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

AI Transparency in Healthcare: Navigating a Changing Regulatory Landscape

Recentive: Federal Circuit’s Patent-Eligibility Guideposts for Machine-Learning Inventions

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

LinkedIN

Last week, the English High Court limited the availability of collective actions for data breaches to identifiable individuals who have suffered specific and discernible damage. In Richard Lloyd v Google LLC, the Court refused to allow a representative action alleging breach by Google of its duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 (“DP Act 1998”) to proceed. The Court reinforced the need to prove “damage” resulting from data privacy breaches in order to claim compensation and continued its policy of reluctance to permit English court procedures to be used to bring U.S.-style “opt-out” class actions.The case reinforces the need to prove damage or distress when bringing data breach claims, as well as the hurdles involved in bringing representative actions in the English courts. It will also be relevant to claims for breach of the new Data Protection Act 2018 (“DP Act 2018”) (which has largely replaced the DP Act 1998) and could therefore serve as a deterrent to future claims.Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/RXqWCVO0oWI89PvycyGBW8">client alert</a>.

Lloyd v Google – English High Court Blocks Collective Data Breach Claim

gillham_annabel_blog_150x150.png

gillham_annabel_common_640x280.jpg

gillham_annabel_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

gillham_annabel_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

gillham_annabel_social_600x600.jpg

Managing Partner, London

Annabel is a partner at Morrison Foerster and co-Managing Partner of the London office.

Annabel Gillham

mofotechblog-cloud-600x295-cloud1.jpg

Lloyd v Google – English High Court Blocks Collective Data Breach Claim

Google Ordered to Comply with Warrant for Foreign-Stored User Data

511541940

Last week, the English High Court limited the availability of collective actions for data breaches to identifiable individuals who have suffered specific and di

When Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1906 and Senate Bill 327 into law on Friday, California took major strides toward regulating the Internet of Things, the network of internet‑connected devices that includes everything from televisions and cars, to refrigerators, fitness trackers, and baby monitors. As of January 1, 2020, “reasonable security feature[s]” must be included in all “connected devices” sold or offered for sale in California, specifically those devices capable of connecting directly or indirectly to the internet and that have an IP or Bluetooth address.Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/gJ6YCG6QzAU9WPplfpXwMW">client alert</a>.

mofotechblog-iot-600x295-iot.jpg

New California IoT Law Requires Security for Connected Devices

The Unblinking Eye: Employee Monitoring in the IoT Era

mofotechblog-iot-600x295-iot

When Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1906 and Senate Bill 327 into law on Friday, California took major strides toward regulating the Internet of Thin

New California IoT Law Requires Security for Connected Devices

Just over a month after the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect, California passed its own sweeping privacy legislation, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018.The Act stands to affect countless global companies doing business in California, many of which recently devoted extensive time and resources to GDPR compliance. These companies must now determine what additional steps are necessary to comply with the Act by the time it takes effect on January 1, 2020.Join Socially Aware contributors Christine Lyon and Julie O’Neill on Thursday, September 20, 2018, for a deep dive into the key similarities and differences between the GDPR and the Act, as well as practical steps companies can take to assess gaps and chart a path to compliance. The areas they expect to cover include:<ul><li>Notice requirements</li><li>Access and portability</li><li>Deletion</li><li>Opt-outs</li><li>Discrimination</li></ul>

oneill_julie_blog_150x150.png

oneill_julie_common_640x280.jpg

oneill_julie_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

oneill_julie_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

oneill_julie_social_600x600.jpg

Clients seek out Julie because of her practical advice on cutting-edge issues at the intersection of privacy and consumer protection laws. She provides clients with practical solutions to compliance c

Julie O'Neill

Clients seek out Julie because of her practical advice on cutting-edge issues at the intersection of privacy and consumer protection laws. She provides clients with practical solutions to compliance challenges around a wide variety of both online and offline privacy issues, including tracking, interest-based advertising, geo-targeting and other mobile tracking, personalization, and cross-device tracking. Recognized in The Legal 500 US 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2020 and Chambers USA 2021 for her exceptional legal work, her clients praise her saying, “She is really good at giving practical, targeted advice and taking stock of what the risk profile of the client is, so that the advice is holistic.” (Chambers USA 2021).

