Podcast appearances and mentions of Reed Smith

Forget product pitches and click-through rates - today's best marketing doesn't just inform, it evokes. In this episode, Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore the rising influence of vibe marketing in healthcare and how AI is both accelerating and reshaping this emotionally-driven strategy. They dive into: What Is Vibe Marketing: How brands are shifting from storytelling to emotion-driven engagement, powered by AI-generated content and mood-matching media. Why It's Working Now: The collapse of institutional trust, the rise of TikTok-era behavior, and the tech that allows campaigns to adapt in real time to audience feelings. AI's Role in Vibe: From automated content distribution to hyper-personalized interactions, AI is becoming the engine behind emotionally intelligent marketing. What This Means for Healthcare:  In a field built on trust and empathy, vibe marketing may be healthcare's strongest brand strategy…if done right. Later in the episode, they're joined by Matt Cyr of Loop Agency, who shares how health system marketers can use AI as a creative partner, not a job-stealer. He discusses how his work with Roper St. Francis Healthcare is helping lean teams use AI to free up time for storytelling and strategy, while still getting it all done. In 2025, marketing isn't about messaging; it's about vibe. And AI might be the key to capturing it. Mentions from the Show:  What is Vibe Marketing? Beyond Storytelling in the TikTok Era Almost Timely News:

Polina Pompliano, Author of ‘Hidden Genius' and Founder of The Profile, and Anthony Pompliano, Author of ‘How To Live An Extraordinary Life' and CEO of Professional Capital Management, discuss bitcoin, crypto, gold, tariffs, Anthony recaps his trip to the White House, and he explains why he thinks bitcoin will skyrocket past gold. =======================The future is being built today and the future of currency isn't dollars, euros, pounds, or yen, it's crypto. And Gemini thinks that's a great thing. Because a future where money is decentralized, inclusive, and globally accessible, that's a future that we are anxious to be a part of. Go where dollars won't. With Gemini. =======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Zach Weinberg is the Founder of Curie.Bio, and we debate everything about tariffs. We discuss the current state of the US economy, why people don't feel wealthy, production vs consumption, purchasing power of the dollar, what America should manufacture, and what we should ultimately do with tariffs?=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Simple Mining makes Bitcoin mining simple and accessible for everyone. We offer a premium white glove hosting service, helping you maximize the profitability of Bitcoin mining. For more information on Simple Mining or to get started mining Bitcoin, visit https://www.simplemining.io/=======================BitcoinOS is bringing Bitcoin into a new era. For the first time, Bitcoiners can access real DeFi across the entire crypto ecosystem, powered by revolutionary zero-knowledge technology. No more trusting sketchy bridges or giving up security. BitcoinOS reunites all of crypto around the chain where it all began. Follow BitcoinOS on twitter @BTC_OS and Be early to Bitcoin again.=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Arbitrators and counsel can use artificial intelligence to improve service quality and lessen work burden, but they also must deal with the ethical and professional implications. In this episode, Rebeca Mosquera, a Reed Smith associate and president of ArbitralWomen, interviews Benjamin Malek, a partner at T.H.E. Chambers and former chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. They reveal insights and experiences on the current and future applications of AI in arbitration, the potential risks of bias and transparency, and the best practices and guidelines for the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. The duo discusses how AI is reshaping arbitration and what it means for arbitrators, counsel and parties. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Rebeca: Welcome to Tech Law Talks and our series on AI. My name is Rebeca Mosquera. I am an attorney with Reed Smith in New York focusing on international arbitration. Today we focus on AI in arbitration. How artificial intelligence is reshaping dispute resolution and the legal profession. Joining me is Benjamin Malek, a partner at THE Chambers and chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. Ben has extensive experience in commercial and investor state arbitration and is at the forefront of AI governance in arbitration. He has worked at leading institutions and law firms, advising on the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. He's also founder and CEO of LexArb, an AI-driven case management software. Ben, welcome to Tech Law Talks.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca, for having me.  Rebeca: Well, let's dive in into our questions today. So artificial intelligence is often misunderstood, or put it in other words, there is a lot of misconceptions surrounding AI. How would you define AI in arbitration? And why is it important to look beyond just generative AI?  