On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

GDPR - Privacy Shield Boot Camp 2017

Released on: Oct. 18, 2017
Running Time: 04:05:50

Complying with laws governing privacy and cross-border data flows has never been more complicated.  U.S. companies can no longer effectively compete in today’s interconnected marketplace without the free flow of data across country borders.  That is why implementing appropriate programs to comply with new data protection laws emerging around the world has never been more important.  Companies in the U.S. that deal directly with consumers in the European Union (B2C), or offer services to European companies (B2B), have until May 25, 2018 to comply with the new European General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), and deploy adequate cross-border data transfer mechanisms. 

This boot camp is for individuals charged with formulating their organization’s privacy compliance strategy.  It is for those who must implement the “nuts and bolts” of GDPR, and evaluate the right cross-border data transfer mechanisms.  What are the practical implications in choosing the Privacy Shield Framework over other options?  And how do you implement the procedural enhancements now required?  This program is for practitioners within every organization – legal, compliance, IT security, and audit – hoping to gain insights and practical information about GDPR and Privacy Shield.

You will learn:

  • Gain insights on key substantive and procedural compliance recommendations for GDPR and Privacy Shield
  • What are the fundamental requirements for notice, consent, record of processing activities, and onward transfer requirements now mandated by GDPR and Privacy Shield?
  • Discuss practical considerations on how to set your organization’s compliance strategy, and whether to pursue certification for EU data transfers
  • Hear distinguished expertsfrom both government and industry tell you what you should be doing to address cross-border data transfers

Special feature:

Earn Continuing Privacy Education credit.

Lecture Topics [Total time 04:05:50]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:11:47]
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Introduction and Legislative Context for GDPR [01:01:48]
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Adam Schlosser, Harry A. Valetk
  • What does GDPR really mean for B2B companies? [00:57:30]
    Robert S. Jett III, Chris Lockard, Harry A. Valetk, Krista Ferguson, Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • What does GDPR really mean for B2C companies? [01:03:15]
    Jonathan Avila, Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Jeanne M. Sheahan, Harry A. Valetk
  • What is Privacy Shield? Is it right for you? [00:51:30]
    Laura D. Berger, Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Mary Ann Le Fort, Harry A. Valetk

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • EU General Data Protection Regulation in 13 Game Changers
    Harry A. Valetk
  • 2016 Global Data Breach Notification Guide
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • GDPR Myth-Buster (January 2017)
    Phil Lee, Mark Webber
  • GDPR Impact on Cloud Service Providers (January 2017)
    Felicity Fisher, Mark Webber
  • EU-U.S. Privacy Shield: EU Commission’s Adequacy Determination (July 12, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Statement of the Article 29 Working Party on the Opinion on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (April 13, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Article 29 Working Party Statement on the decision of the European Commission on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (July 1, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Full Text of the Privacy Shield Principles and Annex 1
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter from Secretary of Commerce, Penny Pritzker (July 7, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Baker & McKenzie—Legal Bytes: Open for Business: The U.S. Department of Commerce Begins Acceptance of Certifications to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (August 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter from the International Trade Administration describing its administration and oversight of the Privacy Shield (July 7, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter and accompanying attachment from the Federal Trade Commission describing its enforcement of the Privacy Shield (July 7, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter from the Department of Transportation describing its enforcement of the Privacy Shield (February 19, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter from the Department of State and accompanying memorandum describing a new Privacy Shield Ombudsperson for submission of inquiries regarding the United States’ signals intelligence practices (July 7, 2016)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letters prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding safeguards and limitations applicable to U.S. national security authorities
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter prepared by the Department of Justice regarding safeguards and limitations on U.S. Government access for law enforcement and public interest purposes (February 19, 2016)
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • European Commission Guide to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (2016)
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework: Key New Requirements
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Program: Benefits of Participation
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Framework: Self-Certification
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Program: Guide to Self-Certification
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Program: Self-Certification Information
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Program: Administration of Privacy Shield
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Program: Withdrawal from Privacy Shield
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Bloomberg BNA: World Data Protection Report—The EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Versus Other EU Data Transfer Compliance Options; Volume 16, Number 8 (August 2016)
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Privacy Shield Overview
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh
  • Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield FAQs
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Letter from Secretary of Commerce, Penny Pritzker, and accompanying Privacy Shield Package (January 9, 2017)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC) Statement: Swiss-US Privacy Shield: new framework for the transfer of data to the USA (January 11, 2017)
    Harry A. Valetk
  • Department of Commerce: International Trade Administration: Privacy Policy FAQs 1-5
    Harry A. Valetk

Presentation Material


  • Introduction and Legislative Context
    Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Adam Schlosser, Harry A. Valetk
  • What does GDPR really mean for B2B companies?
    Krista Ferguson, Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Robert S. Jett III, Chris Lockard, Harry A. Valetk
  • What does GDPR really mean for B2C companies?
    Jonathan Avila, Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Jeanne M. Sheahan, Harry A. Valetk
  • Is Privacy Shield Right for You?
    Laura D. Berger, Brian L. Hengesbaugh, Mary Ann Le Fort, Harry A. Valetk
Chairperson(s)
Harry A. Valetk ~ Baker & McKenzie LLP
Speaker(s)
Jonathan Avila ~ Vice President, Chief Privacy Officer, Walmart Stores, Inc.
Laura D. Berger ~ Attorney, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Federal Trade Commission
Krista Ferguson ~ Chief Privacy Counsel, Principal Financial Group
Brian L. Hengesbaugh ~ Baker & McKenzie LLP
Robert S. Jett III ~ Senior Legal Counsel – Global Information Services, Stryker Corporation
Mary Ann Le Fort ~ VP and Associate General Counsel, Priceline.com
Chris Lockard ~ Senior Director, Legal - Global Privacy., Salesforce
Adam Schlosser ~ Lead Digital Trade and Data Flows, World Economic Forum
Jeanne M. Sheahan ~ Global Privacy Counsel, Groupon
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

GDPR - Privacy Shield Boot Camp 2018 (San Francisco, CA) Sep. 21, 2018

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

GDPR - Privacy Shield Boot Camp 2018  
GDPR-Privacy Shield Boot Camp 2017 Harry A Valetk, Baker & McKenzie LLP
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.