TOTAL: {[ getCartTotalCost() | currencyFilter ]} Update cart for total shopping_basket Checkout

Daily Dashboard | Clapper v. Amnesty International's Impact on the Harm Threshold Related reading: European Commission expected to unveil Digital Services Act in December

rss_feed
GDPR-Ready_300x250-Ad

""

“Amid the storm of cybersecurity incidents in the last year, plaintiffs still face an uphill battle convincing courts that they suffered actual—and not hypothetical—harm from data breaches,” Cheryl Howard and Dana Post write in this exclusive for The Privacy Advisor. “In several recent decisions, however, courts have found that plaintiffs alleging future harm had adequately pleaded Article III standing, giving renewed vigor to data breach cases.” Howard and Post consider the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Clapper v. Amnesty International—that Article III standing requires threatened injury must “be certainly impending to constitute an injury in fact”—and the case’s implications.
Full Story

Comments

If you want to comment on this post, you need to login.