Now more than ever, technology is influencing the way we do business, communicate, move through and around the world, access and manage our homes, receive and administer healthcare, make purchases, secure information, and protect our most valuable property. Morrison Foerster keeps pace with this rapidly evolving landscape across our internationally recognized corporate, finance, intellectual property, and litigation practices. MoFo Tech brings together our insights relating to fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and as-a-service technologies, driverless cars, drones, fintech, computer hardware and software, the Internet of Things, semiconductors, and telecommunications. The MoFo Tech blog offers real-time, in-depth analyses of the trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry.<h2>ABOUT MORRISON FOERSTER</h2>Morrison Foerster is a leading global law firm that transforms complexity into advantage for its clients. Our clients include some of the largest financial institutions, banks, consulting and accounting firms, and Fortune 100, technology, and life sciences companies. Highlighting the firm’s commitment to client service, leadership in market-changing deals and impact litigation, and values-based culture, Morrison Foerster has been repeatedly recognized as one of the top 10 firms on The American Lawyer’s A-List. Year after year, the firm receives significant recognition from Chambers and The Legal 500 across their various guides, including Global, USA, Asia‑Pacific, Europe, UK, Latin America, and FinTech Legal. Our lawyers passionately care about delivering legal excellence while living our values. Morrison Foerster has a long-standing commitment to creating a culture that respects and celebrates differences, while providing an inclusive environment. The firm has achieved Mansfield Certification Plus since 2018 as a result of successfully reaching at least 30 percent women, communities of color, and LGBTQ+ lawyer representation in a notable number of current leadership roles and committees. The firm also has a long history of commitment to the community and society through providing pro bono legal services, including litigating for civil rights and civil liberties, improving public education and fostering the wellbeing of children, advocating for veterans, promoting international human rights, enforcing the right to asylum, and safeguarding the environment.

Social

Search

testimage.jpg

MoFo Tech

Scott Llewellyn’s practice focuses on complex litigation in federal and state courts around the country, with an emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes. Over the past decade, he has worked on some of the most significant, high–profile IP cases involving technology for televisions, smartphones, and self–driving cars, relying on 40 years of experience with computer hardware and software. Scott also has significant experience with business divorce cases before courts and arbitrators, involving a mix of trade secret, patent, tort, and contract claims relating to technology development and implementation.Scott also has successfully tried general commercial arbitration and agency matters, briefed and argued various appeals in federal appellate court, and tried more than 20 cases for the Denver City Attorney’s office, most of them jury trials.Scott also has an active pro bono practice, having worked on a variety of criminal and immigration appeals, and having represented Colorado criminal defense and mental health organizations in high–profile suits against the state of Colorado for violations of the constitutional rights of defendants.At MoFo, Scott serves on the board of the Morrison & Foerster Foundation. In the broader legal community, he serves on the boards of the Colorado Lawyers Committee and Drop in the Bucket (a charity that builds wells and sanitation systems in sub–Saharan Africa).After law school, Scott clerked for the Honorable Clarence A. Brimmer, District of Wyoming, and the Honorable Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Ninth Circuit. He was also previously an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center.

llewellyn_scott_blog_150x150.png

llewellyn_scott_common_640x280.jpg

llewellyn_scott_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

llewellyn_scott_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

llewellyn_scott_social_600x600.jpg

Partner

Scott Llewellyn’s practice involves complex litigation before state and federal courts around the country, with an emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes for high-tech companies, to which he brings more than 35 years of experience with computer hardware and software, in particular relating to the processing and transmission of audio, video, voice, and other types of data. Mr. Llewellyn has also tried commercial arbitration and agency matters; briefed and argued various appeals in federal appellate court; and tried more than 20 cases for the Denver city attorney’s office, most of them jury trials.

Scott F. Llewellyn

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

MoFo Tech brings together legal insights and in-depth analyses on trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry, covering fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and SaaS technologies, driverless cars, drones, FinTech, computer hardware and software, the IoT, semiconductors, and telecommunications.

Mofo Tech testimage

Announcements

Welcome to the MoFo Tech Blog

Blog - Blog Disclaimer

Blog - Terms of Use

Blog - Privacy Policy

Blog - Attorney Advertising

morrison-foerster-blog-logo.png

Provides insights and reports on the most current class actions lawsuits and product liability issues that affect consumer-facing companies.

Class Dismissed Blog

Class Dismissed

In-depth analysis of developments and trends impacting government contracting.

Government Contract Insights Blog

Government Contract Insights

Government Contracts Insights Blog

Govcon

News and thought leadership from lawyers who are adding value to the legal profession and the communities we call home.

