Many Firms Are Too Confident About Their Cybersecurity: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
January 07, 2022 at 06:00 AM
4 minute read
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
SEE YOU AT THE CROSSROADS - Over the past two years, law firms have surprised many a naysayer by demonstrating a previously unseen ability to adapt to extreme circumstances and unanticipated challenges. But 2022 could be the true test of whether this notoriously change-averse segment of the industry has any appetite for true, lasting transformation. In our first Law.com Trendspotter column of 2022, we're examining how law firms' approaches to talent acquisition and retention are poised to fundamentally change forever—or, y'know, not. The pandemic still appears to be far from "over" (whatever that means), but we're reaching a point at which law firms must decide whether they want to attempt to "get back to normal" (whatever that means) or embrace a new normal. For large firms, in particular, exhibiting a resistance to change at this crucial moment could cost them talent. But will it? That largely depends on what happens to the power balance between firms and talent in 2022.
FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY - Like the ever-mutating coronavirus, cybersecurity threats have been evolving since the beginning of the pandemic. What worked last year may now not be enough to ward off infection as cyber scams become harder to detect and more sophisticated. As Law.com's Rhys Dipshan writes in this week's Law.com Barometer newsletter, while law firms have been expanding training, rolling out secure devices and VPNs, and investing more in cybersecurity resources since early 2020, their security posture still faces glaring gaps. And far from being cognizant of their shortcomings, many are overconfident in their ability to weather the storm. To receive the Law.com Barometer directly to your inbox each week, click here.
UNFAIR GAME? - A former GameStop executive filed a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit against the company Thursday in Texas Northern District Court. Bruce Kulp, who is represented by Smyser Kaplan & Veselka, accuses GameStop of firing him to prevent the disclosure of negative information regarding the financial impact of increased shipping costs. Kulp, who served as GameStop's senior vice president of supply chain for more than a decade, claims that he was fired in late 2020 after preparing an analysis of the issue for GameStop's board of directors. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 4:22-cv-00012, Kulp v. GameStop Corp. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
Attorney Disbarred for Representing 150 'Ghost Clients' Without Firm's Knowledge By Marianna Wharry Does Big Law Have A Staffing Crisis? Not Yet By Dan Packel For Sullivan & Cromwell's New Co-Chairs, Two Is Better Than One By Ben Seal 'It Was News to Us': Storm Clouds Surface Over Rapidly Reached J&J Sunscreen Settlement By Amanda Bronstad 'Jan. 6 Did Not Come Out of Nowhere': Paul Weiss' Jeannie Rhee on Countering Hate in Court and What Lawyers Are Missing in the Pandemic By Jacqueline Thomsen|
WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING
ILL-SUITED? - Just 35% of 600 large global companies' legal and risk leaders feel fully confident in how prepared they are to face litigation this year, as regulatory pressures continue to ramp up globally, Law.com International's Hannah Walker reports. A report by Baker McKenzie has found that only 35% of companies with an annual revenue over $500 million based in the U.K., U.S., Singapore or Brazil feel totally confident in their preparedness to tackle litigation, with the figure dropping to just 14% in the U.K. The firm surveyed senior legal and risk leaders at the organizations for the report, which also found high levels of nervousness about a perceived high risk of external investigations from regulators and law enforcement agencies. Of the global respondents, 82% said they are experiencing concern over the issue, while 65% also worried about internal investigations, according to the report.
|
WHAT YOU SAID
"My advisor, who was a professor, introduced himself and asked me, 'Why are you taking the seat of a man who will use this to make a living?'"
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A Horrible Reputation for Bad Verdicts': Plaintiffs Attorney Breaks Down $129M Wrongful-Death Verdict From Conservative Venue
As Global Law Firm Mergers Keep Coming, Will There Ever Be a New Swiss Verein?
What Will Happen to U.S. Efforts Against Financial Secrecy and Corruption Under Trump’s Leadership?
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: The Recorder and Law.com's California Legal Awards 2025
- 2The Week in Data Dec. 13: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 3Antitrust Class Actions Against CVS, Other Pharmacy Benefit Managers Are Piling Up
- 4Judge Grinds NY's Cannabis Licensing Regime to a Halt Again
- 5On the Move and After Hours: Barclay Damon; VLJ; Barnes & Thornburg
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250