Incentive to “pay attention” to security?  But is it enough? 

https://www.bespacific.com/sec-is-giving-companies-four-days-to-report-cyberattacks/

SEC is giving companies four days to report cyberattacks

Quartz:  “The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) wants public companies to be more transparent and forthcoming about “material cybersecurity incidents,” the federal agency said yesterday (July 26).  Its new rules, passed by a 3-2 vote, dictate companies must disclose details of incidents and their effect on the bottomline in a section of the Form 8-K, a broad form companies use to notify shareholders of major events, within four days of a cybersecurity event.  A delay in filing will only be allowed if the US Attorney General determines that “immediate disclosure would pose a substantial risk to national security or public safety and notifies the Commission of such determination in writing,” the SEC said.  Final rules, which will be signed into the Federal Register later this year, will apply to big companies within 30 days.  Smaller companies will be given a more generous deadline—180 days—to comply.”

        ◦ SEC Adopts Rules on Cybersecurity Risk Management, Strategy, Governance, and Incident Disclosure by Public Companies 

        ◦ Final Rule 

        ◦ Fact Sheet 

Nothing is ever straight forward…

https://fpf.org/blog/old-laws-new-tech-as-courts-wrestle-with-tough-questions-under-us-biometric-laws-immersive-tech-raises-new-challenges/

OLD LAWS & NEW TECH: AS COURTS WRESTLE WITH TOUGH QUESTIONS UNDER US BIOMETRIC LAWS, IMMERSIVE TECH RAISES NEW CHALLENGES

Extended reality (XR) technologies often rely on users’ body-based data, particularly information about their eyes, hands, and body position, to create realistic, interactive experiences.  However, data derived from individuals’ bodies can pose serious privacy and data protection risks for people.  It can also create substantial liability risks for organizations, given the growing volume of lawsuits under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) and scrutiny of biometric data practices by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) in their recent Policy Statement.  At the same time, there is considerable debate and lack of consensus about what counts as biometric data under existing state privacy laws, creating significant uncertainty for regulators, individuals, and organizations developing XR services.

This blog post explores the intersection of US biometric data privacy laws and XR technologies, particularly whether and to what extent specific body-based data XR devices collect and use may be considered “biometric” under various data protection regimes.  We observe that:

The law, she is a-changing. 

https://iapp.org/news/a/third-party-liability-and-product-liability-for-ai-systems/

Third-party liability and product liability for AI systems

…   Traditionally, consumer protection law has been favorable for software vendors, limiting their liability to end users.  This has been particularly true for third-party vendors that have had liability managed by the judicious use of warranty disclaimers, contractual limitations of liability and limitations in the application of negligence law to such vendors.

However, recent U.S. case law signals an erosion of these traditional liability boundaries between vendors of software and their customers.

For example, in Connecticut Fair Housing Center v. Corelogic Rental Property Solutions, a 2019 case against a third-party vendor of tenant screening software, the U.S. District Court held that the vendor of the screening software was subject to the same nondiscrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Act as its landlord customers.  Tenant screening criteria, including criminal records, was made available to landlords through the software.  This could result in discrimination against those with criminal histories and violates of Department of Housing and Urban Development guidance regarding FHA protections.

The court rejected the vendor's argument that it is precluded from FHA liability because its customers have exclusive control over setting the screening criteria.  The court stressed the vendor had a duty to not sell a product which could cause a customer to either knowingly or unknowingly violate federal housing law and regulations.

Resource.

https://www.bespacific.com/research-guide-for-the-constitution-annotated/

Research Guide for the Constitution Annotated

In Custodia Legis – Mitch Ruhl, a paralegal specialist in the American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service.  “One of the challenges for any researcher tackling questions of constitutional interpretation is knowing where to start.  The Congressional Research Service’s (CRS) Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (or “Constitution Annotated”) serves as the official legal treatise on the constitution, offering a comprehensive, authoritative, and nonpartisan analysis of the most important document in American history.  This year marks the publication of the latest decennial edition and the fourth anniversary of the Constitution Annotated website.  As part of this anniversary, CRS has produced a new research guide dedicated to helping the general reader navigate and understand the Constitution Annotated, whether they are congressional staffers, seasoned attorneys, university students, or anyone interested in the Constitution and how it relates to current issues.  This research guide walks the reader through the Constitution Annotated website; the methodology behind its component essays; additional resources created by CRS, including a comprehensive table of cases cited in all essays, a table of overruled Supreme Court decisions, sets of introductory essays, and a topical guide for each section of the Constitution and its amendments.  The Constitution Annotated research guide will be regularly updated as new essays and resources are added and edited.  Researchers of all backgrounds can use this research guide to delve into this unique and important treatise and further their understanding of how America’s founding document relates to current Supreme Court cases and discussions surrounding constitutional issues.”