Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
In fact, 20%[1] of Google’s workers protested from around the globe, from Tokyo setting precedent, all the way to Berlin, it was estimated that more than 1,500 employees - mostly women - walked out from more than 60% of Google’s offices at 11:10AM[2].
Why were they protesting? Well, it may have been a shock to many of you, (those who perhaps are not hired by Google), as the company is renowned for their reputation regarding its work environment and progressive attitude. But a week prior to the protests, Google reported that they had given a former executive a whopping 90 million dollar severance package in 2014.
Andy Rubin – the creator of the Android mobile software - decided to say goodbye to Google in October 2014; his leave was promptly followed by Larry Page, Former Chief Executive of Google, paying homage to their much loved employee, stating[3]: “I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next…With Android he created something truly remarkable — with a billion-plus happy users.”
Obviously, what Google decided to conveniently miss out, was that an employee had accused Rubin of sexual misconduct and when their investigation into the matter concluded that her claim remained credible, Page asked for Rubin’s resignation after confidentiality agreements were signed.
The cherry on top of the cake is that Rubin is actually one of three executives Google has supposedly protected over the past decade after they were accused of sexual misconduct.
The googlewalkout page on Instagram stated that they wanted Google to make five changes to its company policy:
In arbitration, the proceedings are usually private and the public does not know when the arbitration is occurring or where, and oftentimes many documents are designated as confidential, also without becoming part of public court records.
Touching on their first point, we have previously touched on the issues of using arbitration in harassment cases, especially in the US; Twila White, an employment lawyer in Southern California, explained how employers often require employees to sign an agreement prior to beginning their employment, that if a dispute arises, it will be resolved via arbitration.
This often leaves employees at a disadvantage. Speaking to us earlier this year, she states: “When something bad happens in the workplace, after an employee has signed an arbitration agreement, most of the times the employee will end up in arbitration where there is a retired judge or lawyer, who is the ultimate decision maker. The employer is paying the arbitrator. The employer has the opportunity to have a repeat player dynamic where that employer has been before a particular arbitrator many times over, and has a familiarity with an arbitrator, whereas the plaintiff has no familiarity with that arbitrator or process. Lawyers call it the “repeat player effect”.” Twila expands on this, stating that another issue for employees and the general public, is that arbitration allows cases to not be publically reported for press, leaving little knowledge of such cases to the public eye, thus making it easier to employers to brush their accusations under the carpet.
Twila states: “In arbitration, the proceedings are usually private and the public does not know when the arbitration is occurring or where, and oftentimes many documents are designated as confidential, also without becoming part of public court records.”
Ignorance isn’t always bliss, especially when harassment and discrimination are involved. For the safety and wellbeing of others, shouldn’t the public be aware of a company’s misconduct?
So, How Should Harassment Cases Be Handled?
Obviously prevention is better than cure, and employers should make it evidently clear to what accounts towards sexual harassment and their zero tolerance policy towards such behaviour; workplaces should also have a detailed policy in place if harassment occurs whereby employees should know who to report to and how the investigation, and responses of such an investigation, will occur. Twila recommends that training should be done yearly, and focus on working from the top (higher management), to lower down[4].
Nonetheless, regardless if preventative measures have been taken, evidence of discriminatory behaviour and harassment should be investigated, involving a member of the HR team if necessary, and when appropriate, offer guidance and counselling to the victim. How the case is resolved, depends on the situation itself.
Possible outcomes are: verbal or written warning; a (temporary) restraining order; the accused may be reassigned to another department, away from the victim, or suspended, or terminated from employment; and, depending on the severity of the case, cases may be reported to the police who will sanction the accused appropriately.
Due to the sensitivity of these cases, employers, and in some instances employees, usually prefer to maintain as much confidentiality as possible, and this is where non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) come in.
The purpose of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is to keep sensitive information confidential.
What is an NDA?
NDAs are contracts whereby parties agree to limit what they say about a dispute in the future. In sexual harassment cases, it may come across as part of a ‘deal’ to get employees to take a form of compensation - monetary, as an example -, as long as you legally agree to not mention this to the public. This may occur when an investigation hasn’t come to a secure conclusion, but employers want to be thorough and ensure nothing will come back to bite them.
Jamie Jenkins, Barrister at St John’s Buildings chambers, tells us more about NDAs in sexual harassment cases:
“The purpose of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is to keep sensitive information confidential. They are commonly used in business settings, during a deal process, for example, and can be used to protect the confidential or sensitive information from one or both parties during negotiations or a business transaction.
“With the dawn of the #MeToo movement, the use of NDAs to cover up historical sexual misconduct has come to light, prompting widespread scrutiny of how they are used, and to what purpose. In the case of the Harvey Weinstein allegations, the NDAs relate to particular incidents, and were put in place retrospectively. However, in the case of the Presidents Club, the staff were reportedly made to sign contracts in advance, before going on to be subjected to sexual harassment. It is very important that the receiving party, the individual signing the NDA, understands in full the parameters of the agreement being put in place.”
