5 Questions Boards Should Ask About Data Privacy Risks – Forbes

Any company that has customers needs to be on alert. The average cost of a privacy data breach has now reached $214 per record, according to the Ponemon Institute. And that is expected to rise. In addition, legal obligations and regulatory fines related to a breach are evolving, which creates a level of uncertainty about how to respond when a breach incident occurs. That uncertainty is potentially a very expensive risk.

A company’s board of directors is tasked to evaluate corporate risk – internal and external competitive, financial and customer. Each typically has a committee; each has a plan. A data breach of your customers’ (or even employees’) private information is one of the largest risks to an organization. Yet it is often overlooked. If you haven’t discussed this topic at a board meeting, add these questions to your next agenda.

Question 1:  How much private, information do we have and how sensitive is it?

Your customers and employees place a tremendous amount of trust in your organization to protect their information. However, this trust is being compromised on a daily basis. According to Identityhawk, the first six months of 2011 had 158 breaches totaling nearly 105 million individual’s records. These breaches were in all kinds of organizations including those with sensitive transaction data such as banks, hospitals and consumer electronics companies. When this compromised data includes health information or social security numbers, the impact of any breach can have serious legal implications, in addition to the reputational harm your organization will experience.

Question 2: What are the consequences if this sensitive information is compromised?

The recent breach of 77 million Sony Playstation customers has resulted in class action lawsuits because of negligence to protect users’ data. In addition, the FBI launched an inquiry and the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating. To date, the company has spent more than $170 million on customer support and legal fees.

Smaller breaches can have an equally corrosive impact on an organization. In March, five patients filed a lawsuit against Charleston Area Medical Center in West Virginia seeking class action status from the Circuit Court in Kanawha County for all of 3,655 affected patients of a breach that occurred in September 2010.

The loss of customer goodwill is one of the highest costs of data breach. In fact, more than 63 percent of breach costs are a direct result of lost business. Customers do not want to do business with organizations that can’t protect their information. The bottom line is that a data breach can unravel your business and destroy the very fabric of a hard-built reputation. Data breaches are much cheaper to prevent than clean up. The cost to reduce the risk before a breach can be as low as 10 percent of the cost to remediate a medium-sized breach.

continued @ 5 Questions Boards Should Ask About Data Privacy Risks – Forbes.

Sony insurer sues to deny data breach coverage | Reuters

One of Sony Corp’s insurers has asked a court to declare that it does not have to pay to defend the media and electronics conglomerate from mounting legal claims related to a massive data breach earlier this year.

The dispute comes as demand soars for “cyberinsurance,” with companies seeking to protect themselves against customer claims and associated costs for data and identity theft.

How to write such policies has become a huge subject of debate in the insurance industry.

Zurich American Insurance Co asked a New York state court in documents filed late on Wednesday to rule it does not have to defend or indemnify Sony against any claims “asserted in the class-action lawsuits, miscellaneous claims, or potential future actions instituted by any state attorney general.”

via Sony insurer sues to deny data breach coverage | Reuters.

Judge to Google: sniffing even open WiFi networks may be wiretapping

When a homeowner runs an open, unencrypted wireless network and Google sniffs the packets from that network, has wiretapping taken place? Or did the openness of the network remove the user’s reasonable expectation of privacy?

Google’s Street View project has enmeshed the company in litigation around the world, most notably over the company’s data collection from WiFi networks its camera cars passed while doing their work. (Google has claimed that this was a mistake.) In the US, a host of class-action lawsuits over the practice have been consolidated into a single case, and the California federal judge overseeing it has just refused Google’s motion to completely dismiss the case. Sniffing even open WiFi packets might indeed be wiretapping, he ruled.

The case remains at a preliminary stage, but the ruling grapples with an interesting question: the extent to which one can access an open WiFi network without falling afoul of the Wiretap Act. Judge James Ware drew a distinction in yesterday’s ruling between merely accessing an open WiFi network and actually sniffing the individual packets on that network.

In the first case, one is only jumping onto a network to send and receive’s one own communications; in the second case, one is looking into someone else’s communications, and doing so in a way that requires nontrivial technical ability or software.

The key question turns on whether open WiFi packets are “readily accessible to the general public,” since US law does provide an exception for monitoring such signals. Because Google’s Street View vehicles allegedly collected WiFi network names (SSIDs), unique hardware addresses (MAC addresses), usernames, passwords, and even “whole e-mails,” Judge Ware concluded that the plaintiffs had stated a proper Wiretap Act claim.

via Judge to Google: sniffing even open WiFi networks may be wiretapping.

Facebook slapped with class-action privacy lawsuit – Computerworld

A Canadian law firm has filed a class-action lawsuit against Facebook Inc., alleging the social networking company mishandled users’ private information and breached their privacy.

Merchant Law Group LLP filed the lawsuit on July 2 in Queen’s Bench court in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The law firm, which has class-action lawsuits as a large part of its business, filed the suit on behalf of Donald J. Woligroski, a Winnipeg resident and a registered Facebook user, and other class members for an unspecified amount of damages.

