Published on:

Companies, old and new, now have the opportunity to raise funds through a unique technique—crowdfunding. Although, this is a twist on the traditional investment model, crowdfunding allows companies and individuals to fund their new ideas and business ventures by seeking investments from the general public. This unconventional approach to the well-known investment structure allows new business to gain financial support. Do you have a new idea that you would like to fundraise? Are you a company that would like to launch a new product? Do you need financial support to help propel your latest venture? If so, then crowdfunding may help your entrepreneurial efforts.

What Is Crowdfunding?

Crowdfunding is the practice of fundraising a new company, idea, project, or venture through large numbers of people. These people typically donate small amounts that add up in the aggregate. Unlike the investment structure that appeals to traditional investors, the general public fundraises projects. Crowdfunding has begun to gain momentum and exposure after the passage of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (“JOBS”) Act. This law was passed to help small businesses and entrepreneurs jumpstart their business. Both private and public companies may take advantage of this capital-raising model. Crowdfunding is unique because although it does allow for a company to use outside resources to fund a project, however, the company does not have to make an initial public offering, register as a public company, or meet the requirements of a traditional publicly-traded company. Also, unlike a public company, which receives outside investments on an on-going basis, crowdfunding efforts are limited in time. That is, they may not continue forever. An entity must raise its goal amount by a specified end date. Otherwise, the company must offer to return all investments made under that project.

What Are The Limitations To Crowdfunding?

As with all other financial efforts, a government agency regulates the process. In this case, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) defines the parameters of crowdfunding. Currently, the JOBS Act and the SEC proposed crowdfunding rules provide some guidance for crowdfunding. First, companies cannot raise more than $1 million during any single year. Companies that require more funds to startup will need to turn to other fundraising efforts for the remainder of the capital. This is limiting because companies will often skip over crowdfunding and turn to the other fundraising techniques. There are also very stringent disclosure requirements that companies must abide by before they raise funds. Satisfying all of these requirements is a costly endeavor for any company, but especially a company that is new and does not have the capital. Additionally, crowdfunding appeals to the common consumer and not necessarily to the experienced investor. Therefore, there are strict regulations in place to ensure that crowdfunders properly educate potential investors about the parameters of their project. These regulations aim to protect the investors if the project does not become successful. Ultimately, in the face of an entirely new form of investment structure, these regulations hope to protect the parties.

You may contact us to speak with an attorney about how this innovative investment tool may help with your next fundraising or startup efforts.

Published on:

Where you visit online seems to say a lot about you. Online privacy has been in the spotlight recently, as consumers come to terms with the reality that their online tracks define who they are to marketers and government agencies.  By studying this data, third parties can paint a picture about consumers—i.e., where they go, what they do, their preferences, and even any illegal conduct.  Now, data brokers can also compile and study large bodies of data to find patterns in behavior. While this carries huge potential for technological advancement, it also comes with greater threats to consumer privacy.

What Is Data Mining?

Data mining is the intricate process whereby data brokers collect, store, and study large sets of data for patterns.  The data includes everything from shopping habits, healthcare records, online practices, and public records (e.g., court and property records). This data is then used in a variety of fields, including intelligence gathering, statistics, database systems, and machine learning. Usually, data mining is used to compile lists for targeted marketing purposes—such as lists of diabetics, smokers, and political affiliations. However, recent reports indicate that data mining has been used to compile more personal lists—rape victims, addicts, and AIDS victims. The U.S. government has used data mining in various surveillance projects. These projects were ultimately terminated because of rising concerns that they violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. It is most shocking that the subjects never know they are victims to data mining. At a glance, most of these categories seem harmless. However, the underlying threat is that data brokers conduct mining projects without notifying consumers and without obtaining consent.

What Are the Potential Privacy Concerns Associated With Data Mining?

In its basic form, data mining does not carry any ethical implications. However, in application, this procedure has been used in a variety of ways that threaten individual privacy. For example, when the government uses data mining for national security purposes, it leads to several constitutional implications. Generally, individuals must receive notice that they will be subject to data mining in advance. Adequate notice includes the purpose of the project, who will have access to the data, how the data will be secured, and whether the data will be updated in the future. Furthermore, when data brokers store the information they gather, they run the risk that hackers will breach the database. There are serious cybersecurity concerns related to the storage of personal information.