There is an important safeguard. [In the UK] under an employment settlement agreement (s203 Employment Rights Act 1996), it is an express condition that the employee must have received legal advice.
But here lies the problem: confidentiality may refrain other victims coming out about further harassment claims. Moreover, critics of NDAs state that they easily sweep claims under the carpet.
The process of filing a harassment claim can be tiresome, especially in some cases, whereby silence is an easy offer to accept in replacement for money or the termination – or some form of discipline - of such employee.
An example, is this report made on Magnify Money: Chelsea* learnt the difficulties of filing a claim; she never wanted to resort to hiring an attorney, but when the company’s HR team did nothing, - aside from offering her a demotion after filing a complaint that her manager was making sexual advances -, she had little choice left. She wanted to ensure her manager realised his actions were incorrect and hoped taking such action would refrain him from harassing another employee, and stated that her reason for settling was not a ‘money making scheme’, but instead, stated: “I accepted a settlement instead of going to trial is that [sic] I didn’t want to be publicly seen as a woman who files these claims.”
We spoke to Andrew McDonald, Employment Law partner at BLM, on this particular matter.
“Even where an employer fights a spurious claim and wins, it is often a pyrrhic victory, one which incurs extensive legal fees and a huge amount of senior management resourcing. Additionally, these cases tend to attract a high level of press interest, which could concentrate on allegations, rather than the rationale behind judgements which rule in the business’ favour.
“This is where NDAs can come in to play. Faced with these challenges, businesses will often try to see if a claim can be settled for a modest amount either under a settlement agreement [or an ACAS COT3, (solely in the UK)]; these will always include a confidentiality clause, which is a form of NDA. In these circumstances, the use of NDAs are not to protect sexual harassers, but for the simple expedient of avoiding the payment becoming general knowledge.”
NDAs often leave a lot of confusion and do give the accused power to avoid consequences of their actions. However, does it cause the same level of harm, when NDAs are reported to be signed in such cases and leaves us no definite answer to what truly occurred?
Are we intentionally silencing abused women and men? The rise of #metoo has shed light into how much more common sexual harassment is than we think, and it is not until we delve into the process of how things are handled, that we learn the easy misuse of NDAs. What other choices are there for victims? Well, Caroline Humphries, Tutor at The University of Law, Bloomsbury, assures us that not all is lost:
“Some commentators have suggested that due to an inequality of bargaining power such settlement agreements are not really consensual and therefore may be steamrolled through by employers. However, there is an important safeguard. [In the UK] under an employment settlement agreement (s203 Employment Rights Act 1996), it is an express condition that the employee must have received legal advice. This advice is in regards to the terms and effect of the proposed agreement and, in particular, its effect on the employee’s ability to pursue any claims in an Employment Tribunal.
“The employee must, therefore, take legal advice before agreeing to the Settlement Agreement. This means the employee must be advised on the terms of the agreement and they have the opportunity to redress the balance of power.
“Employment lawyers often advise on Settlement Agreements and they will negotiate on behalf of an employee if the terms of the Settlement Agreement are not appropriate. Given this safeguard, I consider that Settlement Agreements have a useful role in settling disputes and should be allowed.
“They bring potentially difficult proceedings to an end. They also do not put employees or their employers through the process of litigation where the results are uncertain and individuals may have to give very personal evidence.
“Allowing Confidential Settlement Agreements does not, of course, mean that they are always appropriate. Employees should have the confidence to understand that if they do not want to settle, there is always the option of employment tribunal proceedings.”
If we turn back to the Google scandal in particular, many of the protestors were aggravated that an employer who had broken policy, was still being paid millions of dollars, even though he has resigned[5]. Rubin denied all allegations, with his spokesperson stating he left due to other reasons. Rubin publicly responded: “Specifically, I never coerced a woman to have sex in a hotel room. These false allegations are part of a smear campaign by my ex-wife to disparage me during a divorce and custody battle.[6]”
NDAs often leave a lot of confusion and do give the accused power to avoid consequences of their actions. However, does it cause the same level of harm, when NDAs are reported to be signed in such cases and leaves us no definite answer to what truly occurred?
In the case of NDAs, whilst stopping serial offenders is crucial, legislators will have to tread carefully to ensure they don’t remove the assistance NDAs provide all parties, ensuring any new regime still allows sensible settlements to be reached with confidentiality maintained.
