Steve Millendorf (Partner, San Diego) and Avi Ginsberg (Associate, Boston) will join the New England Corporate Counsel Association for a hybrid in-person/virtual seminar on current issues in cybersecurity.
As technology continues to evolve, new security threats and compliance risks confront companies worldwide and, accordingly, require in-house counsel to quickly assess and respond to these constant challenges in order to minimize damages, losses, and liability to their clients, assets, and reputations. Our team will lead an interactive discussion of some selected cybersecurity issues that in-house counsel are likely to face in 2024 as a result of new developments, including:
- Today’s cybersecurity landscape
- Risk implications of emerging website software tools such as cookie consent managers, chatbots, and session replay technologies
- Recent developments in state privacy laws
- Cybersecurity insurance and negotiating cybersecurity terms in contracts.
To learn more and register to attend, please click here.
People
Related Insights
24 July 2025
Events
ACI's Inaugural Summit on GLP-1 Law & Policy
Foley partner Kyle Faget, co-chair of the firm’s Medical Devices Area of Focus, is speaking in American Conference Institute’s Inaugural Summit on GLP-1 Law & Policy on July 24.
23 April 2025
Tariff & International Trade Resource
What Every Multinational Company Should Know About…Tariff Strategies for Sell-Side Contracts
With the size and scope of President Trump’s tariffs continuing to shift, this is a critical time for businesses to assess their contracts and determine how increased tariff costs might adversely affect profitability, and whether there are any strategies to mitigate the losses.
22 April 2025
Health Care Law Today
Health Care Marketing: The Seventh Circuit Addresses “Referrals” Under The Anti-Kickback Statute
The case, United States v. Sorenson, addressed whether a Medicare-registered distributor violated the AKS in making payments to advertising, marketing, and manufacturing companies that worked to sell orthopedic braces to Medicare patients. The court held that such payments were not “referrals” within the meaning of the AKS because the payments were made to entities that were neither physicians in a position to refer their patients nor other decisionmakers in positions to “leverage fluid, informal power and influence” over health care decisions.