How an organization communicates in the wake of a major breach incident can play an important role in maintaining the organization's reputation and minimizing the financial impact. But how can your organization avoid mismanaging post-breach communication and potentially wasting millions of dollars?
Quick communication decisions needed to mitigate the potential harm of a data breach is challenging. Too many organizations mismanage data breach response efforts, making decisions without complete knowledge and lacking a clear and forthright message.
Carefully planned communication in the wake of a major breach incident can play a major role in maintaining the organization's reputation and minimizing the financial impact of a breach. Good communication also can help mitigate or prevent unnecessary litigation or government investigations.
In this webinar, our speaker, a legal expert who has advised organizations that have experience breaches, will review the essential components of a successful post-breach communication strategy, including:
-
Preparing proactively for data breaches by conducting compliance and security assessments, designating an internal breach response team, establishing relationships with key vendors and developing breach response communication plans;
-
Testing a breach response plan, including the communications component;
-
Providing accurate and timely notice communications by quickly and efficiently collecting the facts to understand the breach, developing methods to identify all relevant audiences, crafting the right message and identifying the best means of communication;
-
Determining when to hire a breach resolution or public relations firm to help with post-breach communications;
-
Planning how to inform appropriate regulators, such as state attorneys general, before issuing a breach notice;
-
Providing inaccurate or confusing notice communications, including communications that provide a limited, legalistic or formulaic response;
-
Failing to develop proper remediation and mitigation processes and using a process that frustrates consumers;
-
Ignoring certain audiences that should be contracted regarding a data breach.
Ronald Raether, Esq.
Faruki, Ireland & Cox, PLL
Ron’s broad experience with technology-related issues brings a unique and important perspective to successfully resolving disputes and developing creative compliance programs that blend well with existing business practices. These technology-related matters have spanned a broad array of substantive legal areas, including patent, antitrust, licensing and contracts, employment, trademark, domain name disputes, and federal and state privacy statutes.
When tackling new matters, this broad experience brings valuable insight not often available from attorneys that focus on a single area of the law. One recent example is Ron’s defense against claims that a company infringed a business-method patent in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bilski. Ron’s trial experience, including an arbitration in New York City where Ron successfully defended a computer performance dispute for a major provider of computer systems, assures that the plan developed always has the ultimate goal in mind – success.
Others have sought Ron’s experience in writings and as a featured speaker. Ron has authored technology-related articles, such as "E-Mail Maelstrom: Electronic Documents Must be Managed," Business Law Today (September/October 2003) and, “Preparing for the Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference and Other Practical Advice in the Wake of the Recent Amendments to the Rules Governing E Discovery,” The Federal Lawyer (August 2007). Ron has been a featured speaker on the use of technology in the courtroom and electronic discovery and has been active in organizations designed to assist technology entrepreneurs.
Ron has been involved in seminal cases addressing compliance with statutes that regulate the use and disclosure of personal information (such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) and laws that concern the adequacy of securing against unauthorized access to personal information in the context of defending class actions, investigations by federal and state agencies, and third party inquiries. Ron has successfully defended companies in over 25 class actions, and has represented companies in over 150 individual FCRA cases. One example where Ron successfully argued a motion was reported at 302 F. Supp. 2d 654 (E.D. La. 2004), where the court granted motions to dismiss a putative class action raising federal privacy claims. The Fifth Circuit recently relied heavily on this earlier decision in Taylor v. Axciom, where Ron played a key role in leading the defense and success on appeal.
Ron not only works with companies which have experienced unauthorized access to consumer data or have been named defendants in class actions and before the Federal Trade Commission, but also has advised companies in developing practices and policies to proactively address these issues. In addition to speaking on these issues, Ron has authored articles on topics such as “Security Before and After a Data Breach,” Business Law Today (November/December 2006), and “Data Security Breaches: Defining Measures Appropriate Under the Circumstances,” ACC Docket (December 2007). Ron also is a Certified Informational Privacy Professional, the industry standard to certify privacy professionals as knowledgeable about corporate compliance with U.S. and European privacy laws.
Ron's practice, however, has not been limited to technology-related matters. Ron recently obtained an award of $1,250,000 for a client who had been fraudulently induced to invest in a company. Ron also has handled construction, copyright, real estate, law firm dissolution, environmental, insurance coverage, and product liability matters and Ron led an independent investigation of accounting irregularities of a national Section 42 housing developer.
Ron is a member of the Bars of the States of Ohio and Minnesota, the United States District Court for the Northern and Southern Districts of Ohio, the Eastern District of Wisconsin, and the Court of Appeals for the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits. Ron has been admitted pro hac vice in state and federal courts throughout the United States, including California, Pennsylvania, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia and has argued motions or tried cases in these jurisdictions.
If you intend to take a course for CLE credit, please make sure your state is listed in the "Accreditation" section to the upper right of the program description. Accreditation displayed is unique to the purchased program format (live conference, live webcast, on demand, podcast). Credit totals listed for live conferences are the maximum credits available. Credits issued will be based upon actual time in attendance. Credit totals for other formats are for complete programs. Partial credit is not available for any online or downloadable format.
West LegalEdcenter will not provide accreditation for states not listed.