Jamie sheds more light into the controversy behind using NDAs and how all could be over, if the media finds out: “In a commercial context, NDAs are often restricted in time. On the other hand, NDAs used to cover up cases of sexual misdemeanour have no shelf-life – the receiving party is silenced indefinitely. If a high-profile NDA does come to light, it can prompt a flurry of further disclosures, rendering its entire purpose useless - the allegations having become widely publicised. In such cases, the celebrity may seek an injunction in an attempt to preserve their reputation. The problem with injunctions in this setting is that, whilst they silence the original source, they may not prevent others from spreading the word further - once started, a media furore is hard to quell.”
So, why are they legal? Well, because they are a little more complicated than we think, as Jamie explains: “There are two areas of difficulty surrounding whether NDAs should be used in sexual harassment cases. Firstly, the remit of such agreements is far more complex than is widely reported. Their use to cover up criminal activity, such as rape and assault, is a matter which the government is currently looking into. However, not all sexual harassment is criminal, and NDAs are commonly used in relation to information or conduct that is not illegal – it is therefore wrong to assume that the use of NDAs as a whole is wrong. Secondly, an NDA can play an important role, even in disputes. In such situations, including legal disputes, an NDA can allow all parties to draw a line under the matter, and move on - so they can serve a valuable purpose.”
And what if NDAs were not to exist? With many stating they should be banned in such cases, Andrew highlights what could happen if they were no longer an option:
“The complete banning of NDAs could result in matters which could otherwise have been settled having to undergo a full hearing before a Judge. Employment Tribunal systems would be clogged, and businesses and claimants would face great expenses of time and legal fees.”
He expands on sharing that the important thing to do is to ensure that businesses, across different industries and sectors, commit to stopping sexual harassment and eradicating workplace cultures that may have previously allowed abuse to thrive. He expands: “In the case of NDAs, whilst stopping serial offenders is crucial, legislators will have to tread carefully to ensure they don’t remove the assistance NDAs provide all parties, ensuring any new regime still allows sensible settlements to be reached with confidentiality maintained.”
Since the walkout, Google has announced that they have made some changes to how harassment cases are handled; they will no longer force employees to take their claim into arbitration.
"We will make arbitration optional for individual sexual harassment and sexual assault claims. Google has never required confidentiality in the arbitration process and arbitration still may be the best path for a number of reasons (e.g. personal privacy) but, we recognize that choice should be up to you," wrote Google CEO Sundar Pichai in a company email.[7]
The controversy behind NDAs remain, and even though there is a strong movement for the use of NDAs to be reviewed, especially in regards to sexual harassment cases, it is vital that workplaces do as much as they can to avoid sexual harassment cases in the first place. Prevention is always better than cure.
[1] https://www.reputationinstitute.com/blog/growing-workplace-crisis-google
[2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/1/18051026/google-walkout-sexual-harassment-protest
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html?module=inline
[4] https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2018/04/workplace-harassment-how-do-we-stop-it-2/
[5] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/2/18056390/google-walkout-employee-interviews
[6] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html
[7] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/08/tech/google-sexual-harassment/index.html
Solo travel has become something of a trend in recent years, as people head out around the globe to enjoy the sights and sounds of international destinations, on their own terms, or even embark on work-related travel. However, along with the sense of freedom and liberation this can bring as a traveller, it’s also important to be smart and stay safe. These are a few key tips for the adventurous individual traveller.
Prior Preparation Prevents...
All kinds of potential problems. Do your homework before you travel by researching the destinations you’re going to visit at sites such as Tripadvisor, not only because is this a fun way to get ready for your adventure, but because it will provide you with important knowledge about local customs and etiquette in the countries you’re visiting. Find out about dressing appropriately to blend in, get to know the safest public transport options, learn about places to avoid, and much more.
Likewise, don’t forget to check Department of State Travel Advisories if you’re a US citizen, UK Government Foreign Travel Advice if you’re British, or Travel Advice and Advisories for Canadians, because they can provide important and valuable information about your destination. This is particularly useful when departing for locations where civil unrest or other potential dangers are a factor you need to consider, so they can be avoided whenever possible.
Keep Your Phone Charged and Stay Connected
Travelling without our smartphone or tablet seems impossible to imagine these days. Our mobile devices aren’t just handy for playing online games to pass the time during long journeys, or for storing the many photos of our adventures. They’re also a vital tool for solo travellers overseas to keep in touch with friends and family back home - not to mention being a handy way to access online maps and news about our destinations when we arrive.
Make sure to check roaming costs and capabilities in advance, buy or rent a second phone as a backup, or get an international SIM card if your device will take it. Always keep your device fully charged before heading out on trips and have a USB charger handy. You may also want to invest in a battery bank, too.
Let People Know Where You're Going
This is of particular importance for the solo traveller. Let friends and family know your travel plans and daily schedule if possible, then arrange to check in regularly with them. This doesn’t just mean posting photos on Facebook or Instagram, because sending an email, text message, or making a quick call can be more effective and personal.
