Today's news about the consumer data security breach at Citigroup underscores the need for a secure cloud offering.  Citigroup acknowledged today that hackers had penetrated its systems, exposing sensitive data regarding credit card customers.  http://nyti.ms/lZeLBM

Regardless of which systems were hacked, this news supports the need for companies to closely scrutinize cloud offerings for their data storage.  It is not enough for a cloud provider to offer cheap and unlimited storage.  Companies must satisfy themselves that appropriate security measures are in place when data is transferred and stored in the cloud.  Otherwise, sensitive business and consumer information could be subject to disclosure and misuse.

Proper safekeeping measures should include an encryption protocol that provides security for data transfers to and from the cloud.  Multi-layered firewalls that prevent unauthorized access to...

Are you looking to the cloud to save costs on data storage?  Great idea.  But look carefully at the cloud offerings out there.  Companies that are going to the cloud should consider whether they can timely retrieve data for legal, regulatory or other business purposes.

This is not a theoretical consideration.  Courts have traditionally rejected what I euphemistically call the “messy garage” defense.  That defense usually involves a litigant informing the court that its disorganized record keeping makes production of requested documents unduly burdensome.  The Brooks v. Macy’s (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2011) decision from last month is just the latest example of a court rejecting that defense.

In Brooks, an employer was ordered to produce paper healthcare records to the plaintiff in an ERISA lawsuit.  The employer had argued that the records were too burdensome to produce because:

• The records...

I was fortunate enough this week to have Symantec  send me to the 11thAnnual Superconference in Chicago at the Fairmont.  All sessions I attended were useful, but one of most important was the Judicial Panel on eDiscovery.  The Judges were: Flynn, Francis, Nolan and Waxse with Patrick Oot of the SEC as the moderator.  It is always beneficial to get into the minds of the judges who lead in eDiscovery.  It is especially important to me because many of our Symantec customers ask when purchasing or deploying our eDiscovery suite, “Does this software have court approval?”

The quick answer to that question is “No,” because in general, courts are not in the business of approving technology.  The other way to answer the question is, “Yes,” because our products have never been disapproved either.  Judges prefer that parties reach agreement themselves on scope, search terms, formats and search methodologies. ...

The SEC implemented rules this week to create awards for corporate insiders that blow the whistle for violations of federal securities laws.  Where the violations result in fines (referred to as "sanctions") of more than $1 million, the whistleblower may be entitled to a bounty of up to thirty percent of those sanctions.  http://1.usa.gov/kNvsXz

The SEC's whistleblower program is certain to increase the amount of litigation surrounding alleged securities violations.  That was the case when Congress strengthened the whistleblower provisions in the False Claims Act in 1986 to better address federal procurement fraud.  False Claims Act litigation ballooned, with whistleblowers receiving in some cases up to thirty percent of the $2.3 billion that the Department of Justice obtain last year in lawsuits whistleblowers initiated.  http://1.usa.gov/iwCnVv

SEC...