首页> 外文OA文献 >Credit-Monitoring Damages in Cybersecurity Tort Litigation
【2h】

Credit-Monitoring Damages in Cybersecurity Tort Litigation

机译:网络安全侵权诉讼中的信用监控损害赔偿

摘要

Part I of this Article provides an overview of the importance of credit monitoring and of tort claims related to cybersecurity. It also discusses the duty to protect digital personal information and to disclose breaches of cybersecurity, as well as the reasons why the economic loss rule should not bar claims for the costs of credit monitoring. Part II of this Article discusses the precedent dealing with credit-monitoring damages, related business practices, class-action settlements, and judicial and administrative sanctions. Part III explores the issue of whether credit-monitoring damages are analogous to the medical-monitoring damages that many states award to victims of toxic exposure. Part IV then considers arguments against the compensability of credit-monitoring damages in cybersecurity lawsuits. These include the alleged lack of present injury in cases where the plaintiff has not experienced identity theft and the ability of potential plaintiffs to self-protect against economic harm by purchasing credit-monitoring services. Part V then explains why courts should allow victims of data-security breaches to recover compensation for the costs of credit monitoring. The Article argues that protection from identity theft should be as widespread as commercial use of computerized personal information and that businesses should be required to internalize the costs of their negligent data practices. In many instances, businesses are well-situated to efficiently spread identity theft prevention costs among those who benefit from the use of computerized personal information. Finally, this Article concludes that plaintiffs should be able to recover credit-monitoring costs often in cybersecurity litigation.
机译:本文的第一部分概述了信用监控和与网络安全相关的侵权索赔的重要性。它还讨论了保护数字个人信息和披露违反网络安全性的义务,以及经济损失规则不应禁止信用监控成本索赔的原因。本文的第二部分讨论了有关信用监控损害赔偿,相关业务惯例,集体诉讼和解以及司法和行政制裁的先例。第三部分探讨了信用监控损害赔偿是否类似于许多州授予有毒暴露受害者的医学监督损害赔偿的问题。然后,第四部分讨论了反对网络安全诉讼中信用监控损害赔偿是否可赔的论点。其中包括在原告未遭受身份盗用的情况下据称目前没有受到伤害,以及潜在的原告通过购买信用监控服务自我保护免受经济伤害的能力。然后,第五部分解释了法院为何应允许违反数据安全性的受害人收回信用监控成本的赔偿。该条认为,防止身份盗用应与商业化使用计算机化个人信息一样广泛,并且应要求企业内部化其疏忽数据做法的成本。在许多情况下,企业处于有利位置,可以在那些受益于使用计算机化个人信息的人中有效地分散预防身份盗窃的成本。最后,本文的结论是,在网络安全诉讼中,原告应通常能够收回信用监控成本。

著录项

  • 作者

    Vincent R. Johnson;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2011
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 English, en-US
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号