Benjamin: Yes, thank you so much for having me. AI in arbitration has existed for many years now, But it hasn't been until the rise of generative AI that big question marks have started to arise. And that is mainly because generative AI creates or generates AI output, whereas up until now, it was a relatively mild output. I'll give you one example. Looking for an email in your inbox, that requires a certain amount of AI. Your spellcheck in Word has AI, and it has been used for many years without raising any eyebrows. It hasn't been until ChatGPT has really given an AI tool to the masses that question started arising. What can it do? Will attorneys still be held accountable? Will AI start drafting for them? What will happen? And it's that fear that started generating all this talk about AI. Now, to your question on looking beyond generative AI, I think that is a very important point. In my function as the chair of the SAMC AI Task Force, while we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI, one of the proposals was to call it use of generative AI in arbitration. And I'm very happy that we stood firm and said no, because there's many forms of AI that will arise over the years. Now we're talking about predictive AI, but there are many AI forms such as predictive AI, NLP, automations, and more. And we use it not only in generating text per se, but we're using it in legal research, in case prediction to a certain extent. Whoever has used LexisNexis, they're using a new tool now where AI is leveraged to predict certain outcomes, document automation, procedural management, and more. So understanding AI as a whole is crucial for responsible adoption.  Rebeca: That's interesting. So you're saying, obviously, that AI and arbitration is more than just chat GPT, right? I think that the reason why people think that and relies on maybe, as we'll see in some of the questions I have for you, that people may rely on chat GPT because it sounds normal. It sounds like another person texting you, providing you with a lot of information. And sometimes we just, you know, people, I can understand or I can see why people might believe that that's the correct outcome. And you've given examples of how AI is already being used and that people might not realize it. So all of that is very interesting. Now, tell me, as chair of the SVAMC AI Task Force, you've led significant initiatives in AI governance, right? What motivated the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? And what are their key objectives? And before you dive into that, though, I want to take a moment to congratulate you and the rest of the task force on being nominated once again for the GAR Awards, which will be unveiled during Paris Arbitration Week in April of this year. That's an incredible achievement. And I really hope you'll take pride in the impact of your work and the well-deserved recognition it continues to receive. So good luck to you and the rest of the team.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca. Thank you so much. It really means a lot, and it also reinforces the importance of our work, seeing that we're nominated not only once last year for the GAR Award, but second year in a row. I will be blunt, I haven't kept track of many nominations, but I think it may be one of the first years where one initiative gets nominated twice, one year after the other. So that in itself for us is worth priding ourselves with. And it may potentially even be more than an award itself. It really, it's a testament to the work we have provided. So what led to the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? It's a very straightforward and to a certain extent, a little boring answer as of now, because we've heard it so many times. But the crux was Mata versus Avianca. I'm not going to dive into the case. I think most of us have heard it. Who hasn't? There's many sources to find out about it. The idea being that in a court case, an attorney used Chad GPT, used the outcome without verifying it, and it caused a lot of backlash, not only from opposing party, but also being chastised by the judge. Now when I saw that case, and I saw the outcome, and I saw that there were several tangential cases throughout the U.S. And worldwide, I realized that it was only a question of time until something like this could potentially happen in arbitration. So I got on a call with my dear friend Gary Benton at the SVAMC, and I told him that I really think that this is the moment for the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, an institution that is heavily invested in tech to shine. So I took it upon myself to say, give me 12 months and I'll come up with guidelines. So up until now at the SVAMC, there are a lot of think tank-like groups discussing many interesting subjects. But the SVAMC scope, especially AI related, was to have something that produces something tangible. So the guidelines to me were intuitive. It was, I will be honest, I don't think I was the only one. I might have just been the first mover, but there we were. We created the idea. It was vetted by the board. And we came up first with the task force, then with the guidelines. And there's a lot more to come. And I'll leave it there.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. And I just wanted to mention or just kind of draw from, you mentioned the Mata case. And you explained a bit about what happened in that case. And I think that was, what, 2023? Is that right? 