Published on:

On August 24, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit handed down its decision in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Wyndham Worldwide Corporation.  This lawsuit was against the defendant and its subsidiaries for their failure to implement proper cybersecurity measures and protect consumers’ personal information against hackers.  The FTC alleged that defendants did not use encryption, firewalls, and other commercially reasonable methods for protecting personal information.

What was the basis of the lawsuit?

In general, the FTC has the responsibility to protect consumers against unfair and deceptive business practices. These illegal practices could range from false advertising to antitrust issues. The FTC has started to prosecute companies with inadequate cybersecurity to protect consumer data. The companies that made false statements about their level of security in their terms of service also had lawsuits filed against them.  In this case, between 2008 and 2009, hackers breached Wyndham Worldwide Corporation’s network and computer systems three separate times. One incident occurred in 2008 and two occurred in 2009.   The hackers were allegedly able to breach the network due to the use of weak and obvious passwords, lack of response to the first incident, and inadequate monitoring systems.  In one of the instances, it took approximately two months for Wyndham Worldwide Corporation to discover its systems had been accessed without authorization. The hackers successfully accessed personal information of approximately 619,000 consumers and managed to cause $10.6 million in fraudulent charges. Therefore, on June 26, 2012, the FTC brought the lawsuit against defendants.  Their motion to dismiss was denied by the district court and their appeal was heard on two issues in order to determine whether there was a valid claim.  The issues that were raised included: (1) whether the FTC had authority to regulate cybersecurity under 15 U.S.C. § 45; and (2) if so, whether defendants received fair notice that their cybersecurity practices were inadequate under the guidelines.

What is the effect of the ruling?

The appellate court affirmed the district court’s ruling against the motion to dismiss for lack of standing and allowed the FTC to continue with its lawsuit.  So, in essence, this ruling affirmed the FTC’s authority to bring lawsuits against companies for their lack of cybersecurity measures under 15 U.S.C. § 45(a) and (n).  The appellate court then determined that defendants could not claim that they lacked fair notice because they were making that claim under the understanding that they needed ascertainable certainty of FTC’s cybersecurity standards. For civil cases, the standard of notice does not need to be as high as in a criminal case and defendants had notice that they needed cybersecurity measures in place, especially after the initial security breach.  In recent years, the FTC has continuously filed lawsuits against companies that have not protected their customers’ privacy.  In order to protect a business from such lawsuits, it is important for companies to implement proper security measures, protect private information, and to not misrepresent the extent of their security measures provided towards consumers.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to technology, privacy, and cyber-related activities. You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

In general, intellectual property, includes, copyright, trademarks, and patents (collectively “IP”).  According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, IP refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, and symbols, names and images used in commerce. Now, when it comes to the use of intellectual property, what is considered fair use?

What is fair use and how does it affect intellectual property right?

There are multiple ways to protect or claim your intellectual property. When an individual believes that its intellectual property has been misappropriated (i.e., taken without consent), it has the right to demand that it be removed or notify the hosting organization about the infringement, so that they can remove it. The services of a lawyer should be obtained if any of these steps fail. However, before any of these steps are taken, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), which is codified under 17 U.S.C. section 512, recommends that the individual making the claim considers whether the use of their intellectual property is fair use. Fair use is defined under 17 U.S.C. § 107, where it states that copyrighted material may be used so long as it is for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, . . . scholarship, or research” and it will not be considered an infringement of the copyright. The following factors are evaluated to determine fair use: (1) purpose and character of use; (2) nature or type of work used; (3) amount of the work used; and (4) effect using the copyrighted work will have on its use for the author or creator. When deciding whether to demand removal, redaction, or whether to pursue a legal case alleging misappropriation, individuals should be aware of their legal rights and relevant factors.

What happened in Lenz v. Universal Music Corporation?