The suit contends that Facebook subjected Woligroski to a breach of privacy and the misappropriation of his personal information. It also alleges that Facebook intentionally used his information for commercial purposes; it calls the company’s actions “malicious, deliberate, and oppressive.”

via Facebook slapped with class-action privacy lawsuit – Computerworld.

Toyota Recall Lawyers Appointed to Leadership Roles in Federal Litigation – AboutLawsuits.com

U.S. District Judge James Selna, who is presiding over the federal Toyota litigation, has appointed 21 plaintiffs’ lawyers to serve in leadership roles in the multidistrict litigation (MDL). The Toyota recall lawyers will perform actions during pretrial proceedings that will benefit all plaintiffs who have filed a product liability lawsuit in federal courts throughout the United States over sudden acceleration problems with Toyota or Lexus vehicles.

Following the recall of millions of vehicles in recent months, a growing number of Toyota class action lawsuits, Toyota accident injury lawsuits and wrongful death lawsuits have been filed in state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Last month, all federal Toyota lawsuits were consolidated and centralized before Judge Selna as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) for pretrial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. There are now about 228 federal lawsuits over recalled Toyota vehicles included in the MDL, and there are nearly 100 other lawsuits pending in state courts nationwide.

The litigation comprises of two types of claims: lawsuits alleging that defective Toyota or Lexus vehicles caused a personal injury or death to plaintiffs or their loved ones, and lawsuits claiming that the vehicles lost significant value due to the massive recalls and concerns about the safety.

As part of the coordinated pretrial proceedings, Judge Selna issued an order on May 14 creating two separate committees of lawyers representing the various plaintiffs. Each of the committees will have nine lawyers involved in the Toyota recall litigation, including the lead counsels.

The lead Toyota recall attorneys for the economic loss committee will be Steve Berman, Marc M. Seltzer and Frank Pitre. The lead Toyota personal injury lawyers will be Elizabeth Cabraser, and Mark P. Robinson. The lead counsels will act as spokespersons for all plaintiffs at pretrial hearings and in response to inquiries from the court. They will also submit and argue motions before the court, examine witnesses at hearings and negotiate stipulations and potential Toyota settlement agreements with the defendants, which would apply to all cases.

Judge Selna has also appointed Wylie Aitken, Dawn Barrios and Gretchen M. Nelson to serve as Liaison Counsel. As Liaison Counsel, they will receive and distribute orders from the Court and documents from opposing counsel, and assist in the coordination of activities between both parties.

via Toyota Recall Lawyers Appointed to Leadership Roles in Federal Litigation – AboutLawsuits.com.

Parties in Toyota Securities Suit Told to Resolve Discovery Fight | National Law Journal

A federal judge in Los Angeles has declined a request by plaintiffs lawyers in a shareholder class action to force attorneys for Toyota Motor Corp. to turn over documents that were provided to Congress, which has been investigating vehicle recalls associated with sudden unintended acceleration defects.

Instead, U.S. District Judge Dale Fischer of the Central District of California on Monday ordered the parties to reach a discovery agreement on their own within a week.

The suit, filed on Feb. 8, is the first shareholder class action to allege that Toyota’s executives and directors made false and misleading statements to shareholders regarding the defects. The recall caused Toyota’s stock price to drop from $90.42 on Jan. 21 to $71.78 on Feb. 4.

In court documents, lawyers for the plaintiff, Harry Stackhouse, had asked Fischer to lift a stay on discovery and instead order that documents relevant to the case be preserved or turned over. Under securities law, discovery is stayed in a shareholder case if a judge has yet to rule on pleading motions, such as a motion to dismiss.

To support their argument, the lawyers pointed to “serious allegations” that Toyota failed to disclose the defects. They specifically mentioned a $16.4 million fine that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration imposed after finding that Toyota waited four months to report the defects.

via Law.com – Parties in Toyota Securities Suit Told to Resolve Discovery Fight.

Toyota Class Action Lawsuits Could Cost Auto Maker $3B: AP Report – AboutLawsuits.com

Class action litigation springing from Toyota recalls over unintended acceleration could end up costing the company $3 billion or more, according to an Associated Press report.

The Japanese automaker currently faces at least 89 Toyota class action lawsuits sparked by recalls involving problems with Toyota gas pedals and brakes. An analysis done by the Associated Press estimates that the company’s legal bills on those cases alone could top $3 billion, and that does not include the costs of a number of individual Toyota accident personal injury lawsuits, product liability lawsuits and wrongful death lawsuits that have also been filed against the company.

Toyota has recalled about 9 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles since September 2009. About 8.5 million of those vehicles were recalled due to problems with sudden acceleration, which the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) says have been involved in as many as 52 deaths. More than 400,000 additional Toyota Prius and Lexus HS250h vehicles have also been recalled due to brake problems.

via Toyota Class Action Lawsuits Could Cost Auto Maker $3B: AP Report – AboutLawsuits.com.