2022, 2023, right? And so, but just recently we had another one, right? In the federal courts of Wyoming. And I think about two days ago, the order came out from the judge and the attorneys involved were fined about $15,000 because of hallucinations on the case law that they cited to the court. So, you know I see that happening anyway. And this is a major law firm that we're talking about here in the U.S. So it's interesting how we still don't learn, I guess. That would be my take on that.  Benjamin: I mean, I will say this. Learning is a relative term because learning, you need to also fail. You need to make mistakes to learn. I guess the crux and the difference is that up until now, at any law firm or anyone working in law would never entrust a first-year associate, a summer associate, a paralegal to draft arguments or to draft certain parts of a pleading by themselves without supervision. However, now, given that AI sounds sophisticated, because it has unlimited access to words and dictionaries, people assume that it is right. And that is where the problem starts. So I am obviously, personally, I am no one to judge a case, no one to say what to do. And in my capacity of the chair of the SVAMC AI task force, we also take a backseat saying these are soft law guidelines. However, submitting documents with information that has not been verified has, in my opinion, very little to do with AI. It has something to do with ethical duty and candor. And that is something that, in my opinion, if a court wants to fine attorneys, they're more welcome to do so. But that is something that should definitely be referred to the Bar Association to take measures. But again, these are my two cents as a citizen.  Rebeca: No, very good. Very good. So, you know, drawing from that point as well, and because of the cautionary tales we hear about surrounding these cases and many others that we've heard, many see AI as a double-edged sword, right? On the one hand, offering efficiency gains while raising concerns about bias and procedural fairness. What do you see as the biggest risk and benefits of AI in arbitration?  Benjamin: So it's an interesting question. To a certain extent, we tried to address many of the risks in the AI guidelines. Whoever hasn't looked at the guidelines yet, I highly suggest you take a look at them they're available on svamc.org I'm sure that they're widely available on other databases Jus Mundi has it as well. I invite everyone to take a look at it. There are several challenges. We don't believe that those challenges would justify not using it. To name a few, we have bias. We have lack of transparency. We also have the issue of over-reliance, which is the one we were talking about just a minute ago, where it seems so sophisticated that we as human beings, having worked in the field, cannot conceive how such an eloquent answer is anything but true. So there's a black box problem and so many others, but quite frankly, there are so many benefits that come with it. AI is an unlimited knowledge tool that we can use. As of now, AI is what we know it is. It has hallucinations. It does have some bias. There is this black box problem. Where does it come from? Why? What's the source? But quite frankly, if we are able to triage the issues and to really look at what are the advantages and what is it we want to get out of it, and I'll give you a brief example. Let's say you're drafting an RFA. If you know the case, you know the parties, and you know every aspect of the case, AI can draft everything head to toe. You will always be able to tell what is from the case and what's not from the case. If we over-rely on AI and we allow it to draft without verifying all the facts, without making sure we know the transcript inside and out, without knowing the facts of the case, then we will always run into certain issues. Another issue we run into a lot with predictive AI is relying on data that exists. So compared to generative AI, predictive AI is taking data that already exists and predicting another outcome. So there's a lesser likelihood of hallucinations. The issue with that is, of course, bias. Just a brief example, you're the president of Arbitral Women, so you will definitely understand. It has only been in the last 30 years that women had more of a presence in arbitration, specifically sitting as an arbitrator. So if we rely on data that goes beyond those 30, 40, 50 years, there's going to be a lot of male decisions having been taken. Potentially even laws that applied back then that were not very gender neutral. So we need, we as people, need to triage and understand where is the good information, where is information that may have bias and counterbalance it. As of now, we will need to counterbalance it manually. However, as I always say, we've only seen a grain of salt of what AI can do. So as time progresses, the challenges, as you mentioned, will become lesser and lesser and lesser. And the knowledge that AI has will become wider and wider. As of now, especially in arbitration, we are really taking advantage of the fact that there is still scarcity of knowledge. But it is really just a question of time until AI picks up. So we need to get a better understanding of what is it we can do to leverage AI to make ourselves indispensable.  