The National Security Agency has protocols in place that require the destruction of irrelevant information in order to prevent breaches. However, a recent report by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board identified that this practice is rarely followed. The United States Congress has taken steps to secure privacy in certain areas of data mining. For instance, it passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act to protect privacy in medical records. Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission recommended that Congress also require that data mining ensure consumer control over their personal information. Meanwhile, Facebook is set to provide advertisers increased access to user data, such as browsing habits.

You may contact us to speak with an experienced and knowledgeable attorney to discuss data mining and the applicable privacy rights.

Published on:

In recent years, consumers have received numerous emails from merchants, all trying to sell a service or a product. While marketing and commercial activity is central to the American economy, the recipients of these emails must also enjoy their privacy. In an effort to protect against these disruptive emails, the California Legislature passed anti-spam laws in order to regulate commercial email activity. In addition, a recent district court opinion further clarified the types of emails that are implicated by these statutory standards.

What Are California’s Anti-Spam Laws?

In general, California’s anti-spam laws are codified under Business & Professions Code sections 17529 et seq. First, commercial email advertisements must come from a domain name registered to the sender. Commercial email advertisements include any email sent for the specific purpose of selling or advertising a product or service. The purpose of these laws is to limit promotional emails with false or misleading subject information. These laws apply to any U.S.-based company that sends emails to California consumers. It does not matter whether the sender is located in California. In fact, it may not even matter whether the sender knew the recipient was in California. Furthermore, California’s anti-spam laws provide a greater degree of protection than their federal equivalent—i.e., Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (“CAN-SPAM”). For example, CAN-SPAM requires that each email contain an “opt-out” option that allows consumers to quickly unsubscribe from future emails. The sender must comply with such a request within ten business days. In California, there are no such requirements. Indeed, the recipient can collect these emails and sue the sender for up to $1,000 per email.  So, the charges can quickly add up. If the sender of commercial emails is faced with a lawsuit, it bears the burden of proving that it was in compliance with both the state and federal standards.

What Did the Court Find in Bontrager v. Showmark Media, LLC, et al.?

In Bontrager v. Showmark Media, LLC, et al., the United States District Court for the Central District of California clarified the meaning of a “misleading subject line” under California’s anti-spam law. The plaintiff, Nicholas Bontrager, sued Showmark Media, LLC alleging that the merchant sent over 10,000 emails with misleading subject lines. The subject lines to these emails suggested that Bontrager had won an award. The presiding judge granted the motion to dismiss, holding that the subject lines would not deceive a reasonable consumer. The subject lines at issue stated “Lawyer Media, Top Lawyers in California.” The body of the email contained details of a commemorative plaque that the reader could purchase. The court held that while at a glance the subject lines suggested the reader was being recognized in the legal industry, the subject lines were consistent with the body of the emails. Therefore, there was no violation of California’s anti-spam laws because there were no misleading subject lines. Indeed, the subject line did not suggest that plaintiff would earn a reward simply by opening and reading the email.

You may contact us to speak with a knowledgeable attorney to discuss whether the emails you receive have violated state or federal anti-spam laws and the applicable remedies.

Published on:

On July 11, 2014, the privacy watchdog, Electronic Privacy Information Center (“EPIC”) filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) against Facebook. EPIC alleged that Facebook broke the law by secretly monitoring users’ emotions in response to news feeds. The complaint explains that Facebook deceived users through its psychological experiment because the users did not give prior consent to participate in the experiment and they were not aware that an experiment was taking place. EPIC stated that this could also be a violation of the guidelines for experiments involving humans. In a world where social media and online presence dominate interaction, such social experiments threaten to undermine privacy and expose the most personal information to marketing and commercial techniques.

What Was the Nature of Facebook’s Experiments?

Facebook conducted surveys to determine whether seeing positive or negative updates in news feeds impacted users’ emotions and altered their browsing tendencies. It controlled the newsfeed of nearly 700,000 members to study whether positive and negative news reports impacted online behavior. The findings from this study were reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The issue underlying the EPIC complaint arose because Facebook did not warn users in their Data Use Policy that it would be using their data for research purposes. Other agencies have also threatened to take action against Facebook. The Center for Digital Democracy and regulators in the United Kingdom have stated an intent to file complaints. Indeed, the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office intends to address its concerns with Facebook after it reviews the study and its findings. Facebook responded to these allegations by explaining that all users consent to this type of research when they sign up. Representatives did apologize to the public for the misunderstanding.