  External-Link

MoFo + Blog

MoFo+ Together

MoFo Tech brings together legal insights and in-depth analyses on trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry, covering fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and SaaS technologies, driverless cars, drones, FinTech, computer hardware and software, the IoT, semiconductors, and telecommunications.

MoFo Tech

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

MoFo Tech Blog - RSS

Stay Connected

At the Intersection of Technology, Law, and Business

At the Intersection of Technology, Law, and Business

Morrison Foerster - Footer

Blogs -  Home Button

Home

Blog - Topics

Telecommunications

Artificial Intelligence

Asia

Cloud Services + SaaS

European Union

Financings

Fintech

Hardware

Intellectual Property

Internet of Things

Litigation

Mergers + Acquisitions

Privacy + Data Security

Regulatory

Software

Tech Talks

Topics

Blog - Editors

Editors

Blog - About

About

Blog - Subscribe

Subscribe

More

Japan’s Approach to AI Regulation in 2025

Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements for Prior Art Under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)

AI Agent as a Service in Medtech - Key Considerations for Commercial Contracts

D.C. Circuit Holds that Works Created Solely by AI are Not Copyrightable

Navigating Inventorship in the Era of AI-Assisted Drug Discovery

When companies employ artificial intelligence technologies they have to be mindful of the legal and ethical problems those technologies might cause. While the scope of legal concerns surrounding AI technologies’ impact is broad, of particular concern are instances of unlawful bias and discrimination, privacy law violations, and legal liability resulting from harm caused by the AI technology.The good news is that corporate AI policies can help companies to encourage compliance and guide decisions about the acceptable use of AI technologies. This article describes the points that corporate AI policies should address.Read our piece in <a href="http://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/managing-corporate-ai/">Corporate Compliance Insights</a>.

sharron_stephanie_blog_150x150.png

sharron_stephanie_common_640x280.jpg

sharron_stephanie_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

sharron_stephanie_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

sharron_stephanie_social_600x600.jpg

Stephanie assists companies with technology and life sciences transactions, representing both private and public companies, from emerging growth through the Fortune 50. In particular, Stephanie focuses on helping companies that leverage data through technology in structuring their business and commercial transactions.

Stephanie Sharron

Stephanie Sharron is partner in the Palo Alto office and a member of the firm’s Technology Transactions Group. Clients turn to Ms. Sharron for advice on how to leverage data through technology and the related issues that apply to their business models in light of the rapid changes in business, technology and law.

Stephanie Lynn Sharron

mofotechblog-av-ai-600x295-bluecar.jpg

Managing Corporate AI

USDOT Issues New Policy on Development and Deployment of Automated Vehicle Technologies

mofotechblog-av-ai-600x295-bluecar

When companies employ artificial intelligence technologies they have to be mindful of the legal and ethical problems those technologies might cause. While the s

Managing Corporate AI

As John Carlin notes in his op-ed for the New York Times, Russia has become “the world’s largest safe haven for cybercriminals.”  John, chair of Morrison & Foerster’s Global Risk + Crisis Management Group and former chief of staff to Robert Mueller, explains that while Mr. Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian nationals accused of meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election may have dominated news headlines, Russian cybercrime — and the Russian government’s harboring of cybercriminals — is nothing new. In the piece, John outlines the magnitude of Russian cyber attacks, reasons why the Russian government continues to shield a “who’s who” of the world’s most wanted hackers, and steps the Trump administration can take to hold Russia accountable and protect American companies. Read John's <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/29pSCmZM8ki94lxKcBP5_N">op-ed</a>.

mofotechblog-software-600x295-tunnel.jpg

Putin is Running a Destructive Cybercrime Syndicate Out of Russia

Don’t Get Caught by the Phisherman’s Hook This Tax Season

507065943

As John Carlin notes in his op-ed for the New York Times, Russia has become “the world’s largest safe haven for cybercriminals.”  John, chair of Morrison & Foer

Putin is Running a Destructive Cybercrime Syndicate Out of Russia

Companies acquiring or selling businesses that leverage data through technology face special challenges and risks. Focus and prioritization can assist both business principals and lawyers effectively manage these concerns.  This article offers answers to five key questions toward achieving that end.Read the full article in The M&A Journal <a href="https://media2.mofo.com/v3/assets/blt5775cc69c999c255/bltb2175331524d0a8c/627317c8a1a1dd2aa9f6ca66/180711-five-legal-risks-technology-ma.pdf">here</a>.

