This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In late 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI alleging that it trained ChatGPT on copyrighted Times material without permission. As generative AI continues to roll out everywhere from Google search results to chatbots on law firm websites, more legal action over the training material is sure to arise. Instead, the U.S.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (“ CJEU ”) issued a judgment on the 9 th of February 2023 (docket no. C-453/21) , which addresses the question of the dismissal of a DataProtection Officer (“ DPO ”) and the interpretation of Article 38 of the EU GDPR. KG. (“ X-FAB ”) and several of its group companies.
In late 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI alleging that it trained ChatGPT on copyrighted Times material without permission. As generative AI continues to roll out everywhere from Google search results to chatbots on law firm websites, more legal action over the training material is sure to arise. Instead, the U.S.
In late December 2023, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) published a Report and Order (“Order”) expanding the scope of the data breach notification rules (“Rules”) applicable to telecommunications carriers and interconnected VoIP (“iVoIP”) providers.
Law firm data security should be a top priority for any practice, and here’s why: Clients trust you with their most confidential information. Since clients entrust lawyers with so much of their sensitive data, law firms make prime targets for cybercrime. You don’t want your law firm to become part of that statistic.
At the state level, California has banned law enforcement from installing, activating, or using biometric surveillance with body cameras until 2023. Vermont and Virginia have banned law enforcement from using facial recognition technology pending further legislative action.
state privacy law, including updates to the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) and the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), the Colorado Protect Personal Data Privacy Act (“ColoPA”), the Connecticut Privacy Act (“CTPA”), the Virginia Consumer DataProtection Act (“VCDPA”), and the Utah Consumer Privacy Act (“UCPA”).
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content