Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: June 11, 2015
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comWhile we all await national data breach standards, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has made it clear that it plans to continue to assert its consumer protection authority and bring privacy and data security enforcement actions. In a recent blog post, Mark Eichorn, an Assistant Director in the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, outlined how the FTC typically investigates a potential data breach.

When launching a data breach investigation, the agency relies on Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.” The statute broadly defines unfair practices as those that “cause or [are] likely to cause substantial injury to consumers…not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.”
While the FTC may first initiate an informal investigation, it also has the power to subpoena corporate documents and testimony, such as security risk assessments, privacy policies, and training protocols. According to the FTC, its goal is to determine the circumstances surrounding the breach: what happened, what protections were in place at the time, and how the company responded. It then uses that information to determine whether to bring an enforcement action.
According to the FTC, it often decides to launch an investigation based on news reports, complaints from consumers or other companies, or requests from Congress or other government agencies. In the absence of a legal obligation to notify regulators of a data breach, companies must decide whether to self-report the issue to federal or state authorities. In its blog post, the FTC makes it clear that it favors companies that alert state or federal authorities when breaches occur rather than waiting for the FTC to come knocking.
We’ll also consider the steps the company took to help affected consumers, and whether it cooperated with criminal and other law enforcement agencies in their efforts to apprehend the people responsible for the intrusion. In our eyes, a company that has reported a breach to the appropriate law enforcers and cooperated with them has taken an important step to reduce the harm from the breach. Therefore, in the course of conducting an investigation, it’s likely we’d view that company more favorably than a company that hasn’t cooperated.
Of course, no good deed goes unpunished, and self-reporting can also backfire. While the company may think that they took all of the appropriate steps to address a data breach, the FTC’s investigation may conclude otherwise and impose unexpected fines and penalties. Accordingly, all legal decisions in the wake of a potential data breach should be made in consultation with experienced counsel.
###
Do you have any feedback, thoughts, reactions or comments concerning this topic? Feel free to leave a comment below for Fernando M. Pinguelo.
Follow the twitter accounts @CyberPinguelo and @eWHW_Blog for timely comments on related issues. If you have any questions about this post or would like assistance with your legal needs, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work. To learn more about data privacy and security, visit eWhiteHouse Watch – Where Technology, Politics, and Privacy Collide (http://ewhwblog.com)
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!