Get to know the hotel or hostel proprietor and staff if you’re heading out on any lengthy trips alone, especially to remote or wilderness destinations, along with information about the travel route and when you’re expected to return. Consider making sure people you know - or get to know and can trust - are fully aware of your travel itinerary before you depart.
Make Sure Valuables Stay Safe
There’s no need to take everything with you when heading out into the big wide world. Always make sure your passport is in a safe location, especially when heading out and about. Leave the passport itself in your hotel or hostel safe, if available, or with the concierge in safe storage. Carry a photocopy of the passport data page instead. Leaving a copy at home with someone is also a good idea.
Only take essentials with you when travelling anywhere and keep them safe about your person. Split things up a little by keeping a little cash in your wallet or purse, with extra money and cards in a money pouch or inside pocket, somewhere they can’t easily be grabbed. Make sure to keep identification and travel documents separately from your cash and cards.
We hope you find the above tips useful. Although nobody wants to find themselves in an unsafe situation when traveling, it always helps to be prepared, and it means that should something unpleasant happen, you can deal with it.
Stephanie Glover, Senior Consultant at Pagefield Global strategic reputation consultancy talks Lawyer Monthly through newly proposed guidelines for media access to courts that was issued by the HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) at the end of last month and which raised larger issues.
Developed by a working group involving media representatives it aims to foster a cooperative relationship between court staff and journalists, acting as an accessible first point of reference for court and tribunal staff who handle information requests from the media or arrange media access to trials.
As part of a wider initiative to promote open justice alongside the new guide, Courts Minister Lucy Frazer chaired a roundtable discussion earlier this month with newspaper representatives, broadcasters and online media platforms to discuss ways of enhancing court access.
But what impact will this new guide have?
Divided sections containing detailed jurisdictional advice the guide covers the handling of routine media enquiries as well as queries about high profile cases. It expressly recognises the fact that such requests are often made under the pressure of production deadlines and stresses the need for timely and relevant responses wherever possible.
One of the key issues is fair access to courtrooms and seating. The guide advises capping seating allocations by organisation and ensuring local media representation, and for high profile trials and hearings recommends contingency plans for seating at the risk of sudden influx of media interest.
Court staff are often faced with numerous information requests from the media at short notice and matching media demand for seats is a particularly sensitive issue.
Court services and media reporting are both becoming increasingly digitised and the data protection laws that came into effect in May 2018 have caused confusion over what information court staff can legally provide to journalists.
The guide clarifies that media representatives do not need to apply for permission to text, email or use social media in court. Court staff are also expressly instructed that they can disclose certain kinds of information without breaching data protection legislation.
The promotion of press freedom must always be balanced against the rights of litigants and accused persons to a fair trial.
Critics might argue that more legal reporting increases the risk of prejudice to the jury in the context of a criminal trial, even in spite of rigorous laws against contempt of court.
The promotion of press freedom must always be balanced against the rights of litigants and accused persons to a fair trial.
It remains to be seen whether the recommendations in the guide will actually achieve better media access to the courts or if they will trigger a countervailing increase in applications for the conduct of private hearings (i.e. not open to the public) or for orders restricting disclosure of court documents or other information. This would not only detract from open justice but would increase both the administrative burden on courts and the costs of litigation.
Whatever the outcome, courts are now evidently more in the public eye than ever. Media coverage of legal proceedings carries huge reputational risks for the parties involved and getting professional reputational advice is essential to mitigate the risk of lasting damage.
Below Francine Ryan, lecturer in law and member of the Open Justice Centre at The Open University, talks Lawyer monthly through some of the key tech skills you should get your head around.
Technology is shaping the practice of law and changing how legal services are being delivered. Lawyers entering practice today require an understanding of the relationship between law and technology. So law students need to work to develop relevant skills and competencies to market themselves to law firms, being able to demonstrate technological acumen is an increasingly valuable addition to the portfolio of skills that will help your application stand out.
Law students need to work to develop relevant skills and competencies to market themselves to law firms.
To build your technology skills set, start with the basics- you should be able to demonstrate proficiency in common office software such as Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat and Connect. Mastering these functions provides a foundation from which to build on. Law school is a great opportunity to familiarise and practice using technology tools to give you confidence to engage with new forms of technology.
Here are some functions to practise now:
In practice, you will draft a variety of different documents including letters, agreements, contracts and court forms, being confident in advanced find and replace, review tools, track changes and formatting in Microsoft Word is essential. You may be collaborating with colleagues through Practice Management Systems, Office 365 and Google Drive, knowing how to use those tools is critical for future success. Find an opportunity to work with a student colleague to create and edit a document, spreadsheet or presentation using Google Docs.