In Lenz v. Universal Music Corporation, the district court addressed how the Digital Millennium Copyright Act requires that copyright holders consider fair use before they make a claim of infringement. In this case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Universal Music Corporation and its subsidiaries for false claims in a takedown notification. By failing to consider fair use principles, a triable issue was raised before the federal court. Before a takedown demand is made, the holder of the copyright must have a subjective good faith belief that the material was taken and used without consent. Misrepresenting that a copyright holder has a good faith belief before issuing a take down notice is a violation.   The summary judgment motion by Universal Music Corporation was denied and plaintiff was allowed to seek damages for its violation. This case acts as a warning for copyright holders to consider fair use principles before issuing takedown notifications. Those with questions regarding their intellectual property rights or those who have received takedown notifications should seek legal assistance.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to technology, intellectual property, and business transactions. You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

The term RFID is everywhere these days. Consumers are seeing RFID blocking wallets, credit card holders, and passport covers as the holidays approach. However, many still do not know what it is and how it is used in their every day life.

What is RFID?

RFID stands for “Radio Frequency Identification” and is a term used to describe technology that makes identifications via radio waves. It is usually discussed in conversations and articles about the Internet of Things because it is a form of automatic identification. The term automatic identification covers a broad range of identification technologies, from bar codes to retinal scans, used by machines to make identifications. The identification of people or objects occurs through the use of microchips that store electronic information. The microchip has an antenna and the information is picked up through a reader using radio waves. The microchip can be as small as a grain of sand and made out of silicone. Although, this technology has been in use since World War II, it has only become widely used in the past two decades as costs have decreased. RFID technology is now used in certain products and businesses. Walmart and other stores use RFID technology to keep track of products and consumer activities. They use RFID to do anything from detecting an item about to be stolen as it exits the door, or trigger cameras when an item is removed from the shelf. Anyone who has ever used the EZ-Pass toll roads has experienced the use of RFID technology as it is used to identify cars with EZ-Pass. Nonetheless, this is just a limited representation of the use of RFID technology to track consumers and products.

What are the concerns and disputes connected to RFID?

Security and privacy are the main issues facing the use of RFID. Even though RFID technology is used everywhere, it recently started to become a term recognized and used to promote RFID blocking products. RFID theft and tracking can be blocked with certain metals and materials. Travelers and consumers are now using products containing these metals to protect themselves from high-tech pick pockets and companies tracking consumers. This is because thieves around the world have had to adapt to the changing technologies. There is little cash to gain from a wallet when people rarely carry cash, but the information gained from scanning a credit card can be valuable. The hardest part of using an RFID reader to obtain information is to decode the information. Although, security is a large concern, privacy of consumers is also an issue for the government. As of now, nineteen states have implemented RFID privacy laws, not including the laws governing RFID use in driver’s licenses, bar codes, or other usage. There is a widely-held concern that companies are starting to track consumers. Consumers are tracked to see what they are picking up from the shelves or target them for advertisements, which compliment their recent choices. Civil rights and consumer privacy groups are now expressing their concerns over the use of RFID.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to technology, privacy, and constitutional rights.  You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

It is common knowledge that travelers have to take their laptop out of their suitcase upon arrival at airports.  However, not all people know the extent to which electronic devices can be confiscated and searched at the borders whether the traveler is a United States citizen or not.

Why and when can customs officials search your electronic device?

Once electronic devices enter the United States, the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.  However, there is an exception to the Fourth Amendment protection at the borders.  In United States v. Ickles, the court confirmed that customs officials are allowed to search any cargo at the borders. In this case, a search of a vehicle’s cargo revealed a videotape focusing excessively on a young ball boy at a tennis match. A more thorough search uncovered drug paraphernalia, pornographic photographs, computer, and computer discs. The computer was confiscated after the defendant was arrested and searched, revealing child pornography. The defendant requested that the electronic evidence be suppressed claiming that the warrantless search of his electronic devices was protected by his First and Fourth Amendment rights. The court ruled that the search was justified because the border search doctrine indicates that reasonable suspicion and probable cause can be justification for searches without a warrant in order to protect against criminal activity. The First Amendment claim was ruled to be invalid as well because the content of a computer may be searched regardless of how expressive the discovered material may be in order to protect national interests.  The most recent case on this topic was United States v. Kim, which was heard and decided this year. This case was about a foreign national leaving the United States whose electronic devices were searched at the border. The search of his computer was found unlawful because although he may have committed a crime in the past, however, the crime had already occurred, and there was no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to search for imminent criminal activity.

