It works. Millions of users worldwide can’t be wrong. If Twitter could play a role in the revolutionary Arab Spring, why not in the complex battle zone we call patent litigation.

Twitter has a new internal policy which they call the “Innovator’s Patent Agreement,” and it has attracted quite a bit of attention. The policy is reportedly one that allows the company to sue for infringement only when it is acting in its own defense, or when the inventors themselves give the company the okay to go ahead.

via Patent Infringement In 140 Characters Or Less: The Twitter Way – Forbes.

Just because you might not pay for it, doesn’t mean you have free reign, and the consequences can come back to haunt if you, especially if you went into risky territory.

Computer forensic expert Michael McCartney said, “It happens every day. Every day in our business we’re kind of tossed between an employee doing bad things or an environment in which has been compromised due to internal threats or external threats where it has exposed the organization to tremendous risk.”

Just a year ago, nearly 800 companies, including Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, were all hacked. In today’s world, the threat is far too easy.

The simple act of checking a personal e-mail account or buying flowers for mom on Mother’s Day with mobile work devices can put the company you work for at risk.

via Hackers target company-owned cellphones | WIVB.com.

A. Yes.

A significant percentage of anti-bribery violations against business organizations are based on the conduct of agents, representatives, distributors, or even joint venture partners (collectively third-parties).  Utilizing third-parties in foreign markets is very common as third parties best know the local business landscape and how to get things done.  However, knowing the local business landscape and how to get things done can also mean making improper payments on a company’s behalf in violation of the anti-bribery provisions.

The anti-bribery provisions prohibit not only direct payments to a “foreign official” to “obtain or retain business,” but also payments to “any person” (such as a third-party) “while knowing that all or a portion of such money or thing of value” will be provided to a “foreign official.”

The anti-bribery provisions state that “a person’s state of mind is ‘knowing’ with respect to conduct, a circumstance, or a result if (i) such person is aware that such person is engaging in such conduct, that such circumstance exists, or that such result is substantially certain to occur; or (ii) such person has a firm belief that such circumstance exists or that such result is substantially certain to occur.”

via Doing Business in China. Know the FCPA.

The Dallas company says hackers used automated programs to try to link mobile numbers and account log-in credentials, which they then hoped to use to access customer accounts on AT&T’s website.

via AT&T discloses “organized” hacking attempt – BusinessWeek.

via LinkedIn Raises Offering Price, Now Valued at US$ 4 Billion.

Amazing as it may seem, some companies’ employees still behave as if their e-mails were just between them and their correspondents. Here are some examples of why your employees need to think before they type. This past May, a high-profile case provided a dramatic example of how seemingly innocuous and/or confidential e-mails can be used in litigation with devastating consequences. Former hedge fund titan Arthur Samberg had to pay nearly $28 million to settle insider trading allegations. The case was going nowhere for several years when, in an unlikely twist, the divorce of a former Microsoft employee gave the Securities and Exchange Commission the break it needed. The employee’s soon-to-be ex-wife uncovered e-mails from their home computer that proved to be the critical link the SEC needed for a successful investigation.

As this case demonstrates, lawsuits and government investigations can turn into trouble fast and with little warning, especially when “E-Trouble” happens. We coined the term E-Trouble a few years ago to refer to e-mails sent by a company’s employees that are produced in discovery or pursuant to a subpoena and then used against that company. E-Trouble can be devastating, as judges, juries, and government investigators will look at employees’ e-mails as the true story of what really happened, often discounting or disregarding after-the-fact testimony or explanations that are inconsistent with, or even simply not supported by, e-mail from the time of the events at issue.

So how can you avoid E-Trouble? Begin by teaching your employees our five tips on avoiding the slings and arrows of outrageous e-mails.

via Business Letter | 5 Tips To Keep Loose E-Mails From Sinking Litigation.

via Cisco May Be Making A Run For Skype.

AT&T Inc. (T) is expected to wrap up its network improvements for New York by the third quarter, with San Francisco to follow three months later, according to the company’s operations chief.

The Dallas telecommunications giant is working to upgrade its network in the two key media markets, which were hit by intense traffic primarily caused by the Apple Inc. (AAPL) iPhone. But the company has been delayed by component shortages and zoning issues, which have been particularly cumbersome in San Francisco.