Rebeca: No, that's very interesting, Ben. And as you mentioned, yes, as president of ArbitralWomen, the word bias is something I pay close attention. You know, we're talking about bias. You mentioned bias. And we all have conscious or unconscious biases, right? And so you mentioned that about laws that were passed in the past where potentially there was not a lot of input from women or other members of our society. Do you think AI can be trained then to be truly neutral or will bias always be a challenge?  Benjamin: I wish I had the right answer. I think, I actually truly believe that bias is a very relative term. And in certain societies, bias has a very firm and black and white standing, whereas in other societies, it does not. Especially in international arbitration, where we not only deal with cross-border disputes, but different cultures, different laws, laws of the seats, laws of the contract. I think it's very hard to point out one set of bias that we will combat or that we will set as principle for everything. I think ultimately what ensures that there is always human oversight in the use of AI, especially in arbitration, are exactly these type of issues. So we can, of course, try to combat bias and gender bias and others. But I don't think it is as easy as we say, because even nowadays, in normal proceedings, we are still dealing with bias on a human level. So I think we cannot ask from machines to be less biased than we as humans are.  Rebeca: Let me pivot here a bit. And, you know, earlier, we mentioned the GAR Awards. And now I'd like to shift our focus to the recent GAR Life on Technology that took place here in New York last week on February 20th. And to give our audience, you know, some context. GAR stands for Global Arbitration Review, a widely read journal that not only ranks international arbitration practices at law firms worldwide, but also, among other things, organizes live conferences on cutting-edge topics in arbitration across the globe. So I know you were a speaker at GAR Live, and there was an important discussion about distinguishing generative AI, predictive AI, and other AI applications. How do these different AI technologies impact arbitration, and how do the SVAMC guidelines address them?  Benjamin: I was truly honored to speak at the GAR Live event in New York, and I think the fact that I was invited to speak on AI as a testament on how important AI is and how widely interested the community is in the use of AI, which is very different to 2023 when we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI. I think it is important to understand that ultimately, everything in arbitration, specifically in arbitration, needs human oversight. But in using AI in arbitration, I think we need to differentiate on how the use of AI is different in arbitration versus other parts of the law, and specifically how it is different in arbitration compared to how we would use it on a day-to-day basis. In arbitration specifically, arbitrators are still responsible for a personal or arbitrators are given a personal mandate that is very different to how law works in general. Where you have a lot of judges that let their assistants draft parts of the decision, parts of the order. Arbitration is a little different, and that for a reason. Specifically in international arbitration, because there are certain sensitivities when it comes to local law, when it comes to an international standard and local standards. Arbitrators are held to a higher standard. Using AI as an arbitrator, for example, which could technically be put at the same level as using a tribunal secretary, has its limits. So I think that AI can be used in many aspects, from drafting for attorneys, for counsel, when it comes to helping prepare graphs, when it comes to preparing documents, accumulating documents, etc., etc. But it does have its limits when it comes to arbitrators using it. As we have tried to reiterate in the guidelines, arbitrators need to be very conscious of where their personal mandate starts and ends. In other words, our recommendation, again, we are soft law guidelines, our recommendation to arbitrators are to not use AI when it comes to any decision-making process. What does that mean? We don't know. And neither does the law. And every jurisdiction has their own definition of what that means. It is up for the arbitrator to define what a decision-making process is and to decide of whether the use of AI in that process is adequate.  Rebeca: Thank you so much, Ben. I want to now kind of pivot, since we've been talking a little bit more about the guidelines, I want to ask you a few questions about them. So they were created with a global perspective, right? And so what initiatives is the AI task force pursuing to ensure the guidelines remain relevant worldwide? You've been talking about different legal systems and local laws and how practitioners or certain regulations within certain jurisdictions might treat certain things differently. So what is the AI task force doing to remain relevant, to maybe create some sort of uniformity? So what can you tell me about that?  