30
Nov
2011
An interesting, perhaps troubling, issue raised with respect to security of certain mobile devices. Read more about Carrier IQ (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/how-much-of-your-phone-is-yours-20111115/, http://androidsecuritytest.com/features/logs-and-services/loggers/carrieriq/carrieriq-part2/, http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/secret-software-logging-video. A somewhat long video of how this works is available here. http://tinyurl.com/cwcyjoc. Although there will likely be more articles about this in the media in the future, this highlights potential security and related issues for users of mobile devices.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, Electronic Files, E-mail, Internet Use, Privacy, Security, Cellular phones
11
Mar
2011
The story about what it portrays as a growing use of social media by debt collectors is here.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Florida, Internet Use, Computer Use, Privacy, Social Networking, Social Computing
3
Jan
2011
The story with a link to the court’s order disqualifying the lawyers who read the misdirected e-mail is here.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, California, E-mail, Internet Use, Computer Use, Attorney-client privilege, Privacy
26
Dec
2010
California Formal Opinion 2010-179 outlines the lawyer’s duties when transmitting or storing confidential client information when the underlying technology may be susceptible to unauthorized access by third parties. An attorney’s duties of confidentiality and competence require the attorney to take appropriate steps to ensure that his or her use of technology in conjunction with a client’s representation does not subject confidential client information to an undue risk of unauthorized disclosure. Because of the evolving nature of technology and differences in security features that are available, the attorney must ensure the steps are sufficient for each form of technology being used and must continue to monitor the efficacy of such steps.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, California, E-mail, Internet Use, Computer Use, Attorney-client privilege, Privacy, Rules of Conduct, Ethics Opinions, Discipline, Security, Cloud
17
Nov
2009
An article in Wired Magazine reports that half of the Internet’s top websites use a little known feature in the Flash plug-in that allows for tracking of browsing activity and gathering of “private” information. Ryan Singel, You Deleted Your Cookies? Think Again (Aug. 2009).
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Internet Use, Privacy
16
Sep
2008
There’s an article here. Oh, and here. Oh, and this one.
There’s a webpage, blockshopper.com that tracks who buys what property and for how much in certain upscale neighborhoods. Some Jones Day lawyers bought property in those neighborhoods, and that truthful, factual information was posted on the site, along with truthful factual links to the firm’s website, and truthful, factual links to the individuals’ bios on the firm webpage.
Jones Day filed this complaint for trademark infringement. The sum of the alleged confusing and illegal conduct is using a link to the firm’s website and linking to the two lawyers’ bios who bought houses.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Websites, Advertising, Blogs, Intellectual Property, Internet Use, Computer Use, Privacy, Domain Names
14
Sep
2008
The New York State Bar Association concluded that lawyers could use gmail and comply with the duty of confidentiality despite the fact that email is ’scanned’ by Google to place contextual ads. The committee warned that this sort of unthinking, automated review was proper, but not human review. N.Y. St. B. Ass’n. Comm. Prof. Eth. Op. 820 (Feb. 8, 2008).
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, Websites, E-mail, Internet Use, Attorney-client privilege, New York, Privacy, Rules of Conduct, Bar Association, Discipline, Ethics Walls, Malpractice
12
Sep
2008
Nat’l Economic Research Assocs., Inc. v. Evans, LECG Corp., 21 Mass. L. Rptr. 337 (Mass. Super. Ct. Aug. 3, 2006) is a fascinating case in various ways, and just came to my attention. Apparently, when a user views mail on yahoo, it takes a screenshot of the mail which is stored on the hard drive. While it’s not as easy to later access as a temp file, apparently they reside on the hard drive. I couldn’t find the opinion on line, but it was on westlaw.
Anyone who uses public computers or employer-owned laptops to communicate “in confidence” should examine this issue. I’m not sure it’s accurate, but the court clearly stated that Yahoo, alone, left these ghost emails!
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Meta-data, Confidentiality, Electronic Files, e-Discovery, Attorney-client relationship, E-mail, Attorney-client privilege, Privacy, Ethics Opinions, Massachusetts
30
May
2008
The case, from the West Virginia Supreme Court, is here. There’s a story about it here.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : E-mail, Internet Use, Privacy, Discipline, West Virginia
28
May
2008
What if the United States government is authorized to review electronic data that leaves the country. Does that mean that there is any reasonable expectation of privacy, or any Fourth Amendment protection, over that data? That is a huge issue, as you can imagine, and a suit now seeks this:
declaratory judgment and equitable relief in order to gain certainty about whether the electronic transmission of data from the United States to Acumen India waives Fourth Amendment protection with respect to the data that is electronically transmitted. It seeks this declaration knowing that foreign nationals who reside overseas lack Fourth Amendment protections. It seeks this declaration having been informed, through published materials, that the United States Government engages in pervasive surveillance of electronically transmitted data wherein one party to the transmission is a foreign national residing overseas.
The amended complaint in Newman McIntosh & Hennessey, LLP v. Bush, here, alleges that President Bush has the “view” that it’s not illegal to monitor this data. Amazing world we live in.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Electronic Files, Privacy
29
Apr
2004
A federal district court holds that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which requires financial institutions to provide to customers notices about policies concerning certain personal information, does not apply to law firms. You can read about the court’s decision here.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Privacy