What Are the Privacy Implications of These Experiments?

Part of the EPIC complaint also points out that the study may have violated a 2012 agreement between Facebook and the FTC. The agreement came after Facebook was caught violating users’ privacy and led to improved privacy notifications by the website. The FTC also required Facebook to gather user consent prior to gathering or releasing personal information. EPIC also alleged that Facebook violated the Institutional Review Board’s (“IRB”) standards for experiments involving humans. The IRB evaluates research proposals prior to the conduct of the study. This prior review is necessary to ensure that humans are protected in the course of experiments. Indeed, most prestigious scientific journals will only publish research that received prior approval by the IRB. In the case of the Facebook experiments, the website did not consult with the IRB prior to or during its study. Since the focus of the study was individual users, EPIC alleges that Facebook was required to apply for approval from the IRB.

Online privacy is a central concern in cyberspace. At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we are experienced and knowledgeable in the various aspects of internet and cyber laws. You may contact us to speak with an attorney who can explain your privacy rights and how you can protect yourself in cyberspace.

Published on:

The smartphone has brought a world of possibility to the average consumer’s fingertips. Now, this has come to include mobile banking. With fast-paced lifestyles and long lines at the banks, mobile banking has emerged as a thrilling convenience. However, this convenience brings cybersecurity concerns. Therefore, consumers who have turned to mobile banking for their financial needs must protect their financial privacy from cybersecurity breaches.

What Is Mobile Banking?

Mobile banking allows customers to access their financial institutions and conduct transactions through their mobile devices. Initially, this began with SMS Banking, which allowed customers to conduct various financial transactions by sending and accepting SMS messages or “texts.” In its most basic form, mobile banking allows customers to access their bank accounts and check on financial transactions. However, as the systems have progressed, customers can now make bill payments, transfer funds, and monitor deposits. Indeed, customers can now manage their investment portfolios and rearrange their investments through a smartphone or tablet. This has certainly increased everyday conveniences. However, it has also contributed to the speed with which finances can shift. Although, customers can review and monitor their accounts faster and more regularly, this also means greater security threats for the underlying financial information. This expansive access may lead to greater unauthorized breaches.

What Are The Security Threats Related to Mobile Banking?

US News reported in a recent poll that only 31 percent of companies have a mobile banking security strategy in place.  Mobile banking is less secure than in-person banking, or banking on a computer, because mobile security is divided between the various companies involved in providing the application.  For example, in the case of an application for mobile banking, this can involve the operating system designers, manufacturers of the application, banking agency, company that provides the smartphone or tablet, and even the company that provides web access.  Therefore, while each of these intermediaries may take steps to provide safety, it is important to have a comprehensive security system in place to fully protect mobile banking.  While financial institutions are prominent leaders in the movement to provide greater cybersecurity, mobile users can take steps to ensure their financial privacy remains private.  For instance, it is important to carefully review banking information through the mobile device.  The smaller screen has been reported to lead to greater mistakes, which allows more un-noticed breaches. Furthermore, always make sure to require a password at every login. When you are done accessing your account, log out of your account and close the application. Applications that remain running in the background allow for easier access to cyber-criminals. Of course, if you detect an error or discrepancy in your account, contact your financial institution immediately.  As with all cybersecurity breaches, early detection and action is the key to a fast resolution.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we are experienced and skilled in the legal and practical implications of cybersecurity.  You may contact us to speak with an attorney who can explain how you can take steps to better protect your mobile security.

Published on:

In the aftermath of high profile cybersecurity breaches, businesses and consumers are alert to the real dangers of cyber vulnerability. In response, various government agencies have taken up efforts to protect against future breaches. Thus, consumers and businesses must continue to take steps to protect themselves and their private information. Accordingly, the office of California’s Attorney General has issued Cybersecurity Guidelines aimed at reducing the threat of electronic security leaks. Furthermore, these guidelines set the standard that businesses must meet to protect customer privacy.