How far can a device be taken under a border search?

What is considered “border” for certain searches may be expanded for security purposes. This is because the border entry points do not all have the resources to conduct a thorough analysis of a computer or digital device. Therefore, the courts allow a broad definition of what is considered “border.” In Cotterman v. U.S., the court differentiated the extended border searches and searches that occurred away from the physical border.  In this case, a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity led to a search of defendant’s computer.  The computer was shipped 170 miles away from the border to be analyzed by experts.  The court found that transporting the computer and holding it for a reasonable time did not need the higher level of suspicion the extended border standard required.  This search was still considered to have occurred at the border because the computer was not cleared by customs officials and returned to defendant’s possession.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to technology, privacy, and constitutional rights.  You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

This year saw the data breaches of Sony Pictures, Ashley Madison, and Experian Credit Bureau. The increasing commonality of data breaches has prompted the federal and state legislatures to review their data breach notification laws.

What is a data breach?

A data breach occurs when an unauthorized user (i.e., hacker) accesses sensitive personal identifiable information. The hacker then copies the confidential information and uses it as he or she sees fit.  Often times, the personally identifiable information is used to commit identity theft and fraud.  This information can include, names, telephone numbers, email addresses, credit card numbers, or social security numbers. The target of these breaches can be businesses, financial institutions, and health care institutions.

What are the notification requirements?

After a breach happens, the company that was the target of the breach is required to notify individuals whose information was or may have been accessed. Notification can be done through various mediums: notice by mail, electronic notice, or substitute notice when direct contact is difficult to obtain. Substitute notice is clear posting on the source’s website or clear notice print or broadcast media in areas where affected individuals may reside.

In the United States, 47 states have adopted their own data breach notification laws. The three states that have yet to adopt such a law are Alabama, New Mexico, and South Dakota. What is required in the notice is relatively the same across the board. It requires the notice to be in plain language and include information about the breach and the information accessed or may have been accessed during the breach.  In California, the data breach notification law was recently amended to require the source of the breach to provide identity protection services for at least 12 months at no cost to the affected individual and how the affected individual can access the services.

However, there is no federal standard for data breach notification for individuals or businesses. Following the Sony Pictures hacking, President Obama called for a uniform federal standard and proposed the Personal Data Notification and Protection Act.  This law did not make it past the House of Representatives.  There is, however, a federal notification standard for financial institutions (Gramm-Leach Bliley Act or GLBA) and health care institutions (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or HIPAA).  GLBA requires notification regarding sharing non-public information with affiliates or third parties and protection of non-public information. HIPAA requires the same notification methods and requirements as when a breach occurs in a business.

What remedies are available if notification requirements are not met?

Under California law, affected individuals may file a civil suit to recover damages.  Affected individuals, however, may only collect damages if they can show that the lack of notice or inadequate notice lead to an injury such as identity theft.  There is, however, no private right of action under both GLBA and HIPAA.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to business, technology, and e-commerce transactions. You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

The case of Eagle v. Morgan is about an employer’s access to employee’s social media account. This case highlights the importance of companies having social media policies to address the ownership of social media accounts during and after employment.

What is the case about and how does it affect your rights?

In Eagle v. Morgan, the plaintiff (i.e., Linda Eagle) had founded the company Edcomm, Inc. (“Edcomm”) and remained an employee when she sold her shares to Sawabeh Information Services Company (“SISCOM”). While employed at the company as CEO, Eagle’s coworker recommended creating a LinkedIn account for marketing purposes. Although, the business would occasionally become involved in the social media account’s content, and Eagle used her company email address, however, she was individually bound by the User Agreement and had made connections through her own efforts. Edcomm did not require its employees to have social media accounts and had only limited guidelines in place regarding employee use of LinkedIn. When Linda Eagle’s employment was terminated, the question of who owned the social media account became an issue. Edcomm changed Linda Eagle’s password by using her former company email address and replaced her name with that of her new replacement, i.e., Sandy Morgan.  Linda Eagle sued Edcomm and multiple defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. She claimed that this was an infringement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Lanham Act, as well state laws against invasion of privacy by misappropriation of identity, conversion, civil conspiracy, civil aiding and abetting, tortious interference with contract, unauthorized use of name in violation of Pa. C.S. § 8316, misappropriation of publicity, and identity theft under Pa. C.S. § 8316.

