Sign Up for Alerts
Sign up to receive receive industry-specific emails from our legal team.
Sign Up for Alerts
We provide tailored, industry-specific legal updates to our clients and other friends of the firm.
Areas of Interest
November 29th, 2022
Are Tom Brady and Larry David Liable for the FTX Disaster?
Blockchain Technology Co-Chair Hannah Taylor is quoted in the article, “Are Tom Brady and Larry David Liable for the FTX Disaster?” published by Decrypt. The article discusses the class-action lawsuit against FTX and how likely the allegations will stick to the celebrity endorsers who are listed as co-defendants. Hannah is quoted saying, “There’s not been a lot of precedent for holding celebrities accountable in this sort of case. It’s usually done to help draw PR attention to a case. What’s really going to be hard for them is to prove the idea of conspiracy or fraud—the idea that [these celebrities] were somehow part of some mastermind scheme to defraud consumers. I think that’s unlikely.”
The class-action lawsuit also invoked Florida state securities laws, claiming that FTX violated such statutes by peddling unregistered yield-bearing accounts (YBAs) like staking pools, which offered users guaranteed returns on deposits. “Once a digital asset that someone is promoting is found to be a security, additional rules apply about what they have to disclose and how they have to engage with consumers. If the Florida judge in last week’s lawsuit rules that FTX’s YBAs were in fact securities, past celebrity endorsers of FTX could be exposed to increased liability,” said Hannah.
Hannah says, “There are still factors that could increase a celebrity’s exposure to liability, though. The further their statements on FTX strayed from a general endorsement to specific claims of safety, trustworthiness, or guaranteed returns, the greater the risk of liability. What Steph Curry said, making safety claims about the platform, goes beyond what, for example, Naomi Osaka said, going ‘Oh, cool! FTX!’”
Hannah thinks the class-action lawsuit could be the least of these celebrities’ worries. She says, “Even if these plaintiffs might not be able to prove from a class action standpoint that these celebrities were willfully involved in some conspiracy to defraud consumers, you might have technical noncompliance with other laws.”
Read the full article here.
Other Quoted
Challenges in Opt-Out Design and Children’s Privacy Highlighted by Sling TV’s Settlement With California AG
Cybersecurity Law Report quoted Daniel Goldberg regarding California AG Rob Bonta's $530,000 settlement with Sling TV for CCPA violations related to opt-out processes and children's privacy protections. Goldberg noted this is "the first CCPA settlement involving a connected TV" and indicates that connected TV is now a priority for privacy enforcement. Goldberg predicted future settlements are more likely to reach seven or eight figures as investigations progress. He explained that companies struggle to operationalize opt-outs across different platforms because many rely heavily on consent management platform vendors that often cover only cookie-based activity and don't connect to the backend systems that actually drive targeted advertising.
On children's privacy, Goldberg highlighted the CA AG's aggressive stance, noting that although Sling TV didn't collect age data, the AG concluded they still had knowledge of minors through child-directed channels, notifications from programmers, demographic inferences purchased from data brokers, and ad-targeting segments that included children. He observed this "arguably expands the notion of 'actual knowledge' under the CCPA." Goldberg advises companies to map out data flows and opt-out signals across every environment and audit vendor configurations to ensure the tools actually work. Read the full article on children’s privacy protections here. (Behind a paywall)
December 1 2025
Game companies must be flexible to comply with changing laws
Emma Smizer was recently featured as a panelist at GamesBeat Next 2025 and quoted in a GamesBeat article discussing global regulatory compliance and its impact on the gaming industry. The panel examined how evolving policy frameworks create new opportunities for developers and platforms navigating global markets.
Smizer addressed compliance challenges under emerging laws, specifically citing the Texas App Store Accountability Act. She noted that this kind of legislation changes how developers and platforms interact with users: “App stores have to do this age verification, but so do software and hardware developers. Global compliance is complicated, even just across the states… We’re moving toward a world where you can’t just be willfully ignorant about the age of your users.”
Her analysis emphasizes a growing trend that age verification and child safety requirements are not only regulatory hurdles but also can create opportunities and growth for businesses and sectors. Read the full summary of the panel here.
November 25 2025
Copyright Guide or Policy Change? Project Divides IP Attys
Law360 quoted Jacqueline Charlesworth on the controversy surrounding the American Law Institute’s copyright restatement project. Ms. Charlesworth criticized the initiative as advancing a “revisionist theory” that could weaken copyright protections. She was among nearly two dozen advisers who resigned from the project, signaling deep concerns about its direction.
The article highlights a broader debate within the IP community: whether the restatement simply clarifies existing law or attempts to reshape policy in favor of users. Ms. Charlesworth’s perspective emphasizes the stakes for rights holders as courts and practitioners consider how much influence the restatement may carry. Read the Law360 article about the copyright restatement project here.
November 19 2025