What Are Attorney General’s Cybersecurity Guidelines?

The Attorney General outlined the basics steps to “minimize cyber vulnerability.”  First, anyone could be a target. Therefore, assume cybersecurity could affect you and take preemptive steps to protect your network.  Also, it is important to know where you store your data. The guidelines are directed towards small to medium-sized firms.  So, they focus on the importance for businesses to know which third parties hold company information. It is important to be familiar with these third-party security measures. If a data storage company is not taking proper steps to protect cybersecurity, it may be time to seek different storage options or take steps to counter the vulnerabilities. Alternatively, if your business stores information on the cloud, make sure to back up information, and store data only with secure entities. The overall point is that in the event of a breach, the level of preparedness will limit the consequences.  Next, encrypt your data as an added measure of security. It is also helpful to include firewall and antivirus protection on all devices.  Additionally, make sure to conduct banking and other financial transactions with reliable vendors.  Especially when dealing with third party financial information, the safety and security of those transactions are vital to ongoing business.  Finally, it is important to note that these guidelines are the minimum requirements. It is not a comprehensive list and companies must take care to implement personalized measures based on their cybersecurity needs.

What Additional Steps Will Improve Cyber Protections?

Before putting together any comprehensive cybersecurity plan, an entity must understand the threats it faces. This includes reviewing where data is stored and assessing particular and potential threats. Determining the dangers will help put together an accurate risk-based safety plan that best addresses your specific needs. Additionally, it is important to evaluate a business’s cybersecurity plan in context. In general, each business exists in relation to its manufacturers, suppliers, distributers, and customers. And, each link is implicated in the event of a breach. Therefore, it is important to consider how reasonable measures will help protect their information and security. It is also important because if there is a cybersecurity breach, the appropriate measures will help protect those links and limit the spread of the breach. This is a crucial step for businesses that hope to return to their regular course of business and maintain business relationships.

At our law firm, we help our clients review their cybersecurity needs and potential threats. Then, with the help of an experienced and knowledgeable attorney, we help you put together a cybersecurity plan to protect your business and customers. You may contact us to discuss your cyber protection needs today.

Published on:

In a decision released June 25, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held that law enforcement officials could not search a suspect’s cell phone or electronic devices as part of an arrest. In Riley v. California, the Supreme Court maintained that the officials would need to secure a warrant to look through those devices. This holding is especially monumental because it establishes the country’s highest court’s position that electronic devices enjoy privacy protection under the Constitution. Indeed, the Court notes several times throughout the decision that since electronic devices contain so much of users’ most private data, these devices must enjoy a heightened level of privacy.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we are fully knowledgeable and experienced in the practice of electronic privacy protection for individuals and businesses. Our office handles all civil matters dealing with violations of cyber privacy. Indeed, by speaking to an attorney, you can take precautionary steps to help protect your privacy and personal data.

How Will Riley v. California Impact Individual Privacy Rights?

The Supreme Court emphasized that today’s electronic devices, such as cell phones and smartphones, have the capacity to store a wealth of private information. This includes financial data, contact information, private documents, and information about third parties. Also, smartphones have immense storage capacity. For example, by looking through a phone, a law enforcement official could access the user’s “cloud” and all the data that is stored in there. A “cloud” is a remote storage location, where users can upload and save personal data—including contact information, personal documentation, and communication history. While police officers may have an interest in investigating this information, the Supreme Court focused first on the individual’s constitutionally protected privacy rights. Since searching electronic devices allows access to such broad information, it also threatens to reach implicate third parties with data available on the device. Indeed, this search could also incriminate electronic storage companies—such as Internet service providers, cloud computing companies, and third party storage sites.

How Will Riley v. California Impact Corporate Privacy Rights?

A broad interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision suggests that this holding will tighten electronic privacy in all areas, not just as it applies to cell phones during an arrest. For example, the Department of Justice has used the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to argue that it is entitled to search without a warrant the contents of emails opened or stored for more than 180 days. However, courts have increasingly been ruling that the government must first obtain a warrant and a subpoena is not enough. The Court is careful to point out that the facts are limited to searches incident to arrest, or searches that take place during an arrest. However, the judges hint at their willingness to consider strengthening electronic privacy. Furthermore, the Court points out that law enforcement agencies and lower courts must begin to appreciate that searching an electronic device is far more intrusive than searching a location or physical container. For corporations, this means greater security for databases, electronic files, and electronic communications. With this ruling, courts and government agencies are more likely to require a warrant before breaching the electronic privacy barrier.