Understanding how to create an effective presentation or poster in Microsoft PowerPoint and or Prezi is important, you might be involved in a client presentation or a training event. There are lots of tutorials on YouTube which will help you refine your skills.
You may be called upon to build a database or create a project plan, learning about the features and functionality of Microsoft Excel will make you more confident imputing and working with data.
Most law students will be very familiar with email and text but there are other tools that facilitate team communication like Slack, Bitrix24, Yammer, Skype, Quip and Trello Students need to be confident using online communication tools to effectively collaborate with colleagues.
Law students don’t need to have an in depth knowledge of every technology application but an important skill is the ability to think critically about the use of technology and how it will impact on clients.
Once you have mastered basic tech skills consider whether you want more advanced tech skills such as the ability to program/code. If you are interested a good place to start is Future Learn or edX both offer free courses in programming, coding, and data analysis. Understanding how digital technologies work and developing literacy in code helps to stand out in a crowded market place. If you not quite ready to develop your computational skills having an awareness of how legal technology is impacting on law is something that is achievable.
Law students don’t need to have an in depth knowledge of every technology application but an important skill is the ability to think critically about the use of technology and how it will impact on clients. Not every law student needs to know how to code but they do need to have a basic understanding of technology to communicate and work with the coder so they can identify the legal issues relating to its use.
AI is computer technology that aims to replicate intelligent human behaviour or to perform specific tasks that require human intelligence. AI is being used in law firms to review documents for discovery, legal research using automated searches of case law and legislation, contract and document analysis, proof reading and correcting documents. AI platforms are powering a range of virtual assistants such as Kim and Kira follow the links to understand how they work and how they are changing legal practice.
Blockchain is used in crypto-currencies you may be familiar with Bitcoin but Blockchain has enormous potential beyond a financial use, which is only starting to be realised. Smart contracts are an area in which blockchain networks can be used to automatically facilitate, execute and enforce the negotiation or performance of an agreement. A smart contract has been described as a computer programme that acts as an agreement- the terms are pre-programmed and it has the ability to self-execute and enforce. Have a look at Nxt which is an advanced blockchain platform.
Law firms will expect students to have basic tech skills, but in today’s fast moving legal landscape keeping up to date with how technology is changing legal practice is also essential. Law school is a great opportunity to refine your skills and gain some new ones- think about participating in a legal hackathon to get a real flavour of what the future holds!
From Equifax’s mishandling of America’s data to Facebook’s growing scandal, our data seems to be as secure as my teenage self.
Fortunately, there are ways to keep your data a little more secure. With these 5 tips, there will be no need to worry about your passwords or your maybe questionable browser history.
Face it, you probably don’t remember all your passwords. Nowadays you need to make an account for everything. I have 20 frequently used accounts and having to keep track of them all is a pain. Luckily, there is a simple solution to this: password managers.
With a password manager, you can keep all your passwords in one catalog on your browser or an app, so you don’t have to go through the frustration of locating one when you need it most. Password managers can also help you generate long, random passwords for each individual website or account. This way, you have a strong, unique password for each platform that are extremely easy to manage.
While not an end-all-be-all solution, password managers are convenient and secure. It’s never a bad idea to have one, and you don’t have to worry about losing your passwords ever again. Before you decide on which one to get, do some research on different password managers so you won’t have to panic like OneLogin did last year.
It’s not always independent hackers you need to worry about. Sometimes your internet provider enjoys snooping around your network and collecting data, like a racoon digging through your trash. Since snooping usually isn’t appreciated, some companies offer Virtual Private Network services that works something like a bandana over your identity.
With a VPN, your data is hidden and encrypted on its way to the internet and in between various nodes you may pass by. Your location is also hidden from third parties with a changed IP address.
Think of a Western movie. Whenever a character wanted to commit a crime, they would cover their face with a bandana as to hide their identity. A VPN is used in a similar fashion. Hopefully not the crime part though.
When you’re at the coffee shop enjoying a nice latte, you might decide to visit the internet on the shop’s Wi-Fi. The issue with this is that the connection is not secured, meaning that a hacker with the most basic gears could potentially see your data on the network, your passwords, search engine results, you name it.
With a VPN, your data is hidden and encrypted on its way to the internet and in between various nodes you may pass by. Your location is also hidden from third parties with a changed IP address.
While encryption sounds like a fancy technology for the tech savvy, you don’t need to be a professional to use encryption. To encrypt your traffic with a VPN is to send data through a ‘tunnel’ that makes content unreadable as it passes through the ‘tubes’. In a general sense, encryption is ‘locking’ data by jumbling it up with codes until a user enters the right key to decrypt it. This key can be a password, PIN, or any other form of login.
To encrypt your traffic with a VPN is to send data through a ‘tunnel’ that makes content unreadable as it passes through the ‘tubes’.