Benjamin: So we at the SVAMC task force, we continue to gather feedback, of course, And we're looking for global adaptation. We will continue to work closely with practitioners, with institutions, with lawmakers, with government, to ensure that when it comes to arbitration, AI is given a space, it's used adequately, and if possible, of course, and preferential to us, the SVAMC AI guidelines are used. That's why they were drafted, to be used. When we presented the guidelines to different committees and to different law sections and bar associations, it struck us that jurisdictions such as the U.S., and more specifically in New York, where both you and I are based, the community was not very open to receiving these guidelines as guidelines. And the suggestion was actually made to creating a white paper, And as much as it seemed to be a shutdown at an early stage, when we were thinking about it, and I was very blessed to have seven additional members in the Guidelines Drafting Committee, seven very bright individual members that I learned a lot from during this process. It was clear to us that jurisdictions such as New York have a very high ethical standard, and where guidelines such as our guidelines would potentially be seen as doubling ethical rules. So although we advocate for them not being ethical guidelines whatsoever, because we don't believe they are, we strongly suggest that local and international ethical standards are being upheld. So with that in mind, we realize that there is more to a global aspect that needs to be addressed rather than an aspect of law associations in the US or in the UK or now in Europe. Up-and-coming jurisdictions that up until now did not have a lot of exposure to artificial intelligence and maybe even technology as a whole are rising. And they may need more guidance than jurisdictions where technology may be an instinct away. So what the AI task force has created. And is continuing to recruit for, are regional committees for the AI Task Force, tracking AI usage in different legal systems and different jurisdictions. Our goal is to track AI-related legislation and its potential impact on arbitration. These regional committees will also provide jurisdiction-specific insights to refine the guidelines. And hopefully, or this is what we anticipate, these regional committees will help bridge the gap between AI's global development and local legal framework. There will be a dialogue. We will continue, obviously, to be present at conferences, to have open dialogue, and to recruit, of course, for these committees. But the next step is definitely to focus on these regional committees and to see how we, as the AI task force of the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, can impact the use of AI in arbitration worldwide.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. So you're utilizing committees in different jurisdictions to keep you appraised of what's happening in each jurisdiction. And then with that, continue, you know, somehow evolving the guidelines and gathering information to see how this field, you know, it's changing rapidly.  Benjamin: Absolutely. Initially, we were thinking of just having a small local committee to analyze different jurisdictions and what laws and what court cases, etc. But we soon came to realize that it's much more than tracking judicial decisions. We need people on the ground that are part of a jurisdiction, part of that local law, to tell us how AI impacts their day-to-day, how it may differ from yesterday to tomorrow, and what potential legislation will be enacted to either allow or disallow the use of certain AI.  Rebeca: That's very interesting. I think it's something that will keep the guidelines up to date and relevant for a long time. So kudos to you, the SVAMC and the task force. Now, I know that the guidelines are a very short paper, you know, and then in the back you have the commentary on them. So I want to, I'm not going to dissect all of the guidelines, but I want to come and talk about one of them in particular that I think created a lot of discussion around the guidelines itself. So for full disclosure, right, I was part of the reviewing committee of the AI guidelines. And I remember that one of the most debated aspects of the SVAMC AI guidelines is guideline three on disclosure, right? So should arbitrators and counsel disclose their AI use in proceedings? So I think that that has generated a lot of debates. And that's the reason why we have the resulting guideline number three, the way it is drafted. So can you give us a little bit more of insight what happened there?  Benjamin: Absolutely. I'd love to. Guideline three was very controversial from the get-go. We initially had two options. We had a two-pronged test that parties would either satisfy or not, and then disclosure was necessary. And then we had another option that the community could vote on where it was up to the parties to decide whether their AI-aided submission could impact the outcome of the case. And depending on that, they would disclose or not disclose whether AI was used. Quite frankly, that was a debate we had in 2023, and a lot changed from November 2023 until April, when we finally published the first version of the AI guidelines. A lot of courts have implemented an obligatory disclosure. I think people have also gotten more comfortable with using AI on a day-to-day. And we ultimately came to the conclusion to opt for a flexible disclosure approach, which can now be found in the guidelines. The reason for that was relatively simple, or relatively simple to us who debated that. Having a disclosure obligation of the use of AI will very easily become inefficient for two reasons. A blanket disclosure for the use of AI serves nobody. It really boils down to one question, which is, if the judge, or in our case in arbitration, if the arbitrator or tribunal knows that AI was used for a certain document, now what? How