DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Confidentiality language may not throw you into the breach!

Posted on January 26, 2016 by Dissent

Lisa A. Carroll, Martin B. Robins, David G. Kern and James M. Fisher II of Fisher Broyles write:

A recent 11th Circuit case may – if followed elsewhere and not reversed by the US Supreme Court – reduce a company’s potential exposure under conventional contract language requiring sensitive materials to be held in confidence. Many companies have been concerned that such language would make them liable if they were the victim of a third-party data breach as opposed to an intentional disclosure by one of their employees or contractors.

[…]

In Silverpop v. Leading Market Technologies, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 196, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that losses associated with a data breach “are best characterized as consequential” and recovery on a contract claim should be barred when the contract contains a prohibition the award of consequential damages. The Court further found that negligence claims for such data breaches would be barred due to the lack of an applicable standard of care, as well as by the economic loss rule. Thus, absent proof of negligence or specific contractual language that is on-point, a data breach of itself does not constitute a breach of the obligation to take reasonable measures to safeguard confidential material under a confidentiality provision.

Read more on Lexology while I go pour some more coffee and try to find someone to translate this into non-legalese for me.

No related posts.

Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← OH: Community Mercy Health Partners notifies patients after vendor improperly discarded patient records (UPDATED)
UK: Brentwood c2c rail users have personal information shared with over 500 people after mistake →

4 thoughts on “Confidentiality language may not throw you into the breach!”

  1. proltorsalz says:
    February 6, 2016 at 7:02 am

    The Court further found that negligence claims for such data breaches would be barred due to the lack of an applicable standard of care, as well as by the economic loss rule. Where is this information?

    1. Dissent says:
      February 6, 2016 at 8:44 am

      I’m not sure I understand your question. What information are you asking about? The information that they say doesn’t exist or are you asking something else?

  2. IA Eng says:
    February 8, 2016 at 7:35 am

    Its a poorly wriiten original post.

    It seems to be wrapped around more than one issue.

    The way I read it is simple. Its main focus seems to be on insurance claims. The focus seems to be on “consequentia” damages.
    Looks like there would be no reward for normal losses, since breaches are considered “consequential” and if this “consequentia coverage” was not offered, or opted out, the company was not covered.

    Furthermore, it looks like NO coverage is provided if the company or entity is found negligent, due to the lack of an applicable standard of care, as well as by the economic loss rule.

    The sentence ” Thus, absent proof of negligence or specific contractual language that is on-point, a data breach of itself does not constitute a breach of the obligation to take reasonable measures to safeguard confidential material under a confidentiality provision. ”

    Is Rubbish. It talks in circles. Maybe if one Hits the hard stuff as they might have when they wrote that, one too can understand the twisted intent.

  3. Dissent says:
    February 8, 2016 at 1:11 pm

    It’s written for lawyers and their clients, and I think it’s actually raising an important point, because I have seen lawsuits attempt to claim breach of confidentiality clause due to a data breach. Could it have been written more clearly for a general public? Sure, but that’s not their target audience.

Comments are closed.

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Russia Jailed Hacker Who Worked for Ukrainian Intelligence to Launch Cyberattacks on Critical Infrastructure
  • Kentfield Hospital victim of cyberattack by World Leaks, patient data involved
  • India’s Max Financial says hacker accessed customer data from its insurance unit
  • Brazil’s central bank service provider hacked, $140M stolen
  • Iranian and Pro-Regime Cyberattacks Against Americans (2011-Present)
  • Nigerian National Pleads Guilty to International Fraud Scheme that Defrauded Elderly U.S. Victims
  • Nova Scotia Power Data Breach Exposed Information of 280,000 Customers
  • No need to hack when it’s leaking: Brandt Kettwick Defense edition
  • SK Telecom to be fined for late data breach report, ordered to waive cancellation fees, criminal investigation into them launched
  • Louis Vuitton Korea suffers cyberattack as customer data leaked

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • On July 7, Gemini AI will access your WhatsApp and more. Learn how to disable it on Android.
  • German court awards Facebook user €5,000 for data protection violations
  • Record-Breaking $1.55M CCPA Settlement Against Health Information Website Publisher
  • Ninth Circuit Reviews Website Tracking Class Actions and the Reach of California’s Privacy Law
  • US healthcare offshoring: Navigating patient data privacy laws and regulations
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • Google Trackers: What You Can Actually Escape And What You Can’t

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.