If you would like to understand how this decision may affect your privacy, you may contact us to speak with an attorney about various legal protections.

Published on:

A corporation’s trade secrets are its lifeblood. Indeed, it is through this information that a company generates a profit and maintains its reputation in the industry. A trade secret includes any unique information that carries value. There are both state and federal laws which pertain to trade secrets. Unfortunately, federal laws do not provide strong protections. This has weakened U.S. companies that have fallen victim to international trade secret misappropriation.  In response, since April 2014 the U.S. Senate has been considering the Defend Trade Secrets Act to provide stronger national protection for domestic corporations.  Nonetheless, companies can take steps to establish internal protections for their trade secrets.

A. Trade Secrets Status

A corporation cannot claim a trade secret if it is publicly known information. Most importantly, it must be information that is not available to competitors. For example, the recipe for Coca Cola is a trade secret. In fact, this recipe is arguably the most expensive trade secret in the world. Coca Cola could not claim its recipe as a trade secret if it was readily available to Pepsi.  Any information that a corporation freely provides to customers, trade associations, outside parties, or the general public cannot constitute a trade secret.

B. Confidentiality Agreements

There is a limited exception if a corporation provides access to its trade secrets, but first requires a confidentiality agreement.  It is important for corporations to have a legally-viable confidentiality agreement in place.  These agreements allow access to the trade secret information for purposes of ongoing business.  However, the agreement outlines the terms of access to the information and prohibits any unauthorized distribution.  So, a potential client could have access to a trade secret to discuss future projects, but the client could not discuss these secrets with a competitor or a third party. Anybody, including employees, independent contractors, and potential clients, should be required to sign this type of agreement before gaining access to trade secrets.

C. Steps To Maintain Trade Secret Status

In general, courts will often look to see whether a corporation took reasonable steps to protect the secrecy of its valuable information.  For example, it may be a good idea to include warning labels indicating that any trade secret is protected information.  Such a warning should be clear and highly visible to avoid confusion. Furthermore, physical and electronic protections can help restrict access to protected information.  This includes storing physical copies of trade secrets in a secure location—such as a locked safe with restricted access. Since information is often also stored electronically, corporations must implement network protections to protect their trade secrets. Non-compete agreements can also be very helpful in maintaining trade secrets.  However, based on state law, these agreements may not be enforceable. For example, California requires a very high burden of proof before enforcing non-compete agreements.  The argument is that such agreements prohibit the free-flow of goods and services and restrict economic growth.  Nonetheless, an agreement that is reasonable in time and scope may be enforceable.  It will help ensure that employees who access trade secrets and later leave the company do not immediately turn the information over to a competitor.

At our law firm, we help our corporate clients establish a framework to protect trade secrets. In the event of trade secret misappropriation, or theft, an experienced litigator can help explain the legal remedies.   You may contact us to discuss your legal options.

Published on:

When a person harms another, the harmed party has the option of filing a lawsuit to seek damages. However, certain harms affect large groups of people, sometimes reaching into the thousands. In these cases, state and federal civil procedure rules provide for class action lawsuits. A class action lawsuit is brought by a group of parties who have all suffered a similar harm from a defendant’s actions. The defendants can also make up a class where several defendants contributed to the harms at issue. In 2005, in an effort to provide greater protection for harmed plaintiffs, Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) revolutionizing class action procedures.

What Are the Terms of the Class Action Fairness Act?

First, CAFA dramatically expands federal jurisdiction to include a larger body of class action claims. There are two federal class action jurisdiction requirements. First, the case must be for more than $5 million. Second, at least one plaintiff must be from a different state than one defendant. There are exceptions to the second requirement. For example, if at least two-thirds of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the main defendant, federal courts may not have jurisdiction. By expanding jurisdiction, CAFA changed the class action landscape. In turn, this led to several ambiguities in the case law. This also meant that attorneys skilled in traditional class action procedures had to reinvent their practices to comply with CAFA’s new requirements. The American Bar Association provides resources to demonstrate the applications of CAFA.