Fertility Center Litigation

Fitbit

MicroPort

Leading Healthcare, Pharmaceutical, and Medical Device Company

Lethal Injection Matters – Major Pharmaceutical Company

Pain Pump Matters – Large Pharmaceutical Company

Major Technology Company

Leading Chemical Company

Security Device Company

In re Air Crash Near Peixoto de Azevedo, Brazil

bosman_erin_blog_150x150.png

bosman_erin_common_640x280.jpg

bosman_erin_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

bosman_erin_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

bosman_erin_social_600x600.jpg

Co-Chair, Litigation Department

Erin Bosman is the global co-chair of Morrison Foerster’s litigation department. Erin is also the founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence group and former chair of the Complex Litigation + Advisement practice group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin M. Bosman

Erin Bosman is the Global Co-Chair of Morrison Foerster’s Litigation Department. Erin is also the founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence Group and former chair of the Complex Litigation + Advisement Practice Group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin Bosman

mofotechblog-m-and-a-600x295-handshake.jpg

Five Key Legal Risks for Data-Centric Technology M&A

Chinese Interest High Despite Uncertainty

480477280

Companies acquiring or selling businesses that leverage data through technology face special challenges and risks. Focus and prioritization can assist both busi

Five Key Legal Risks for Data-Centric Technology M&A

On July 5, 2018, the European Parliament rejected the proposed amendments to the new Copyright Directive: Article 11, which attempts to protect press publications from impermissible digital use, and Article 13, which attempts to protect online content from impermissible use by online content-sharing service providers. While these proposals are mostly well intentioned to secure creators of content a fair remuneration for the content’s online use, they are less likely to incentivize Internet giants like Google to pay for content and more likely to put smaller Internet companies and startups out of business.Background – Modernizing Copyrights for the EU’s Digital Single MarketIn May 2015, the EU Commission (the “Commission”) launched a strategy for the creation of a Digital Single Market (DSM) in the EU. On September 14, 2016, as part of this strategy, the Commission published a proposal for a new Copyright Directive aimed at modernizing the existing copyright rules in the EU to meet the challenges of digitalization. On June 20, 2018, the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament (EP) adopted a proposal introducing material amendments to the Commission’s proposed directive (<a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/JURI/DV/2018/06-20/Compromiseamendments_CopyrightDirective_EN.pdf">the so called Axel Voss proposal</a>). Last week the EP rejected this amendment proposal and sent it back to the committee for re-discussion and revision (see <a href="https://twitter.com/Senficon/status/1014814460488413185">Julia Reda’s Tweet</a>) sharing the concerns expressed by many stakeholders with regard to the proposed Articles 11 and 13 in particular.The EP is expected to vote on a revised version of the amendment proposal in September 2018 at the earliest. If it approves the revised version, the policymakers – the EP, the Council of the European Union, and the Commission – will enter into inter-institutional negotiations to reach a compromise on their different positions. The adaptation of such a final compromise for a new Copyright Directive is expected at the end of 2018 or beginning of 2019 at the earliest. The EU Member States will then have a transposition period of at least 12 months (as proposed by the Commission) or 24 months (as proposed by the Council) to implement the new Copyright Directive into national law.Confronting the ControversiesThe most controversial provisions discussed among the three EU institutions and the different stakeholders in the industries are (i) the introduction of an exclusive neighboring right for e-publishers requiring online service providers (such as online news aggregators and search engines) to obtain (and pay for) the e-publisher consents to copy and display snippets or small extracts of their news content that may otherwise not be subject to copyright protection (Art. #11) and (ii) the introduction of obligations for online platform providers that host, optimize, and give access to the public to user-uploaded content, (called online content sharing service providers) to license, from the respective right owners, copyright-protected works contained in the user-uploaded content and to take measures preventing copyright-infringing content from being available on their platforms (Art. #13).Both Article 11 and Article 13, target prominent online service providers (such as Google News, Google Search, and YouTube) that (i) generate advertising revenues on their websites and apps by either displaying to their users snippets of news content linking to the respective e-publications or (ii) host and display to the public content uploaded by their users including music, films, and photos. The problem with such user-generated content is that some users upload copyright protected works without the owners’ consents and thereby infringe their copyrights. News publishers and entertainment companies (such as music labels, music publishers and film companies) have been arguing that these online service providers make profits by exploiting their content without their permission and without paying the creators of such content a fair remuneration. Both provisions aim to oblige these providers to obtain licenses from the copyright owners for these forms of use of their content and to pay them a fair and appropriate license fee.Article 11Germany and Spain introduced similar protection rights for press publishers some years ago without achieving the intended results. In Spain, Google ceased its Google News service altogether to avoid paying the compulsory license fee. In Germany, Google managed to cause all news publishers to grant Google News a zero price license while the responsible collecting society, VG Media, only collected EUR 715,000 from 2014 to 2017 from other online service providers for the more than 100 news publishers it represents while creating legal costs of EUR 7.6 million for litigation in this matter during the same time period. A <a href="https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/4776/response/15356/attach/6/Doc1.pdf">study</a> ordered by the Commission but never published also indicates that the proposed neighbouring right is not an appropriate instrument to increase the revenues of the news publishers. This study also suggests that most European news publishers running on advertising revenue rather than as paid news services actually benefit from the user traffic they receive through online aggregator websites (which is the reason why most news publishers in Europe do not wall their news content against search engines and news aggregators though this is technically possible). Given this history, it seems very questionable that Article 11 will cause Internet giants such as Google to pay news publishers for news snippets. Instruments incentivising online service providers to collaborate with news publishers in marketing their news content may be more beneficial for them.Article 13According to the rejected proposal, online-content sharing service providers perform copyright-relevant acts of use of copyright-protected works contained in user-uploaded content (i.e., performs an act of communication to the public) requiring these providers to obtain the copyright owners’ authorization under EU copyright law (see Art. #3 of 2001/29/EC Copyright Directive). Therefore, these providers are obliged to “conclude fair and appropriate licensing agreements with the right holders” of the protected works. The rejected proposal takes the position that these online content-sharing platforms are not subject to the “safe harbor” otherwise applies to host provider platforms under Article 14 of the e-Commerce Directive as long as they are not aware of the infringing content. Providers that do not have a license agreement with the copyright owners would be obliged to prevent their users from uploading any content that contains unlicensed copyrighted third party works by taking “appropriate and proportionate measures.” Though this does not explicitly include an obligation to install and operate automated upload filters, employing such upload filters would be the only feasible solution to comply with this obligation given the vast number of content files uploaded on these platforms daily. Internet giants such as Google (the owner of YouTube) have already invested millions of Euros in deploying such filtering systems. For them it will be rather easy to optimize what they already have in place to fulfil such obligation. It is therefore very questionable whether Article 13 would urge these providers to enter into any license agreements with music and film companies for user uploaded content and to pay them a license fee going beyond the ad revenue share monetization model some of them currently offer the right owners for displayed user generated content that they claim is their property. But will the European online service providers hosting user-generated content be able to make such investments for upload filter systems? And what about start-ups with business models in this area? There may be many good intentions behind this proposal, but it may backfire to the European creative and technology sectors, weaken competitiveness, and leave artists and other creators of content as well as consumers in Europe with less choice and diversity.

