Privacy and Data Security Archives

Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California) – 2022

Los Angeles partner Mark Terman and associate Maria Cho have provided an annual update to a Practical Law article, entitled “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California).” In their article, Mark and Maria discuss how companies can protect their information, including the use of confidentiality agreements and related practices, under California law. They also outline practical tips on developing internal systems and contract provisions designed to protect a company’s sensitive information, including its business assets and relationships, data security and trade secrets.

Practical Law™, a division of West Publishing Corporation, provides legal know-how for business lawyers. It also acts as secretariat for the GC100 group of general counsel and company secretaries.

Continue reading “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California) – 2022”

COVID-19: Need-to-Know Employer Information on Data Privacy and Recent Governmental Actions

As employers respond to the daily influx of information about coronavirus/COVID-19, Faegre Drinker continues to update its Employer’s Action Guide and monitor dynamic federal and state developments. Some governmental agencies have provided guidance or adopted rules to assist employees and employers through these uncertain times. This information will help you stay current and compliant. We will continue to monitor developments.

Continue reading “COVID-19: Need-to-Know Employer Information on Data Privacy and Recent Governmental Actions”

Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California)

Los Angeles partner Mark Terman and associates Sujata Wiese and Shamar Toms-Anthony updated their article in Practical Law titled “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (CA).” In their article, Mark, Sujata and Shamar discuss how companies can protect their information, including the use of confidentiality agreements and related practices, under California law. They also outline practical tips on developing internal systems and contract provisions designed to protect a company’s sensitive information, including its business assets and relationships, data security and trade secrets.

Continue reading “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California)”

Developing a Trade Secret Protection Program to Reduce Risk and Increase Court Enforcement

Los Angeles partner Mark Terman recently authored an article for the Daily Journal titled, “Developing a Trade Secret Protection Program to Reduce Risk and Increase Court Enforcement.”

Continue reading “Developing a Trade Secret Protection Program to Reduce Risk and Increase Court Enforcement”

Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California)

Mark Terman, Sujata Wiese and Shamar Toms-Anthony updated their article authored with Practical Law titled “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (CA).” In their article, Mark, Sujata and Shamar discuss how companies can protect their information, including the use of confidentiality agreements and related practices, under California law.

Continue reading “Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreements (California)”

Illinois Employers Beware: State Supreme Court Finds No Harm Required Under Biometric Law

Many employers have opted to use technology to their advantage by adopting biometric timekeeping systems or similar systems for workplace access. But adopting such technology is not without risk. Indeed, with data breaches on the rise, employees and consumers have become more vigilant about protecting their personal data and using state privacy laws and the like to do so. The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Law is one such law that places restrictions on businesses that collect biometric information of individuals. That law defines biometric information as “any information, regardless of how it is captured, converted, stored, or shared, based on an individual’s biometric identifier [i.e. ‘a retina, iris scan, fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry’] used to identify an individual.” 740 ILCS 14/10.

Continue reading “Illinois Employers Beware: State Supreme Court Finds No Harm Required Under Biometric Law”