The improvements are critical to AT&T repairing the reputation of the network, which suffers from the perception that its coverage lags behind rival Verizon Wireless. It also will enable the company to offer additional features, such as tethering for the iPhone, which allows a handset’s cellular signal to be used like a modem.

Other AT&T smartphones allow tethering.

“It’s taking longer than we’d like,” said John Stankey, chief executive of AT&T Operations, in an interview with Dow Jones. “The dynamics of San Francisco are different.”

The New York improvements are proceeding on schedule, he said, adding that the work in San Francisco is roughly 90 days behind as a result of the logistical complications.

Last month, the company said the number of dropped calls on its third-generation, or 3G, network fell 6% in Manhattan and 9% in the New York metropolitan area, but acknowledged that San Francisco was behind. Earlier Wednesday, Ralph de la Vega, who runs AT&T’s wireless and consumer businesses, told investors that the New York metrics have “improved significantly.”

via CORRECT: AT&T Sees NY Network Upgrades Wrapped Up By 3Q, SF By 4Q – WSJ.com.

Related articles by Zemanta

• AT&T CEO isn’t worried about losing iPhone customers once contract with Apple expires (edibleapple.com)
• AT&T Laughs At Verizon iPhone Threat, Says Contracts Will Keep Customers Loyal (cultofmac.com)
• ‘Nothing new’ on iPhone tethering plans, AT&T insists (infoworld.com)
• AT&T Looks to Allow Cellphones to Be Used Like Modems (blogs.wsj.com)

On Dec. 16, 2009, Microsoft Corporation’s legal department settled the company’s longest and most expensive antitrust legal battle. In a major concession to European regulators, the software giant agreed to open its Windows operating system to rival Web browsers.

Microsoft’s general counsel, Brad Smith, and his legal team spent months last year hammering out the details of the 61-page settlement with the European Commission, the European Union’s executive body. By fall, Microsoft’s legal department had held 24 videoconferences and 34 conference calls with E.C. lawyers. “We wanted to be seen as a company that would work with regulators,” said deputy general counsel David Heiner, who heads the antitrust group and led much of the negotiations.

Some have called the settlement one of Smith’s crowning achievements. He and his legal team ended more than a decade of close scrutiny by European regulators. The software colossus can keep doing business across the Atlantic, and the stage is now set for better relations with Brussels. “There could have been an endless succession of slug-it-out battles to the death, and instead Microsoft elected to make some perhaps unwelcome but nonetheless significant concessions,” said Ian Forrester, a partner at White & Case who represented Microsoft in Brussels. The case, he said, is “a really extraordinary piece of legal history.”

The settlement was also symbolic for the company’ s legal team, which has set out to prove that it can resolve disputes amicably, despite Microsoft’s reputation for aggressively fighting legal disputes to their bitter, final end. And much of that effort has focused on building relationships and listening to what the other side wants, and fears. “We have tried to make that a defined part of how we train people to negotiate — in any context,” Smith said. “That is not always successful, but has been widely successful for us.”

Since Smith took the helm of Microsoft’s in-house legal department in 2002, he’s led a campaign to recast his company’s pugnacious image and come to terms with both regulators and Redmond’s fiercest competitors. Last year, for example, along with resolving the Brussels imbroglio, the department helped put together a friendly partnership deal with Yahoo! Inc. after months of acrimonious takeover discussions. The E.C. agreement was the culmination of Smith’s diplomatic offensive.

That’s not to imply that Microsoft has gone all touchy-feely. It remains a formidable legal opponent, especially when it comes to protecting the company’s most valuable asset — its intellectual property. Last year the legal department won two precedent-setting patent defense victories on appeal. Meanwhile, it stopped several consumer lawsuits from getting class certification.

Those litigation successes are among the many reasons we have awarded Microsoft’s lawyers the accolade of Best Legal Department of 2010. It's the fifth time we’ve given out the award, and, as usual, the competition was extremely tight. Corporate Counsel’s writers and editors spent days debating, arguing, and exchanging sometimes heated e-mails. After sending reporters to interview the finalists, we confirmed our ultimate choice.

via Law.com – Microsoft Wins Best Legal Department of 2010.