does that knowledge transform into action? And how does that knowledge lead to a different outcome? And in our analysis, it turned out that a blanket disclosure of AI usage, or in general, an over-disclosure of the use of AI in arbitration, may actually lead to adverse consequences for the parties who make the disclosure. Why? Because not knowing how AI can impact these submissions causes arbitrators not to know what to do with that disclosure. So ultimately, it's really up to the parties to decide, how was AI used? How can it impact the case? What is it I want to disclose? How do I disclose? It's also important for the arbitrators to understand, what do I do with the disclosure before saying, everything needs to be disclosed. During the GAR event in New York, the issue was raised whether documents which were prepared with the use of AI should be disclosed or whether there should be a blanket disclosure. And quite frankly, the debate went back and forth, but ultimately it comes down to cross-examination. It comes down to the expert or the party submitting the document, being able to back up where the information comes from rather than knowing that AI was used. And if you put that in aspect, we received a very interesting question of why we should continue using AI, knowing that approximately 30% of its output are hallucinations and it needs revamping. This was compared to a summer associate or a first-year associate, and the question was very simple. If I have a first-year associate or a summer associate whose output has a 30% error rate, why would I continue using that associate? And quite frankly, there is merit to the question, and it really has a very simple answer. And the answer is time and money. Using AI makes it much faster to receive using AI makes it faster to receive output than using a first year associate or summer associate and it's way cheaper. For that, it's worth having a 30% error margin. I don't know where they got the 30% from, but we just went along with it.  Rebeca: I was about to ask you where they get the 30%. And well, I think that for first-year associates or summer associates that are listening, I think that the main thing will be for them to then become very savvy in the use of AI so they can become relevant to the practice. I think everyone, you know, there's always that question about whether AI will replace all of us, the entire world, and we'll go into machine apocalypses. I don't see it that way. In my view, I see that if we, you know, if we train ourselves, if we're not afraid of using the tool, we'll very much be in a position to pivot and understand how to use it. And when you have, what is the saying, garbage in, garbage out. So if you have a bad input, you will have a bad output. You need to know the case. You need to know your documents to understand whether the machine is hallucinating or giving you, you know, an information that is not real. I like to play and ask certain questions to chat GPT, you know, here and there. And sometimes I, you know, I ask obviously things that I know the answer to. And then I'm like, chat GPT, this is not accurate. Can you check on this? And he's like, oh, thank you for correcting me. I mean, and it's just a way of, you got to try and understand it so you know where to make improvements. But that doesn't mean that the tool, because it's a tool, will come and replace, you know, your better judgment as a professional, as an attorney.  Benjamin: Absolutely. One of the things we say is it is a tool. It does nothing out of its own volition. So what you're saying is 100% right. This is what the SVAMC AI guidelines stand for. Practitioners need to accustom themselves on proper use of AI. AI can be used from paid versions to unpaid versions. We just need to understand what is an open source AI, what is a close circuit AI. Again, for whoever's listening, feel free to look up the guidelines. There's a lot of information there. There's tons of articles written at this point. And just be very mindful of if there is an open AI system, such as an unpaid chat GPT version. It does not mean you cannot use it. First, check with your firm to make sure you're allowed to use it. I don't want to get into any trouble.  Rebeca: Well, we don't want to put confidential information on an open AI platform.  Benjamin: Exactly. Once the firm or your colleagues allow you to use ChatGPT, even if it's an open version, just be very smart about what it is you're putting in. No confidential information, no potential conflict check, no potential cases. Just be smart about what it is you put in. Another aspect we were actually debating about is this hallucination. Just an example, let's say you say this is an ISDS case, so we're talking a little more public, and you ask Chad GPT, hey, show me all the cases against Costa Rica. And it hallucinates, too. It might actually be that somebody input information for a potential case against Costa Rica or a theoretical case against Costa Rica, Chad GPT being on the open end, takes that as one potential case. So just be very smart. Be diligent, but also don't be afraid of using it.  Rebeca: That's a great note to end on. AI is here to stay. And as legal professionals, it's up to us to ensure it serves the interests of justice, fairness, and efficiency. And for those interested in learning more about the SVAMC AI guidelines, you can find them online at svamc.org and search for guidelines. I tried it myself and you will go directly to the guidelines. And if you like to stay updated on developments in AI and arbitration, be sure to follow Tech Law Talks and join us for future episodes where we'll continue exploring the intersection of law and technology. Ben, thank you again for joining me today. It's been a great pleasure. And thank you to our listeners for tuning in.  Benjamin: Thank you so much, Rebeca, for having me and Tech Law Talks for the opportunity to be here.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

