Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

calbar.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#91

Post by dvtrn »

gnicholas wrote: post #89
kingcharles wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen similar, but it's rare because it is such a dark pattern, and on a more high-profile site that nail would get hammered down pretty quickly. I was going to joke that you're a lawyer, you should sue them, but they're not doing anything illegal, just very shady.

I actually made a screen recording and thought about writing up a blog post. But it seemed like the overlap between [people who care about law/lawyers] and [people who care about dark patterns] was too small to warrant much effort. I considered sending it to Above The Law, and I'm open to other suggestions if anyone has any!

LegalEagle has a way of making even the driest of law topics interesting and accessible. Do you think he’s the right messenger for that kind of content?

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#92

Post by boomboomsubban »

vageli wrote: post #81
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is talking about the reality of removing a million sources from the internet. We’re talking about the legal consequences and 1st amendment rights of individuals. You do not have a 1st amendment right to post, for example, classified documents or protected intellectual property. If you post those things, even if 2,000 people posted them before you, the law can still come down on you.

> No one is talking about the reality of removing a million sources from the internet. We’re talking about the legal consequences and 1st amendment rights of individuals. > You do not have a 1st amendment right to post, for example, classified documents or protected intellectual property. If you post those things, even if 2,000 people posted them before you, the law can still come down on you. Did the reporters who b…

>Did the reporters who broke the pentagon papers see court?

Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_S...

And the ruling was printing classified documents was protected, though the government is trying to reverse this ruling with the Assange case.

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#93

Post by mistrial9 »

gnicholas wrote: post #89
kingcharles wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen similar, but it's rare because it is such a dark pattern, and on a more high-profile site that nail would get hammered down pretty quickly. I was going to joke that you're a lawyer, you should sue them, but they're not doing anything illegal, just very shady.

I actually made a screen recording and thought about writing up a blog post. But it seemed like the overlap between [people who care about law/lawyers] and [people who care about dark patterns] was too small to warrant much effort. I considered sending it to Above The Law, and I'm open to other suggestions if anyone has any!

I think the theory is that you should try, as you are now by writing that post here.. but make your own efforts and costs very minimal (also as you have done).. maximize the possibility that a random, individual person may find it, who cares (this is a great place for that).. leave breadcrumbs that can lead an interested party to valid actionable information; and lastly, limit exposure to yourself for retaliation if it is that sort of situation..

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#94

Post by rahimnathwani »

"Under California Business and Professions Code 6086.1(b), all disciplinary investigations are confidential until the time that formal charges are filed, and all investigations are confidential until a formal proceeding is instituted."

Does this part of the code apply to everyone, or only the folks in charge of the investigations, or in charge of safeguarding the information?

If someone is in a bar and overhears a Bar employee talking loudly about an investigation, do they have a legal duty to keep what they heard confidential?

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#95

Post by chrismcb »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #94

"Under California Business and Professions Code 6086.1(b), all disciplinary investigations are confidential until the time that formal charges are filed, and all investigations are confidential until a formal proceeding is instituted." Does this part of the code apply to everyone, or only the folks in charge of the investigations, or in charge of safeguarding the information? If someone is in a bar and overhears a Ba…

No. Once confidential information is leaked, it is no longer confidential. The person who leaked the data can be in trouble. But the person who received it isn't... Assuming they didn't break any laws receiving it. In your particular example, the Bar employee shouldn't have been talking about confidential stuff in public, where it can be overheard. There is no expectation of privacy in a bar, so the eavesdropper is most likely on the clear.

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#96

Post by gnicholas »

dvtrn wrote: post #91
gnicholas wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually made a screen recording and thought about writing up a blog post. But it seemed like the overlap between [people who care about law/lawyers] and [people who care about dark patterns] was too small to warrant much effort. I considered sending it to Above The Law, and I'm open to other suggestions if anyone has any!

LegalEagle has a way of making even the driest of law topics interesting and accessible. Do you think he’s the right messenger for that kind of content?

I'd never heard of LegalEagle, but upon looking him up I see that we graduated from the same law school, one year apart. Perhaps I'll reach out! Thanks for the pointer.

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#97

Post by gnicholas »

mistrial9 wrote: post #93
gnicholas wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually made a screen recording and thought about writing up a blog post. But it seemed like the overlap between [people who care about law/lawyers] and [people who care about dark patterns] was too small to warrant much effort. I considered sending it to Above The Law, and I'm open to other suggestions if anyone has any!

I think the theory is that you should try, as you are now by writing that post here.. but make your own efforts and costs very minimal (also as you have done).. maximize the possibility that a random, individual person may find it, who cares (this is a great place for that).. leave breadcrumbs that can lead an interested party to valid actionable information; and lastly, limit exposure to yourself for retaliation if…

OK, I'm writing something up and will share a draft with ATL, LegalEagle, and anyone else that folks here recommend!

Honestly the biggest blocker for me was that I assume blurring/redacting text from a video would be tricky, but I think YouTube might have a tool that blurs moving objects relatively easily. Or I could just include screenshots...

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#98

Post by alasdair_ »

salawat wrote: post #79
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is talking about the reality of removing a million sources from the internet. We’re talking about the legal consequences and 1st amendment rights of individuals. You do not have a 1st amendment right to post, for example, classified documents or protected intellectual property. If you post those things, even if 2,000 people posted them before you, the law can still come down on you.

You sbsolutely do have a right topost blassified documents if you come across them, but have not attained a security clearance. There's definitely a massive "should" aspect there, however, the courts will protect you in that case. The one who got them for you, or if you committed a crime in acquiring them however... That is a different story.

Oddly, classified documents that could theoretically harm real people are legal to share with others but don’t you dare try to share the latest Beyonce track or there will be hell to pay.

Perhaps the RIAA should be in charge of national security from now on?

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#99

Post by vore »

reset-password wrote: post #50

Why is it so impossible for these people/organizations to accept that they made a mistake and own up to it? The entire response by the State Bar of California is nothing but a deflection of blame that rests solely on themselves and their chosen vendor(s). What are they going to do next, call Missouri's governor and ask for the playbook to follow? The humans behind the scenes at the bar are looking incredibly pathetic…

They did, see the update: https://www.calbar.ca.gov/About-Us/News/Data-Breach-Updates

They have nothing but praise for the judyrecords owner, actually!

Re: State Bar of California addresses breach of confidential data

#100

Post by vageli »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #92
vageli wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one is talking about the reality of removing a million sources from the internet. We’re talking about the legal consequences and 1st amendment rights of individuals. > You do not have a 1st amendment right to post, for example, classified documents or protected intellectual property. If you post those things, even if 2,000 people posted them before you, the law can still come down on you. Did the reporters who b…

>Did the reporters who broke the pentagon papers see court? Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_S... And the ruling was printing classified documents was protected, though the government is trying to reverse this ruling with the Assange case.

As I understand it, the government is not trying to reverse this ruling with the Assange case. The government posits that Assange helped in the acquisition of the documents, which is separate from their dissemination, IIRC.
Post reply on HN