Data Privacy Market Still Has Room for All Entrants
The rapid growth and complexity of data privacy laws makes the idea of one dominant privacy compliance company unlikely, ensuring lawyers' seat at the table.
July 18, 2019 at 11:30 AM
3 minute read
In the midst of growing data regulation laws and compliance needs, some privacy compliance technology companies are attracting a slew of investments. Take for example, data privacy compliance company OneTrust raising $200 million and TrustArc announcing it secured $70 million last week.
But while it may be tempting to say a select few companies have cornered the data privacy market, competitors and observers say the variety and complexity of data privacy regulations makes no platform the single go-to company in the market. Likewise, lawyers' legal expertise still makes them a valuable asset for understanding regulations.
Dave Deasy, vice president of marketing at TrustArc, said the combination of stiff fines grabbing companies' attention and many regulations' reporting requirements is driving venture capital investment into data privacy compliance tech.
As European regulators begin to levy penalties for high-profile data breaches under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), companies are also concerned about other growing data regulations and the patchwork of U.S. data privacy laws. In turn, companies need a host of services to meet their data privacy requirements.
“There are a lot of moving pieces. I suspect [data privacy compliance] companies will concentrate on a particular area,” said Paul Hill, senior consultant for SystemExperts Corp., a cybersecurity consulting services company. “There's legal advice, inventory of data and tracking where data goes and then there's the wide variety of technical controls.”
TrustArc's Deasy noted he's seen more small startups sprouting up with specialized functions geared toward single aspects of a data privacy regulation, from solely offering to manage data request services to only providing data discovery. Meanwhile, law firms are now leveraging compliance technology to counsel their clients, he added.
While firms are using platforms from tech companies, they are also creating data privacy compliance tools of their own for clients, said Tsutomu Johnson, Parsons Behle & Latimer of counsel and CEO of the firm's legal tech lab.
Indeed, various law firms have created privacy compliance tools to provide clients with access to their legal expertise, at perhaps the determinant of the billable hour, to fit clients' 24-7 needs. That foray into legal tech is law firms' stepping stone into automating more legal services, Johnson said.
“What I think law firms will do is pivot and leverage the technology they've made in privacy to meet a demand … to figure out a way to contain legal costs and the only way you can do that is by automating,” he said.
Likewise, lawyers still maintain the traditional role of drafting contracts in compliance with varying regulations.
“The gap law firms can still fill is creating language that is in compliance with the text of the law,” Johnson said.
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 AllTrending Stories
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