How did the court rule and what were the repercussions?

The court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the defendants, stating that there was no violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Lanham Act. However, the state law claims were allowed to proceed to trial. The court found that plaintiff sufficiently proved that the company had violated her privacy and had misused her large number of networking connections on the social media account. This is because the company had no social media policies in place to support its claim of ownership over the social media account. In spite of the court’s finding that the company was in violation of the state laws, the resulting ruling was in favor of the defendants because plaintiff was unable to show any quantifiable damages.  Her claim to damages was that her annual income from her 4000 LinkedIn connections amounted to $1,000,000 per year or $250 per contact annually. The final claim was for $250,000 because the loss of income from being without her account for three months was calculated based on previous estimations. The court found the calculations had no supporting evidence and were speculative. Although, Edcomm was able to avoid paying for its violations, had the plaintiff been able to prove damages there would have been a different outcome.  Hence, in order to avoid legal claims, companies should implement explicit social media policies.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to business, technology, and e-commerce transactions.  You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

From a practical perspective, transactions that occur over the Internet can face similar issues that regular business transactions may encounter in their daily operations.  However, e-commerce transactions have the added problems associated with cyberspace laws.  It is nearly impossible for a business to be successful these days without having a website. Although, not all websites actively conduct business over the Internet, however, e-commerce related issues and disputes may arise from having an online presence.

What issues and disputes face e-commerce transactions?

E-commerce transactions have created a new environment for companies that conduct their business on the Internet.  For example, contractual and non-contractual issues, such as free speech, consumer protection, and competition laws now face businesses that ship products, provide online goods/services, and use the Internet for marketing.  Therefore, conducting business online involves unique legal concerns that is distinct from traditional business models.  In sum, the concerns are centered on privacy, security, and regulation.

In recent times, privacy concerns have been discussed in the media since large corporations yield their customers’ valuable confidential information (e.g., Date-of-Birth, Social Security and/or credit card numbers).  So, these companies must keep a certain level of security to ensure the privacy of their customers.  Not only are laws in effect regulating the protection of customer information, but also companies have to abide by their contractual obligations to protect customer privacy. Competition law and domain name disputes are also commonplace due to the limitations they create for companies.  For example, in the past there could be a “Mama’s Pizza” in every city, but now companies have to find domain names that are not in conflict with each other and do not cause confusion among consumers.  Online anonymity has become an issue with websites that are established for the purpose of consumer reviews.  The issue regarding defamation with the underlying intent to cause financial harm to businesses or individuals has become a commonplace in e-commerce litigation.  However, plaintiffs are having difficulties with identifying and locating anonymous defendants, and find it challenging to remove disparaging online statements. Intellectual property violations are a large problem due to online copyright, trademark, or patent infringements. Moreover, the ability for musics or videos to be properly downloaded has become widespread and has caused financial damages.

What forms of resolutions are available?

Litigation is the first choice when attempts to reach a reasonable solution is unsuccessful. Various attempts to correct a wrong before litigation include: (a) credit card charge-back mechanisms; (b) merchant complaint resolution mechanisms (e.g., alternative dispute resolution agreements); and (c) complaints to governmental authorities, consumer protection agencies, and small claims courts.  In fact, cross-border transactions create jurisdictional issues.  It is remarkable that e-commerce transactions allow a larger number of multi-state and multi-national transactions to occur every day.  As a result, litigation has occurred in both domestic and international courts, which can mean that state, federal, or international laws are applicable.  As stated above, online anonymity is an important issue in terms of litigation because it can be difficult to identify and locate the individual who is in violation of the law.  This form of anonymous activity is particularly prevalent in defamation and online fraud cases. In order to receive guidance on how to initiate or prevent litigation, it is best to consult with legal professionals who are adept in the field of e-commerce.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to business, technology, and e-commerce transactions.  You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

E-commerce transactions have become so common that legislators have had to keep up with the demand for regulations. Jurisdictional issues raise concerns of what law is applied in disputes over multi-state transactions. The state or federal laws of the United States, the domestic laws of another nation, international coalition laws, international treaties, or a combination of these laws could be applicable in a single case.

