Comcast Attorney: When It Comes to the GDPR, Don't Forget Employee Training
“We can develop all the policies in the world,” said the company's deputy general counsel of data and privacy, “but at the end of the day, if we're not doing road shows with all these teams and identifying exactly what they should be looking for, no one's going to read this stuff.”
December 05, 2017 at 01:08 PM
3 minute read
The European Union's impending General Data Protection Regulation has been giving legal departments plenty of headaches, even though the new data security rules don't go into effect for almost six months. With companies potentially looking at fines as steep as 4 percent of their annual global revenue and facing questions around whether to utilize privacy impact assessments or if there's a need to appoint a data protection officer, for instance, there's no doubt much to do ahead of the May 2018 deadline.
For all the planning, however, without proper employee training, these efforts may all be for naught, said Daniel Pepper, vice president and deputy general counsel of data and privacy at Comcast Corp., who spoke on a panel at ALM's 2017 cyberSecure conference in New York.
At Comcast, there are a number of different internal organizations that deal with customers in the European Union and question how the GDPR will apply to their operations, Pepper said on the panel Monday. “We can develop all the policies in the world,” he explained, “but at the end of the day, if we're not doing road shows with all these teams and identifying exactly what they should be looking for, no one's going to read this stuff.”
And it shouldn't just be generalized training for any part of the business that will be impacted by the GDPR, Pepper noted. It's important, he said, to consider “what matters to that particular division, and [to customize] your training and your education and your awareness program to those folks so they understand what to look for.”
“It's amazingly complex, as we know. There is so much subjectivity and confusion built into this regulation, no one has the answers yet,” Pepper said. “What we are doing is telling our folks: 'Look, this is what you should be looking for. We can't tell you necessarily how to solve it, but if you find it, come to us and we can talk about it.'”
But the prospect of training may be complicated by lingering ambiguity around the GDPR.
As a company that's already subject to regulations from the Federal Communications Commission, for instance, Comcast is no stranger to ongoing employee training on regulatory compliance, Pepper said. The difference between the training the company is using to deal with and training around the GDPR, Pepper said, is that with the former, “there's more certainty and definition in those areas.”
“We can provide some cut-and-dried responses, very black and white, five-minute sound bites, and they're good to go,” Pepper said. “We can't do that yet with GDPR.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
GC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250