How Has the Class Action Fairness Act Affected this Area of Lawsuits?

CAFA helped to reduce forum shopping among state courts. Forum shopping is the practice of filing a lawsuit in a court that is more likely to issue a favorable decision. Certain state courts across the country are notorious for issuing rulings that typically favor either plaintiffs or defendants. This is because certain state laws are more favorable to one party than another. By expanding federal jurisdiction, CAFA has made class actions more uniform because these cases all fall under the same federal law. This way, class actions do not focus in jurisdictions that typically favor plaintiffs. Under CAFA, federal courts also grant greater scrutiny (or a more thorough review of the terms and conditions) to class action settlements.

Critics of this law argue that it provides too much protection to defendants, which are typically large corporations. They argue that since class action suits may now proceed in federal court, it is more difficult to bring such a lawsuit. This also adds to federal courts’ caseload, making class actions take even longer to reach a resolution. However, a study by the Federal Judicial Center did show that since CAFA there has been an increase in class action suits. This is consistent with the legislative intent behind the law—i.e., to make it easier for consumers to bring such suits for their damages. Additionally, since federal judges are appointed, not elected, there is a concern the federal government could manipulate class action outcomes by appointing judges with certain political sentiments. There is also controversy about whether class actions suits appropriately fall under federal court jurisdiction. Opponents argue that instead state laws should decide class action suits.

At our law firm, we help guide our clients from the decision to file a class action lawsuit through the various steps of litigation. You may contact us to discuss your legal options with an attorney.

Published on:

The expansion of cyber consumerism—buying and selling products over the Internet, or engaging in business over the Internet—has called into the question whether international laws are equipped to protect consumers in their online transactions. Indeed, online business often takes place over several countries, implicating the legal standards in those countries. When such transactions involve a party that is more experienced than the other, there is the potential that the experienced party will take advantage of the disparity for financial gain. Accordingly, countries around the world have enacted and adopted legislation to combat the threat of unfair business practices. These provisions aim to protect online transactions to promote successful international business.

What Are Unfair Trading Practices?

Unfair trading practices include fraud, misrepresentations, and unconscionable business acts. Fraud is the act of providing false information in a transaction for personal financial gain at the expense of the other party. Misrepresentation involves providing misleading information about any part of a transaction—for example, the quality of the product in question. Finally, unconscionable acts deal with contract terms or negotiations that are overwhelmingly one-sided. These favor the party with greater bargaining power or business experience. The threat of these practices may arise in all sorts of business contexts—for example, insurance contracts, commercial and residential lease provisions, debt collection efforts, and general purchases.

How Do International Laws Protect Against Unfair Business Practices?

Many countries provide laws to regulate these practices in the business context. Indeed, the European Union (“EU”) requires that each of its member states regulate unfair business practices under the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.  Generally, the Directive prohibits aggressive business practices that target specific consumers.  It aims to encourage free trade throughout the EU while providing strict protections for consumers. Also, by implementing a uniform set of laws across the EU, the Directive aims to make it easier to conduct business across the several member states.  The harmony of laws also ensures that consumers in one country do not enjoy more or less protection than consumers in another country.  This further helps stimulate business throughout the EU rather than concentrating it where laws are most favorable to businesses. Individual travelers can also take steps to protect themselves in their international business transactions.  First, it is important to remember that standards are different for different countries.  Therefore, it is helpful to consult an attorney who can explain provisions that will apply to your business transactions.  Travelers who connect to Internet networks abroad and conduct transactions should also take care to protect their financial information and electronic devices.  The Federal Communications Commission recommends that travelers back up their electronic files, remove personal identification information from devices, and make sure that all antivirus software is up to date and running properly.  It is also important to be careful when joining Internet networks abroad—for example, in a hotel, coffee shop, or business center.  Sending electronic communications or using credit card information over these networks can expose users to cyber attacks.

At our law firm, we help inform guide our clients through international business transactions.  Our knowledge of standards against unfair business practices in various countries will help you conduct international business successfully.  You may contact us to discuss applicable laws with an attorney.