Last year, we noted that the Supreme Court had granted certiorari in a case that could limit the ability of plaintiffs to sue defendants over bare statutory violations without the showing of actual injury. The case implicates a wide variety of statutes that grant monetary awards to successful plaintiffs on
Availability of insurance is often among the first questions that arises when a company encounters a data breach or other Internet-related problem involving company records, even where the company lacks a cyberinsurance policy. The federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a ruling by a District Court that required insurance coverage for an inadvertent
On the heels of the Open Internet Order adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) last year, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has circulated a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to fellow Commissioners that would apply the privacy protections of the Communications Act to
On February 29, 2016, the European Commission’s (EC) released a much anticipated draft adequacy decision on the EU–U.S. Privacy Shield. With this and enactment of the Judicial Redress Act last week (see our post here), the European Union came yet another step closer to finalizing the agreement between the EU and the U.S. to enable
On December 15, 2015, the European Commission announced that an agreement has been reached with the European Parliament and the Council (the “trilogue” meetings) regarding the Commission’s sweeping 2012 EU Data Protection Reform proposal. The reform package, which consists of a General Data Protection Regulation and a Data Protection Directive for Police and Criminal
On December 17, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that Lifelock, Inc. (LifeLock), agreed to pay a record-breaking $100 million to settle charges that it violated an earlier consent agreement related to flawed data security practices issued in March 2010. The LifeLock settlements implicate both the “fairness” of the company’s data security practices and
We’ve written about the ground-breaking and panic-inducing ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) invalidating the U.S.–EU Safe Harbor framework as an adequate data transfer mechanism, and ruling that national authorities are not bound by Commission approvals. Click here for our September 23, 2015 blog post, and here for a related October 16, 2015
The Article 29 Working Party (WP) issued a press release on October 16, 2015 announcing the outcome of the meeting to discuss coordinated action after the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) decision in the matter of Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner (C-362-14), which invalidated the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Agreement. While calling for
A European Court of Justice (ECJ) advocate general, Yves Bot, has called for the European Union–U.S. Safe Harbor Agreement to be invalidated due to concerns over U.S. surveillance practices (press release here, opinion here). The ECJ has discretion to reject the recommendation, but such opinions are generally followed. A final decision on the
In a closely watched case where the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) pursued Wyndham Worldwide Corporation for several data breaches that led to millions of dollars in fraudulent charges on customers’ payment cards, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Monday agreed with the Commission’s broad interpretation of its “unfairness” authority (opinion here
