3 ms·
Your second part is answering your first part. You did not see anyone successfully tied it to a particular breach because you have to show that it is because of
by elashri 3y ago
Your second part is answering your first part. You did not see anyone successfully tied it to a particular breach because you have to show that it is because of this breach not other breach.
These companies have deep buckets and will employee laywers who have experience into squashing all the suits of this kind.
Edit: I have much less faith that your question in the beginning was serious with good intentions now.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> did not see anyone successfully tied it to a particular breach because you have to show that it is because of this breach not other breach. Again, this is not true. If two people steal your data, and you can tie the use of any of that stolen data to harm, they are each liable. The problem is in identifying the harms. Not calculating the attributed damage. > companies have deep buckets and will employee laywers who have experience into squashing all the suits of this kind A multibillion-dollar payoff for lawyers and a wealthy plaintiff to get a class certified, and the answer is a conspiracy of corporate counsels?