In fact, you probably use data encryption daily without even noticing. For example, data on an IPhone is encrypted as long as the passcode is not put in. Websites secured with HTTPS encrypt data it receives from you.
You could also download an encryption program to encrypt your files. Though, any file that is encrypted will take a little longer to open as it decrypts.
I cannot stress this point enough. Back up your data! If your computer ever gets infected with ransomware, malware, or a virus, your data is not just at risk of being stolen. Your data can be lost.
To avoid paying a hacker $100 or more to regain access to data that is held hostage by a ransomware, save a copy of your files on a trusted cloud drive or a separate storage hard drive. This saves you the headache and panic attack and your data stays secure.
We’ve all seen this form of security. Whether it’s Twitter asking you to activate two-factor authentication through text, or Steam asking you to download their app to activate it, two-factor authentication is increasing becoming a part of any secure login procedures.
With TFA, a hacker needs more than your password. They would need access to either your email, phone messages, or apps. Not only does the difficulty to gain access to your devices add a layer of security, this also buys you time to change your password before a malicious third party gets in. Activating TFA means you’ll have to take an extra step to log into your accounts every time, but the amplified protection is well worth the hassle.
Activating TFA means you’ll have to take an extra step to log into your accounts every time, but the amplified protection is well worth the hassle.
It’s easy to disregard the importance of security until something bad happens to you. The 5 tips listed above are only a fraction of what you can do to maintain digital privacy on the internet, but the most important thing is to start acting. Take stock of where your cybersecurity might be the most vulnerable and start strengthening your barriers from there. A password manager takes only 10-15 minutes to set up and a two-factor authentication 1-2 minutes. These apps are so handy and easy to use that there’s no excuse to leave your digital doors wide open.
The majority of companies will change their brand protection strategies to cover new cybersecurity and fraud threats in the next year, according to new research by MarkMonitor. In addition, 72% said that brand protection is gaining attention across their organisation as a result of online threats.
The research polled marketing decision makers from a cross section of industries, and five countries.
Over half of respondents identified the dark web dangers as a risk to business, and 69% said that cyber threats influence their domain name strategies.
Research found that the role of brand protection is shifting: 46% of brands said there will be more involvement from board level, while a further 46% said more involvement from IT and security teams is needed.
“This is a significant step forward for online brand protection, especially considering that nearly two-thirds of respondents believe infringement has increased over the last year,” says Chrissie Jamieson, VP of marketing, MarkMonitor. “The fact remains that brand protection is gaining more attention within organisations because the threats to reputation, customers and the bottom line are increasing at pace, and this is being recognised at the highest levels.
“Coupled with fast-developing cyber threats, brands are recognising that the landscape is changing and they need to find the most effective ways to keep themselves and their customers safe, whether that’s through technology, working with a brand protection partner, hiring staff with the right skills, or a combination of all three.”
Brands aren’t just concerned with the present — in the next five years brand protection budgets will mainly be spent on hiring the right people, safeguarding domain names and company IP, fighting phishing and piracy, and implementing new brand protection technologies. They will also be incorporating new technologies into their brand protection strategies, including:
(Source: MarkMonitor)
Gambling and more specifically, casino games, have long been a favourite pastime for people all over the world. Whether it's the more traditional games such as blackjack and roulette which take ones fancy or newer, innovative online slots, there's something for everyone within the confines of the casino. As can be seen over at https://www.statista.com/statistics/217772/casino-gaming-market-in-the-uk/, the casino industry has continued to enjoy significant growth over the last few years, reaching $1353 million in revenue in the UK alone in just one year. As a result, the government has slowly started to introduce the idea of responsible gambling through a number of different measures and regulations. Bookmakers are now encouraged (and required by law) to make sure that customers are both having fun and playing within their own means.
It's no secret that companies are now more aware than ever before of the effect that public perception has on their business. November of this year saw the launch of the now annual "Responsible Gambling Week", with over 190 top organisations supporting the event. In addition to this, the UK government recently announced plans to bring changes to gambling laws forward by six months to April 2019, per https://www.ft.com/content/365db42a-e83d-11e8-8a85-04b8afea6ea3. The game of roulette features heavily in the reforms, owing to the fact that it remains one of the most popular traditional casino games throughout the gambling landscape. The changes include a limit of £2 on roulette machine stakes, which is sure to have a knock-on effect on the online casino industry. Many top bookmakers now offer a range of different roulette variations, including 20p roulette, European roulette and Triple Bonus Spin roulette, as seen on https://games.paddypower.com/c/roulette, and the online casino industry remains one of the most rapidly growing markets within the gambling sector.
