e-Lessons Learned

If you have a credit card or bank account, then you may have received an ominous e‐mail alert discussing the data breach that recently occurred at Epsilon, a third‐party vendor which provides marketing services to many companies. Luckily, the stolen information appears to have been limited to the names and e‐mail addresses of only some customers. Apparently, no account numbers or other confidential information was compromised. Nevertheless, names and e‐mail addresses are powerful tools for certain types of cybercriminals known as “phishers” who use social engineering to target potential victims and lure them into exposing confidential financial information.

Users of the Sony Playstation Network may not be as lucky, as upwards of 10 million credit card accounts may have been accessed by hackers in the recent network attack. Continue reading »

Apple’s recent lawsuit against Amazon opens a new front in the war for app dominance. Apple, it seems, could not abide Amazon’s launch of its own mobile app marketplace – Amazon Appstore. Yet this was not the first shot fired in this battle, as Microsoft last year opposed Apple’s attempt to register the APP STORE brand name with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

So, why all this attention? Why are the app “super powers” – Amazon, Apple, RIM/Blackberry, Google, Microsoft – shifting their strategy from development and consumer marketing to the legal battlefield?

Continue reading »

In 2007, Bill R. McMillen, Sr., was rear-ended by Defendant Wolfe during a cool down lap in a stock car race. He later filed suit to recover damages for the following allegedly sustained injuries: possible permanent impairment, loss and impairment of general health, strength, and vitality, and inability to enjoy certain pleasures of life.

In 2010, after viewing the part of plaintiff’s Facebook account that was available to the public, Defendant Hummingbird filed for an order compelling the plaintiff to disclose his Facebook and MySpace user names and passwords. This request was based on public comments regarding the plaintiff’s fishing trips and trip to the Daytona 500. The defendants wanted to “determine whether or not plaintiff [had] made any other comments which impeach and contradict his disability and damages claims,” or more plainly stated: “we want to make sure this dude isn’t lying.” Continue reading »