mofotechblog-regulatory-600x295-computer-key.jpg

Privacy Across the Atlantic: Comparing the EU GDPR and California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 - A Morrison & Foerster Data Protection Webinar

Biometric Information as Personal Information In A Brave New World of Regulatory Compliance

mofotechblog-regulatory-600x295-computer-key

Just over a month after the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect, California passed its own sweeping privacy legislation, the California Con

Privacy Across the Atlantic: Comparing the EU GDPR and California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 - A Morrison & Foerster Data Protection Webinar

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

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>.

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

mofotechblog-litigation-600x295-scales.jpg

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

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

638601140

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).

moerel_lokke_blog_150x150.png

moerel_lokke_common_640x280.jpg

moerel_lokke_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

moerel_lokke_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

moerel_lokke_social_600x600.jpg

Senior Of Counsel

Among the world’s best-known privacy and cybersecurity advisers, Lokke Moerel is regularly called upon by some of the most sophisticated multinational organizations to confront their global privacy and ethical challenges. Lokke routinely offers guidance to clients when implementing new technologies and digital business models and assists them with their global cybersecurity incident response and regulatory investigations.

Lokke Moerel

Lokke Moerel is among the world’s best-known privacy lawyers. She advises companies on their global information handling governance, strategy, and compliance. “An authority on data protection matters” (Chambers 2014), Lokke is consistently ranked as a leader in data protection law in Chambers Global and Legal 500. She is also professor of global ICT law at Tilburg University, member of the Cyber Security Council of the Netherlands, the advisory body of the Dutch cabinet, and member of the Board of Trustees of WWF International.What do you like best about your work? I enjoy thinking about the data privacy issues and ethical dilemma’s presented by the new technologies, and helping companies decide on how to tune them and implement on a global basis, in an emerging regulatory environment.What do you enjoy doing in your free time? Travel with my husband and three children, the modern arts, but most of all, a good book!What individual most inspired you, and why? In my former EU-based firm, there were no female role- models (I was the first female partner with children) and partners step out at age 55. After moving to MoFo, I met women years older than me and fully at the forefront of their field. What an inspiration! I still have a whole career in front of me.

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

If Algorithms Take Over Routine Work, This Also Kills our Expertise

California Opens the Road to Fully Driverless Cars; Federal Policymaking Slowly Rolls Forward

692832470

In this opinion piece, Morrison & Foerster Senior of Counsel Lokke Moerel challenges current predictions of the ways in which Artificial (AI) Intelligence is go

If Algorithms Take Over Routine Work, This Also Kills our Expertise

The GDPR explicitly requires controllers to inform individuals of decisions made about them by automated or artificially intelligent algorithmic systems. The controller must inform the individual up front about the existence of the decision making activity, as well as provide information about its underlying logic, significance, and envisaged consequences. There is increased debate, however, about whether the GDPR also provides individuals with a right to explanation about an output of the automated decision making.In their post for the International Association of Privacy Professionals (a summary of a longer article first published in the <a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2018/04/law-and-autonomous-systems-series-automated-decisions-based-profiling" target="_blank">Oxford Business Law Blog</a>) Morrison & Foerster Senior of Counsel Lokke Moerel and Associate Marijn Storm argue that the GDPR indeed provides individuals with a right to explanation but also note that both sides to this debate may be losing the forest through the trees.  Under the GDPR, controllers will ultimately be accountable for the outcome of their automated decision making processes, so in addition to informing individuals, they should also be able to justify that the correlations applied in the algorithm are meaningful and unbiased.Read more, including steps controllers can take to ensure Algorithmic Accountability in Lokke and Marijn’s <a href="https://iapp.org/news/a/why-controllers-are-accountable-for-automatic-decision-making-under-the-gdpr/">post for the IAPP</a>.