DocuSign, Inc

enercity AG

SoftBank Vision Fund

TDK and its subsidiary EPCOS

Tele Columbus

United Internet/1&1

ehle-kristina-blogheadshot.jpg

ehle_kristina_common_640x280.jpg

ehle_kristina_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

ehle_kristina_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

ehle_kristina_social_600x600.jpg

Kristina has more than 20 years of experience advising clients across many industries, including the software, internet, mobility, media, and consumer electronics industries, with a particular focus o

Kristina Ehle

Kristina Ehle has more than 20 years of experience advising clients across many industries, including the software, internet, mobility, media, and consumer electronics industries, with a particular focus on technology-driven and IP-heavy transactions.

mofotechblog-litigation-600x295-scales.jpg

European Parliament Voted 318 to 278 Against the Amendment Proposal for a Copyright Directive for the Digital Single Market

California Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Whistleblower Claims Under California Labor Code Section 1102.5

638601140

On July 5, 2018, the European Parliament rejected the proposed amendments to the new Copyright Directive: Article 11, which attempts to protect press publicatio

European Parliament Voted 318 to 278 Against the Amendment Proposal for a Copyright Directive for the Digital Single Market

The European Union’s legislators have reached an agreement on the revision of the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD). The reform aims at providing a uniform legal and market framework for different types of video streaming services provided via the Internet, and a more level playing field for all stakeholders. It introduces new advertising rules and a quota on the provision of European content, as well as provisions to secure enhanced protection for minors and to suppress “hate speech”.Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/yaw8Co268mtQwPQZCV8h69">client alert</a>.

mofotechblog-software-600x295-code-2.jpg

Digital Single Market Update: Revision of the European Union’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive

Court Allows Microsoft to Challenge Secrecy of User Data Requests

629285904

The European Union’s legislators have reached an agreement on the revision of the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD). The reform aims at providin

Digital Single Market Update: Revision of the European Union’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive

On June 6, 2018, the Commercial Court of Vienna decided in favor of private broadcaster Puls4 and determined that YouTube qualified as directly liable for copyright infringing video uploads of its users. If maintained, the decision would obligate YouTube (and indirectly other major online platforms) to perform a content check upon upload instead of only removing copyright infringing content upon notification (“notice-and-takedown”). Austrian case law is not binding for other EU member states, but the Commercial Court’s judgment denying YouTube the application of the Host Provider Privilege under EU law might still encourage similar decisions based on the same line of argument.Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Cy6BC73WYMuw2wE9tBccCy">client alert</a>.

stuetzle_christiane_blog_150x150.png

stuetzle_christiane_common_640x280.jpg

stuetzle_christiane_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

stuetzle_christiane_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

stuetzle_christiane_social_600x600.jpg

Christiane Stuetzle is a partner in Morrison Foerster's German office in Berlin and Co-Chair of the firm's Global Film & Entertainment Practice.

Christiane Stuetzle

Christiane Stuetzle is a partner of Morrison Foerster (International) LLP, based in the Berlin office. She is the Co-Chair of the Global Film & Entertainment Practice of Morrison & Foerster. She is a Certified Specialist for Copyright and Media Law & Arbitrator on the International Arbitration Panel of the IFTA (Independent Film & Television Alliance).

christoph_wagner_blog_150x150.png

christoph_wagner_common_640x280.jpg

christoph_wagner_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

christoph_wagner_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

christoph_wagner_social_600x600.jpg

Co-Chair Global Film & Entertainment Practice

Christoph has more than 25 years of experience as an M&A and regulatory lawyer in the telecommunications, media, and technology industries. He focuses particularly on complex transactions and strategi

Christoph Wagner

Dr. Christoph Wagner is a partner in the Berlin office and Co-Chair of the firm’s global media group. Dr. Wagner is a leading TMT, M&A and regulatory lawyer, with a particular focus on transactions and on strategic regulatory advice in the media and communications industries.

mofotechblog-litigation-600x295-gavel.jpg

Copyrights, Internet: YouTube Decision May Obligate Content Check on Upload

The Madden Saga Continues: On Remand, Madden Survives Summary Judgment and District Court Certifies Class

637294178

On June 6, 2018, the Commercial Court of Vienna decided in favor of private broadcaster Puls4 and determined that YouTube qualified as directly liable for copyr

Copyrights, Internet: YouTube Decision May Obligate Content Check on Upload

In a widely anticipated decision, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that the government must obtain a warrant to acquire customer location information maintained by cellular service providers, at least where that information covers a period of a week or more. The case, Carpenter v. United States, has been closely watched by tech companies and privacy experts. The opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, immediately enshrines greater protections for certain forms of location data assembled by third parties and represents a growing discomfort on the Court with the so-called “third-party doctrine”—a line of cases holding that a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records that he or she voluntarily discloses to a third party. In the longer run, there will likely be further litigation over whether the same logic should extend Fourth Amendment protections to other types of sensitive information in the hands of third parties as courts grapple with applying these principles in the digital age. Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/zKSICQW5jXiYgy9mSMt_9Z">client alert</a>.

litt_robert_blog_150x150.png

litt_robert_common_640x280.jpg

litt_robert_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

litt_robert_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

litt_robert_social_600x600.jpg

Of Counsel

Bob Litt, former General Counsel for the Director of National Intelligence, is of counsel and co-chair of Morrison & Foerster’s Global Risk and Crisis Management group. He advises industry-leading org

Robert S. Litt

Robert Litt

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Location Information Is Protected by the Fourth Amendment

In a widely anticipated decision, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that the government must obtain a warrant to acquire customer location information maintained by ce

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Location Information Is Protected by the Fourth Amendment

In this opinion piece, Morrison & Foerster Senior of Counsel Lokke Moerel challenges current predictions of the ways in which Artificial (AI) Intelligence is going to transform our jobs. Drawing a parallel with how using sat nav systems has impacted our navigation skills, she highlights the need for decision-making transparency and the need to rethink training in a world dominated by AI.Read <a href="https://media2.mofo.com/v3/assets/blt5775cc69c999c255/bltd16c9ce75069aa2d/627317c74886af2aa2be110a/180619-algorithms-routine-kills-expertise.pdf">the full article</a> (in English).