Despite the government's plans to bring their changes forward six months, bookmakers largely outperformed a sliding stock exchange in the latest FTSE 100 figures. Goldman Sachs suggested that several weeks of political debate had created uncertainty, and the latest news has brought a "benefit of clarity" which has "outweighed the small effect on betting sector cash flows." Just as is the case with any other industry, the big players within the casino landscape are doing everything in their power to demonstrate to their demographic that customer enjoyment and satisfaction is their top priority. The fact that the industry continues to thrive despite the aforementioned limits and reforms is proof that firms investing time and money into corporate responsibility will always win out in the long term.
Industries such as online casino have benefited massively from the increased popularity of smartphones and other mobile devices. With major bookmakers now populating app stores and enjoying more advertising space on conventional websites, it's easier than ever to place your bets online.
As a result, it's more important than ever that the necessary rules and regulations are employed in order to ensure that customers are getting the most out of their betting experience. It's difficult to predict where the online casino industry will go from here but with the right guidance and backing, there's no reason why the market can't continue to thrive for years to come.
In exiting the JCPOA, Trump declared the deal “defective” and commenced the reinstatement of the “highest level” of economic sanctions against Iran. Significantly, shortly after this announcement by the US, the EU stated that it intended to preserve the JCPOA, encouraging the Iranian Government not to allow the move to destroy it. Below, Azadeh Meskarian, a solicitor at Zaiwalla & Co, explains for Lawyer Monthly the context of the sanctions placed on Iran and the implications of the regime not only on Iran but in addition to the surrounding community. Furthermore, she considers whether these sanctions will achieve the success the Trump administration is hoping for.
The latest round of Trump administration sanctions against Iran came into force in early November with the announcement that these would be “the toughest sanctions regime ever imposed” – a decision that further complicates the relationship between Iran and foreign investors and heavily impacts the overall confidence in those with existing exposure or interests in the Iranian market.
So how do these sanctions work and what are the implications, not only for Iran, but also for the surrounding community? It is important to distinguish between primary and secondary sanctions.
Primary sanctions are those targeting US companies and their foreign subsidiaries as well as US citizens. The US further revoked all general and specific licences for US companies, their foreign subsidiaries and US citizens, which had enabled them to work with Iran.
All primary sanctions have snapped-back into effect. Limited licences applicable to: (a) aviation and the commercial passenger aircraft sector; (b) certain activities by US-owned or controlled foreign entities; (c) contingent contracts under the commercial passenger aircraft SLP; and (d) trade in Iranian origin trade and foodstuffs have ended and been replaced by wind-down provisions.
Of greater concern to non-US companies is the re-imposition of secondary sanctions targeting their operations in the Iranian market, these sanctions can potentially target anyone that deals with the Iranian market. This has resulted in many non-US entities pulling out of the Iranian market out of fears that they could face prosecutions and sanctions for breaching US sanctions. Some 50 companies and financial institutions have, since the US announcement, withdrawn from the Iranian market. This includes those who had formally entered the market such as Total, Airbus, Boeing, Hyundai Engineering and Construction and other companies that had entered into MOUs with an intention to invest in the Iranian market.
Some 50 companies and financial institutions have, since the US announcement, withdrawn from the Iranian market.
The US Administration’s 90-day wind-down period ended on 6th August, since when it has re-imposed secondary sanctions relating to:
The 180-day wind down period ended on 4th November, since when the US government has re-imposed secondary sanctions relating to:
Since 4th November, OFAC has also restored names on the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List that had been removed pursuant to the JCPOA, including those designated due to their affiliation with the Iranian government and financial sector. Given the continuing support for the JCPOA from the EU, China and Russia which have all agreed to assist Iran in ensuring the JCPOA continues to secure sufficient foreign investment and real economic relief for Iran; investors will have to continue to monitor the scene.
The European Union took significant steps to protect European businesses from the extra territorial impact of the US sanctions mainly by way of a Blocking Regulation (Regulation 2271/96) in June 2018. The Blocking Regulation entered into force in early August, making it illegal for EU businesses to comply with US sanctions and preventing the enforcement/recognition of any judgment or decision of a non-EU authority that gives effect to a blocked measure. With so many non-US businesses already having decided to exit the Iranian market, it is difficult to see the Blocking Regulation anything further than a symbolic move. Pursuant to guidance issued by the EU and understandably, businesses remain free to conduct their business as they see fit – including “whether to engage or not in an economic sector on the basis of their assessment of the economic situation.” There have been further announcements to create a Special Purpose Vehicle (“SPV”) in the form of a third-party institution that would handle the transactions between Iran and European companies trading with it. This SPV would have ideally existed outside the international banking system.
Companies seeking to do business in Iran will need to monitor what steps the US and the EU decide to take next to ensure they are protected throughout.
Nevertheless, attempts to formalize the SPV payment system in EU member states to circumvent sanctions has so far been unsuccessful: playing host to the SPV no doubt increases exposure to secondary sanctions. Although it is hard to see how the US will ultimately succeed in enforcing sanctions against non-US companies, confidence in the Iranian market has as a result decreased, significantly.
