The London Olympics are set to begin in about 10 weeks' time. And as the excitement and pageantry build, concern also is growing with respect to congestion and IT challenges.

There is little question that London, an already densely populated urban center, will feel the immense weight of the influx of people coming to be part of the Olympic Games. Many aspects of daily life, most notably transportation, will be impacted by the surge of additional visitors moving about London because of the Olympics.

The relationship between privacy and mobile applications is coming into focus.  On February 27, 2012, the California Attorney General entered into a Joint Statement of Principles with the six largest mobile application companies – Apple, Google, H-P, Microsoft, Amazon and RIM – regarding consumer privacy and transparency issues when data is collected through an app.  http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n2647_agreement.pdf. The Five Principles set parameters for good practice.  Although not legally binding, the AG promises to review compliance in the fall, and may use California laws on privacy, false advertising, unfair business practices and others as enforcement tools.  Since California often leads the way in privacy enforcement it is likely that other states will follow suit.    

What are the ramifications of this development for mobile medical (mHealth) apps?  A medical app developer must take into account privacy issues, particularly if it collects or assists with the collections of personal data.  In addition, a mobile medical app provider must consider any HIPAA requirements, such as would apply if the app was offered by a health care provider or payor to a consumer, or used internally (e.g. transfer of data by physicians in a hospital).  HHS has established an mHealth Initiative to review the emerging mHealth area and to develop guidance.  In sum, privacy is quickly becoming an important compliance area for mHealth stakeholders: device makers, software and app developers, platform providers, investors, health care providers and payors, and consumers.  Keep an eye on developments and enforcement activities in this area. 

Once upon a time, it was widely believed that electronic discovery would streamline litigation, making it faster, easier, less burdensome, and less expensive. So, now that we are some years into the e-discovery experience, has the prediction come true? Sadly, not necessarily.

While it is true that it can be easier to retrieve information electronically by using search terms, rather than sending teams of associates into warehouses to rummage through boxes of documents, that is just the tip of the iceberg when considering the overall e-discovery effort. And even if vast quantities of electronic information can be brought up based on a simple search, that information had to be harvested at the front-end, and ultimately will need to be reviewed at the back-end.

I have a confession to make: I am addicted to my BlackBerry. Indeed, the term "CrackBerry" certainly applies in my case. Ever since my wireless signal was established years ago, I have been mainlining my BlackBerry on a relatively constant basis.

There was a time that BlackBerry really was the only real PDA game in town at my firm. However, more recently, we have opened up the iPhone option, and as time passes, more and more of my colleagues have been weaning themselves off the BlackBerry and migrating to the iPhone. What's more, some of my colleagues have been encouraging me (rather strenuously) to change my PDA drug of choice, turn my back on my beloved BlackBerry, and go the iPhone route myself.

A new Second Circuit decision could change the way some service providers conduct business on the internet, imposing a greater burden to assess specific infringing activity.

In Viacom v. YouTube, Viacom sought $1 billion in damages for direct and secondary copyright infringement based on claims that its users improperly uploaded thousands of Viacom’s videos.  The district previously held that YouTube was protected against claims of copyright infringement under the DMCA safe harbor primarily because it had insufficient notice of the particular infringement at issue.  Essentially, it held that under the DMCA, service providers did not have a responsibility to identify which of its users' postings infringed a copyright.

This week, the Second Circuit vacated that decision.  While the Second Circuit agreed with the district court that the DMCA safe harbor requires knowledge or awareness of specific infringing activity, it vacated the order granting summary judgment because a reasonable jury could find that YouTube had actual knowledge or awareness of specific infringing activity on its website. It instructed the district court to determine on remand whether any specific infringements of which YouTube had knowledge or awareness correspond to the clips-in-suit in these actions.  It also directed the lower court to consider whether YouTube made a "deliberate effort to avoid guilty knowledge" and whether YouTube had the ability to control the infringing activity and received a financial benefit attributable to that activity.

The decision can be viewed at http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e4374f0f-1919-4bbf-a411-69c963dc238d/5/doc/10-3270_10-3342_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e4374f0f-1919-4bbf-a411-69c963dc238d/5/hilite/

The UK is working on proposals for national electronic surveillance that could monitor every electronic message sent and received by its citizens.

This follows the 2008 abandonment of a gigantic government database that would have tracked UK phone and email communications, the AP reports. It appears that the UK government is back at it now, but perhaps with a somewhat different approach.

According to press reports, online dating websites eHarmony, Match.com and Sparks Networks have entered into a joint statement of business principles to protect users from sexual predators and to help prevent identity theft and other scams. California Attorney General Kamala Harris followed up on this development by stating that "consumers should be able to use websites without fear of being scammed or targeted," in apparent recognition that a woman was assaulted on a date that came about through an online dating site.

The companies reportedly have agreed to use national sex-offender registries to check on subscribers, to quickly respond to reported abuses, and to give Internet safety guidance to members. The dating sites will also provide reports of suspected criminal activity to the Attorney General's office.

Today, the Federal Trade Commission released its final report titled "Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: Recommendations For Businesses and Policymakers."  http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/03/privacyframework.shtm

The report details best practices for businesses to protect the privacy of consumers.  Recognizing the burden on small businesses, the FTC says that the framework should not apply to companies that collect and do not transfer only non-sensitive data from fewer than 5,000 consumers a year. 

In the report, the FTC addressed the following:

Do-Not-Track – the FTC will work with various groups to complete implementation of an easy-to-use, persistent, and effective Do Not Track system.

Mobile - the FTC continues to urge companies offering mobile services to work toward improved privacy protections, including disclosures. It will host a workshop on May 30, 2012 to address how mobile privacy disclosures can be short, effective, and accessible to consumers on small screens.

Data Brokers – the FTC called on data brokers to make their operations more transparent by creating a centralized website to identify themselves, and to disclose how they collect and use consumer data.  In addition, the website should detail the choices that data brokers provide consumers about their own information.

Large Platform Providers - The FTC cited heightened privacy concerns about the extent to which platforms, such as ISPs, operating systems, browsers and social media companies, comprehensively track consumers' online activities. It will host a public workshop in the second half of 2012 to explore issues related to comprehensive tracking.

Promoting Enforceable Self-Regulatory Codes - the FTC is working to develop industry-specific codes of conduct.

One might think that as the Internet matures, domain name disputes might dissipate. Not so!

Indeed, an all-time record 2,764 cybersquatting cases pertaining to 4,781 domain names were filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO) in 2011.

It's happened: In a landmark e-discovery ruling, a federal judge has explicitly approved of computer-assisted review, also known as predictive coding (the use of sophisticated algorithms to enable a computer to determine relevance based on training by a human reviewer), to search for potentially responsive electronically stored information, or ESI.

Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck, of the Southern District of New York, concluded "that computer-assisted review is an acceptable way to search for relevant ESI in appropriate cases" in Monique Da Silva Moore, et al. v. Publicis Groupe & MSL Group, a gender-discrimination case.

Business want to know whether they are potential targets for security breaches, and if so, they seek to identify the types of electric records that may be at risk.

The Trustwave 2012 Global Security Report sheds some light on these concerns by identifying top data-security risk areas.

You may be either "pro" or "con" when it comes to Facebook's new Timeline feature. If you are in the "con" category, you may wish for a solution that will cause the service to revert back to how it was before it changed. But beware: In so doing, you could become the victim of a scam.