What federal and state laws may apply?

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is in charge of regulating e-commerce as a federal agency. The FTC has posted guidelines to help businesses navigate the myriad of e-commerce issues and factors that need to be addressed in order to do business across borders. Twenty-nine nations have signed on to the guidelines, including, but not limited to, United States, Canada, Japan, Germany, and Australia. The guidelines address fair business practices, marketing, commercial emails, consumer privacy, and recommended policies and practices. The laws that the FTC has passed for regulation of e-commerce transactions, include, but are not limited to, the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, which set standards for email marketing, and Federal Trade Commission Act, which regulates all types of marketing and advertising.

The state regulations of e-commerce transactions come in the form of each state’s commercial laws, which govern the cases that are brought in that state’s courts. Each state has its own form of long-arm statute, which grants jurisdiction over individuals and actions in other states if certain requirements are met.  The Full Faith and Credit Clause in the Constitution—under Art. IV. Sec. 1—allows the states to accept and enforce the rulings of another state’s court. A state’s long arm statute is regularly challenged when companies from foreign states argue that their connections with the state do not qualify it to be under that state’s jurisdiction. For example, a company’s contacts with consumers may fall within a range of no direct advertisement, to purposefully advertising to a state’s consumers, and directly intending to do business in that state.  In fact, various cases have molded the necessary standards in order to establish personal jurisdiction through e-commerce transactions.

How can international laws be involved in e-commerce?

There are conflicts between international e-commerce laws.  Many countries have used the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce in order to establish uniformity in the application of e-commerce regulation. The International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network (ICPEN) was established for governments and organizations to deal with issues concerning cross-border transactions.  The website became part of the ICPEN network in 2001, and is a location where e-commerce violation complaints can be submitted against companies. Various e-commerce laws have been passed by coalitions like the European Union (EU) and Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Nations that carry great economic impact (e.g., China, United Kingdom, and Australia) have their own national e-commerce rules and regulations.  From a practical standpoint, each business should track its transactions in foreign nations to determine if it has exposed itself to prosecution under international laws, and know what that nation’s laws are, and understand the treaties that may affect disputes that would arise from its cross-border transactions.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to technology and e-commerce transactions.  You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

The phrase “e-commerce transactions” invokes thoughts of a complicated and technical phenomenon.  In fact, many people partake in e-commerce transactions every day.

What is an e-commerce transaction?

An electronic commerce (a/k/a “e-commerce”) transaction involves a commercial transaction that takes place over the Internet. So, any trading of products or services over any electronic network, including, but not limited to, the Internet, is considered a part of e-commerce. The e-commerce transactions covered by the term include, business-to-business, business-to-consumer, consumer-to-consumer, and consumer-to-business.  There are three categories of e-commerce transactions. There are agreements with: (1) Shrinkwrap terms—when a tangible product is delivered to a physical address usually in shrinkwrap or clear packaging; (2) Clickwrap terms—in which a digital product is delivered over a network (e.g., e-book); and (3) Browsewrap terms—when terms are agreed to in order for a consumer to access and use a website.  However, e-commerce does not always involve actual money.   The transaction can involve e-cash, digital currencies (e.g., Bitcoin), or services.

What problems face e-commerce transactions?