There is much that remains unknown on the way ahead. Companies seeking to do business in Iran will need to monitor what steps the US and the EU decide to take next to ensure they are protected throughout.
Research commissioned by Zaizi, a leader in end-to-end digital services, found over half of government departments are seeing slow or partial progress in digitising their processes, with even less exploring automation. As a result, government digital transformation projects are not as efficient as they could be and not future-proofed to take advantage of emerging technologies and meet the ever-rising expectations of the British public.
The reason why departments are seeing poor progress could be because government departments are lacking the skills, expertise and vision needed to execute robust digital transformation projects. Legacy infrastructure is also stagnating progress with 65% of the respondents saying their existing ICT infrastructure is hindering or partially hindering the success of implementing digital services and automating their processes.
The survey also found that 50 of digital transformation projects are overlooking technologies that include: Internet of Things (IoT), Robotic Process Automation, Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence.
When asked if their organisation had the skills and knowledge to apply these technologies, respondents replied overwhelmingly that they either ‘didn’t know’ or had none. Robotic Process Automation scored the highest for no skills (33), whilst a quarter (26) said that they had ‘some’ skills to implement IoT. 39 did not know if they had the skills and knowledge to apply AI.
In contrast, respondents were more confident about their ability to implement more established technology platforms such as cloud services and Software-as-a-Service - with 44 and 29 respectively stating they had ‘quite a lot of’ skills and knowledge in these areas.
Aingaran Pillai, CEO, Zaizi, commented: “Every organisation is a software company of some guise in today’s world, yet this research indicates that government is yet to embrace this mindset. However, it’s hard to do so when you don’t have the skills and expertise to imagine digital transformation projects not just in the context of today, but also tomorrow. The risk is that current projects will become a burden on the public purse because in five years’ time - or less - they will need to be revamped.
“Brexit looms large on the horizon and will compound the digital limbo government departments find themselves in. In the short term, it will need to digitise rapidly and smartly to minimise disruption to how Government does business, but longer term now is the time to think more creatively about how this digital chasm is addressed from early talent capture through to embracing new ways of working,” Pillai continued.
Other key findings include:
Pillai concludes: “Digital transformation is complex - the pace of technical change has never been so great. That’s why it is imperative that agility is built into projects so that in the future they can flex to incorporate new platforms with ease and we can avoid the dark days of vendor lock-ins that strangled public sectors’ ability to innovate. Culture is a key element to delivering the digital agenda, so that over half thought there was a resistance to change is concerning - especially given that knowledge transfer and empowering employees (65) were considered high ranking success factors. The intent and the will are there, but there is still much work to be done on the digital agenda.”
(Source: Zaizi)
In the early hours of Friday morning (23 Nov), the Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) released its first report reviewing Inheritance Tax (IHT). Ben Taylor, solicitor at Roythornes Solicitors, shares his initial thoughts on the report and what it could mean for 2019.
Despite less than 5% of UK estates being subjected to inheritance tax, it is apparent from the report that many people are concerned about it and unsure whether it applies to them. In fact, the report notes that IHT is seen as the most unfair of 11 major taxes and the process described as complex, stressful and time-consuming.
Whilst there is clearly a perception that IHT applies more often than it actually does, the report shows that there is an increasing number of people subject to IHT. The OTS puts this down to increasing house prices and a freeze on the value of the Nil Rate Band (NRB).
An analysis of HMRC data shows that higher value estates appeared to suffer lower rates IHT, which is put down to increased application of reliefs. Relievable property such as shareholdings and farm properties appear to make up the vast majority of estates where the value exceeds £6 million but significant tax reliefs, such as the Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR), are allowed affecting the rate of tax.
Whilst these reliefs don’t help with the public perception that IHT favours the wealthy, it is worth bearing in mind that they were introduced to ensure that a business is affected as little as possible by the death of its owner. The business will therefore continue contributing to the economy and not be broken up by inheritance tax - which particularly applies to farming businesses.
Another key feature of the report related to digitalisation. One of the principal recommendations by the OTS is for the government to introduce a fully integrated digital IHT reporting system which is unsurprising given the recent focus on ‘making tax digital’. However, it is recognised that such a service would take time to implement so we could be expecting a revision of the IHT forms in the meantime.
The OTS also recommended that the process for tax payment be streamlined and consideration be given to extending the payment deadline. Again, this is not surprising as the current time limit of six months has been criticised by the public and professionals alike.
The first OTS report is incredibly detailed and offers a number of recommendations. Given that this is the first of three reports looking into issues affecting the IHT regime, I would be very surprised if we don’t see a considerable shake up of inheritance tax in 2019.
