Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
confused to commercially aware! trying to develop my commercial awareness
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ADKM" data-source="post: 124378" data-attributes="member: 25667"><p>Hi [USER=17277]@confusedlawstudent[/USER] interestingly I read this news today in the FT and there has been a major update in this sphere. With EU's new Digital Services Act and Twitter's new subscription service, the Blue Tick, if Musk continues to pursue aggressive strategies to control the dissemination of data, they could be permanently banned from functioning in Europe. EU's concern is pretty well understood because of the recent resignations of officials who had a say over content moderation policies and this is particularly important when considering Musk's stand on eliminating fake profiles (which seems shady to say the least), I foresee a great challenge for law firms especially in their technology, telecoms and outsourcing practices. </p><p></p><p>This is because of the security risks that IT faces and the operational challenges which come with multiple providers and advisors. With such complexities, I think a way in which a law firm's TMT practice can navigate this is through conveyor contracts and agreements whereby they will need to figure out whether the IT infrastructure can be transferred or not. If not, law firms need to figure out ways to navigate this non-transfer of data and without proper preparations in place, I think the situation could get worse (examples can include permanent deletion of data due to incorrect IT infrastructure or inefficient strategies used to effectuate a transition from the physical to the digital domain; a solution is the establishment of cloud computing technology to transfer data and keep it secure). I think this can be especially relevant to Twitter and law firms can certainly advice Twitter in this aspect by formulating a centralised contract across the company and order new circuits for the integration of IT infrastructure, as lead times over circuit orders can take time, especially now when there is a tremendous supply crunch (due to the ongoing war in Ukraine).</p><p></p><p>Domain is another important aspect where law firms face another challenge and which, if planned properly can generate significant revenue to law firms. I think they need to address a primary issue by considering Twitter's operational strategies: whether a new domain is needed? When one looks at the way Musk has begun his stint at Twitter and the exit of senior management personnel who were responsible for content moderation policies, I think the creation of a domain is essential for Twitter as a centralised domain is Twitter's face to the world. A way in which law firms can advise in this regard is by delivering a coherent message with a well planned domain conversion structure in place (to cover up for contingencies whilst keeping data under control). This will help maintain transparency in the digital domain and also maintain clear communication channels between internal and external customers reducing anxiety during transition. This is how I think this piece of news is relevant to law firms like Baker & McKenzie, CMS, HSF, DLA Piper who have strengths in multiple practices varying media, corporate, competition and certain US firms like Sidley Austin who are leaders in the Financial Regulatory practice (especially in London).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ADKM, post: 124378, member: 25667"] Hi [USER=17277]@confusedlawstudent[/USER] interestingly I read this news today in the FT and there has been a major update in this sphere. With EU's new Digital Services Act and Twitter's new subscription service, the Blue Tick, if Musk continues to pursue aggressive strategies to control the dissemination of data, they could be permanently banned from functioning in Europe. EU's concern is pretty well understood because of the recent resignations of officials who had a say over content moderation policies and this is particularly important when considering Musk's stand on eliminating fake profiles (which seems shady to say the least), I foresee a great challenge for law firms especially in their technology, telecoms and outsourcing practices. This is because of the security risks that IT faces and the operational challenges which come with multiple providers and advisors. With such complexities, I think a way in which a law firm's TMT practice can navigate this is through conveyor contracts and agreements whereby they will need to figure out whether the IT infrastructure can be transferred or not. If not, law firms need to figure out ways to navigate this non-transfer of data and without proper preparations in place, I think the situation could get worse (examples can include permanent deletion of data due to incorrect IT infrastructure or inefficient strategies used to effectuate a transition from the physical to the digital domain; a solution is the establishment of cloud computing technology to transfer data and keep it secure). I think this can be especially relevant to Twitter and law firms can certainly advice Twitter in this aspect by formulating a centralised contract across the company and order new circuits for the integration of IT infrastructure, as lead times over circuit orders can take time, especially now when there is a tremendous supply crunch (due to the ongoing war in Ukraine). Domain is another important aspect where law firms face another challenge and which, if planned properly can generate significant revenue to law firms. I think they need to address a primary issue by considering Twitter's operational strategies: whether a new domain is needed? When one looks at the way Musk has begun his stint at Twitter and the exit of senior management personnel who were responsible for content moderation policies, I think the creation of a domain is essential for Twitter as a centralised domain is Twitter's face to the world. A way in which law firms can advise in this regard is by delivering a coherent message with a well planned domain conversion structure in place (to cover up for contingencies whilst keeping data under control). This will help maintain transparency in the digital domain and also maintain clear communication channels between internal and external customers reducing anxiety during transition. This is how I think this piece of news is relevant to law firms like Baker & McKenzie, CMS, HSF, DLA Piper who have strengths in multiple practices varying media, corporate, competition and certain US firms like Sidley Austin who are leaders in the Financial Regulatory practice (especially in London). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
confused to commercially aware! trying to develop my commercial awareness
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…