We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 360

Trio of data privacy bills pass Senate Judiciary Committee

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 20 2011

The Senate Judiciary Committee last month approved three data security and privacy bills (S. 1151, S. 1408, and S. 1535) that would preempt state breach notification laws and create a single, nationwide notification rule

Google challenges NSL

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 6 2013

On the heels of the district court's decision, Google reportedly filed suit in the same court (pursuant to 18 USC 3511) to set aside or modify

France's data protection authority issues data security recommendations

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • France
  • -
  • October 24 2009

France's data protection authority, the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), has issued ten recommendations for information technology security that the CNIL says organizations should implement in order to ensure compliance with France's Law on Information Technology and Liberties (Law 78-17 of 1978, updated 2004

Courts at a "loss" as to how to interpret the CFAA

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 24 2009

A federal court in Kansas ruled in The Paradigm Alliance, Inc., v. Celeritas Technololgies, LLC, that fees paid to investigate alleged unauthorized computer access constitute "loss" within the meaning of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and that a claim based on such loss can therefore survive a motion for summary judgment, even without evidence of damage to a computer

A pilgrim’s progress revisited

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • December 5 2009

A little over a decade ago, government agencies in the United States and the United Kingdom were hell-bent on restricting the spread of strong encryption out of their concern that it would impede their ability to monitor the communications of terrorists and criminals

United States urges Ninth Circuit to ditch new rules on computer searches

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 5 2009

As we previously reported, the Ninth Circuit, sitting in an en banc panel of 11 judges, issued sweeping new rules in August that greatly constrain the government’s execution of search warrants in cases involving electronic evidence

DOD proposes data security and reporting requirements for contractors

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 12 2010

The U.S. Department of Defense has issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comments on proposed changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) that would impose data security requirements on defense contractors who handle unclassified DoD information

As the days grow longer, so do the sunsets... of the USA PATRIOT Act

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 12 2010

President Obama has signed into law H.R. 3961, a bill that extends for another year two key (and controversial) sections of the USA PATRIOT Act -- the "roving wiretap" provision and the so-called "library" provision -- and one section of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (the "lone wolf" provision"

Court explains why it blocked application of red flags rule to attorneys

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 12 2009

A federal court in the District of Columbia published its opinion explaining why it blocked the Federal Trade Commission from forcing practicing attorneys to comply with its final rule concerning identity theft "red flags."

German high court says "nein!" to data retention

  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • -
  • Germany
  • -
  • March 18 2010

The German Federal Constitutional Court has overturned provisions of two German laws that implemented the EU Data Retention Directive (Directive 200624EC