Suggestions
Frederick H. Davis
Partner at Kutak Rock LLP, CIPP/US
Frederick H. Davis is an experienced attorney affiliated with Kutak Rock's Little Rock office, specializing in commercial trial practice and corporate law.
With a background in law from the University of Arkansas and a B.A. in History from Davidson College, Davis brings a wealth of knowledge and insight to his practice.
His litigation expertise encompasses technology, consumer protection, data management, security, and branding disputes, offering strategic guidance to businesses on various corporate issues such as governance and internal investigations.
Davis has been associated with esteemed organizations like Kutak Rock, ACCESS Group Inc., QualChoice, United States Attorneys' Offices, and the Arkansas Supreme Court, among others, gaining a diverse range of legal experience and expertise.
His educational journey includes attending schools like Little Rock Central High School, Pulaski Heights Elementary, and Pulaski Heights Middle School, reflecting his commitment to learning and personal development.
Highlights
What's a good first step on the road to adequate cyber governance?
My answer always: BreachBits, the cyber-risk radar. BB is a notable step forward in the state of the art. Accurate, affordable, automated, and continuous first- AND third-party risk management platform from the hacker's perspective, with monitoring and testing (pentests, social engineering) and digestible interactive dashboard, summary reports, and technical data.
https://lnkd.in/g-nMW6hA
Strong move by the FTC (by 3-2 vote):
Effective 120 days after publication in the federal register.
"Pursuant to sections 5 and 6(g) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), the Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) is issuing the Non-Compete Clause Rule (“the final rule”). The final rule provides that it is an unfair method of competition—and therefore a violation of section 5—for persons to, among other things, enter into non-compete clauses (“non-competes”) with workers on or after the final rule’s effective date. With respect to existing non-competes—i.e., non-competes entered into before the effective date—the final rule adopts a different approach for senior executives than for other workers. For senior executives, existing non-competes can remain in force, while existing non-competes with other workers are not enforceable after the effective date."
"The final rule does not apply to non-competes entered into by a person pursuant to a bona fide sale of a business entity. In addition, the final rule does not apply where a cause of action related to a non-compete accrued prior to the effective date.16 The final rule further provides that it is not an unfair method of competition to enforce or attempt to enforce a non-compete or to make representations about a non-compete where a person has a good-faith basis to believe that the final rule is inapplicable. The final rule does not limit or affect enforcement of State laws that restrict noncompetes where the State laws do not conflict with the final rule, but it preempts State laws that conflict with the final rule. Furthermore, the final rule includes a severability clause clarifying the Commission’s intent that, if a reviewing court were to hold any part of any provision or application of the final rule invalid or unenforceable—including, for example, an aspect of the terms or conditions defined as non-competes, one or more of the particular restrictions on noncompetes, or the standards for or application to one or more category of workers—the remainder of the final rule shall remain in effect."
https://lnkd.in/g-xaQngY
