Rule Extended to Trademark and Publicity Rights: The Half-Century Saga of Miller v. Glenn Miller Productions, Inc.
October 30, 2006
It is well settled that a patent or copyright licensee may not sublicense that right absent specific authorization. <i>See, eg, Gardner v. Nike, Inc.</i> 279 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2004); <i>Unarco Industries, Inc. v. Kelley Co.</i>, 465 F.2d 1303 (7th Cir. 1972); <i>In re Patient Education Media, Inc,</i> 210 B.R. 237 (S.D.N.Y 1997). Trademarks are often grouped with patents and copyrights as 'intellectual property,' but fundamental differences among the genres exist. <i>See, eg, Sony Corp of America v. University City Studios</i>, 464 U.S. 417, 439 n.17 (1984). Do the same policies supporting the so-called 'no sublicense' rule in the patent and copyright context apply to trademarks and related publicity rights?
e-Mail Job Termination Notices
October 30, 2006
Traditionally, job-termination notices took the form of a pink slip of paper that employees found in their mailbox or in the envelope carrying their paycheck.<br>Recently, however, tech retailer Radio Shack used e-mails to give more than 400 employees notice of their involuntary separation from the firm. That move probably wasn't the use of technology many in the e-commerce, or the bricks-and-mortar, world envisioned for the business sector.
News Briefs
October 30, 2006
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
Competitive Intelligence: A Tool for In-house Counsel
October 30, 2006
Competitive Intelligence has long been used by corporate America to analyze trends, client feedback, and marketing strategies to get an edge. It's the newest buzzword among law firms to win more market share and retain clients. But it's barely a whisper in law departments, at least when it comes to selecting outside counsel.
The Human Side of Data Security
October 30, 2006
As headlines continue to report data security breaches at an alarming rate, discussion often focuses on the need for enhanced technical controls, such as two-factor authentication and encryption, to protect sensitive, personally identifiable information. The role of the company employee, both as the cause of, and the first line of defense against, security breaches is often lost in the analysis. Yet developing law is increasingly requiring administrative or procedural controls, particularly those directed at employees, as a component of a legally compliant security program.
Shareholder Proxy Access
October 30, 2006
On Sept. 5, 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated: 'In deeming proxy access bylaw proposals non-excludable under Rule 14a-8(i)(8), we take no side in the policy debate regarding shareholder access to the corporate ballot.' <i>American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. American International Group, Inc., 2006 WL 2557941 (2d Cir. Sept. 5, 2006) ('AFSCME')</i>. Despite the Second Circuit's neutral intent, <i>AFSCME</i> has generated a surge of renewed interest in the legal and policy implications of shareholder proxy access, and specifically shareholders' expanding power to influence director elections.