The problems facing e-commerce transactions involve many of the same issues business transactions face. They can include contract breaches, copyright issues, and governmental regulations. One of the main issues involves jurisdiction over disputes. E-commerce transactions have become so accessible that cross-border transactions are normal. Cross-border transactions involve state-to-state transactions and country-to-country transactions. This means that multiple states may have jurisdiction if there is a dispute, but also calls into question which national or international regulation is applicable. Another issue is the ability to track down intellectual property (e.g., copyright, trademark, patent) violators. For example, the intellectual property violators can upload files to a third-party website that resides outside of the United States. They can also use certain programs or applications (e.g., TOR) to remain anonymous. A company may become liable for sharing or disclosing confidential information of its customers with third parties. A company can be liable for trademark infringement if it violates a third-party’s trademark. Also, if the company registers a domain name (e.g., that correlates with a registered or common law trademark (e.g., XYZ) it may be subject to a complaint under ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), or the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). Finally, aliases and privacy laws may cause challenges in locating the violators on the Internet and filing lawsuits in the proper jurisdiction.

An example of an e-commerce transaction that involved issues of jurisdiction and freedom of expression is Yahoo!, Inc. v. LICRA.  In 2000, a lawsuit arose in France against Yahoo due to the selling of Nazi memorabilia on its network.  The French court decided it had jurisdiction over Yahoo and that it could block 70-90 percent of the French public from accessing its network because the selling of Nazi memorabilia conflicted with French laws.  Although, Yahoo has allegedly changed its policies since this case, however, it has made attempts to appeal the ruling in California and argue over jurisdiction. This case demonstrates that when a business engages in online transactions within different states or nations, then multiple states or nations can claim jurisdiction and leave it vulnerable to legal liability.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to Internet, technology, and e-commerce transactions. You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.

Published on:

The Internet of Things (“IoT”) is the network of electronic devices that communicate with each other via the Internet without human intervention.  It has caused concerns regarding security since vast amounts of unsecure electronic devices are being used to send and receive information. Furthermore, the data breaches that lead to the loss of privacy have become more common as the Internet is used to connect electronic devices via private and public networks.

What is the proper security level for electronic devices?

Electronic devices that connect to each other over the Internet were created to transfer information, but were not originally designed with proper security features. What is the proper security level when electronic devices are interconnected? In order to avoid unauthorized access, security precautions should be implemented within the electronic devices and computer networks. For example, firewalls, encryptions, intrusion detection systems, and multi-factor authentications should be implemented as preventive and reactive measures. The electronic devices—which are accessed via the Internet—should be segmented into their own network, and include network access restrictions.  Also, consumers should change the default passwords on smart devices and implement strong passwords.

A corporation’s servers must be properly updated and secured to prevent unauthorized access by third parties. A skilled hacker can connect to a network server and gain access to confidential information (e.g., trade secrets) in a short amount of time.  Information transferred wirelessly to and from printers, mobile phones, or other electronic devices is susceptible to unauthorized access. Also, hackers can implement an IoT Botnet, which comprises of a group of compromised electronic and Internet-connected devices that have been setup for illegal purposes.

In general, public Wi-Fi is a concern because it is used regularly to connect multiple electronic devices to the Internet in public places (e.g., cafes, airports).  A person’s electronic device (e.g., smartphone, laptop) can store and remember the network login/password upon return to the public places and connect automatically. Although, information may be encrypted on electronic devices, cyber criminals are becoming more capable in decrypting information, or using the illegally-obtained information for fraudulent transactions (e.g., online banking fraud, credit card fraud).

What are the main concerns over local and national security?

The government can use this new technology in order to battle crime and enforce the law.  For example, Drones (a/k/a “Unmanned Aircraft Systems” or “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”) have become an important concern for law enforcement.  They are accessible to the public and are being used to collect information and to view public or private spaces. Government owned and operated drones may be accessed by hackers by tapping into their systems without authorization.  Safety concerns, from the use of airspace, to the potential use of terrorism, are being faced by organizations which are trying to enhance security.  Law enforcement agencies use drones for the surveillance of individuals.  The ability to track individuals via electronic devices has been useful, but it remains controversial.  Also, security measures must be implemented in order to enforce local and national security when using drones and similar surveillance devices.

At our law firm, we assist clients with legal issues related to internet and technology laws. You may contact us to set up an initial consultation.