Long before hashtags and apps, patient mentoring thrived quietly in community rooms and support circles—offering emotional validation and practical guidance where clinical care left off. In this episode, Chris Boyer and Reed Smith trace the evolution of peer-to-peer support in healthcare, and how digital platforms have transformed it from local to limitless. They dive into: The History of Peer Mentoring – From 1970s cancer groups to HIV/AIDS buddy programs, peer support has long filled the gaps in clinical care through empathy, shared experience, and trust. The Digital Shift – How platforms like PatientsLikeMe, Reddit, Inspire, and even TikTok created scalable, searchable communities for patients—especially those navigating chronic or stigmatized conditions. Why Health Systems Lag Behind – Compliance fears, cultural resistance, and underinvestment have limited provider involvement, even as patients build robust peer networks on their own. Opportunities for Integration – Peer support could enhance onboarding, post-discharge care, chronic condition engagement, and even brand trust—if health systems partner, not compete. Later in the episode, they're joined by Paul Hoffman, founder of InTandem Health, who shares insights on launching digital peer mentoring platforms—from clinical impact and marketing value to the surprising role peer programs can play in fundraising and health system transformation. In 2025, the most powerful engagement may not be provider-to-patient—but patient-to-patient. Mentions from the Show:  “Peer support/peer provided services: Underlying processes, benefits, and critical ingredients.” Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal. Effectiveness of Peer Support on Quality of Life and Anxiety in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Impact of the 2nd Story Peer Respite Program on Use of Inpatient and Emergency Services Peer-Supported Self-Management of Chronic Disease: A Toolkit “Social Uses of Personal Health Information Within PatientsLikeMe, an Online Patient Community: What Can Happen When Patients Have Access to One Another's Data” Online social networking by patients with diabetes: a qualitative evaluation of communication with Facebook. Paul Hoffman on LinkedIn InTandemHealth Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In 2024, U.S. healthcare and pharma ad spending will top $30 billion—but how much of it actually drives results? In this episode, Chris Boyer and Reed Smith dig into the hidden inefficiencies in health system media budgets and ask a bold question: Are we investing strategically, or just fueling the machine? They dive into: Why Media Waste Persists – From inherited budget models to disconnected teams and shallow KPIs, the current approach to digital spend is full of cracks. The Illusion of Strategy – Why having a media plan isn't the same as having a strategy—and how vague goals and channel-first thinking lead to missed ROI. The Hidden Costs of Poor Alignment – From creative mismatches to lack of CRM integration, unmeasured waste is hiding beyond the dashboard. Agency Transparency & Trust – What health systems need to know about principal media buying, opaque reporting, and misaligned incentives. They're joined by Jane Crosby of True North, who shares her performance marketing playbook: how strategic bid management, integrated media planning, AI tools, and smarter collaboration are turning wasteful spend into efficient, results-driven campaigns. In 2025, it's time to stop asking if media is being wasted—and start asking how to turn it into a high-yield investment. Mentions from the show:  Healthcare and pharma marketers go digital, but traditional media stays relevant Eliminate waste and complexity in your digital advertising budget - the Proxima Group Brands threw away $6 billion in wasted digital ad spend WG Content How AI search ranks healthcare content: A ChatGPT vs. Google experiment Diane Hammons on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Pompliano and Anthony Pompliano discuss Larry Fink being a big bitcoin bull, tariffs, stock market, recessions, crypto assets, and is a recession coming?=======================Simple Mining makes Bitcoin mining simple and accessible for everyone. We offer a premium white glove hosting service, helping you maximize the profitability of Bitcoin mining. For more information on Simple Mining or to get started mining Bitcoin, visit https://www.simplemining.io/=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Nik Bhatia is the Founder of the Bitcoin Layer, and the author of a brand new book called “Bitcoin Age.” In this conversation we talk about bitcoin, it's relationship between the dollar and other traditional assets, why self-custody is protected under the first amendment, what the US government should be doing with bitcoin, how they plan on helping the middle class, and what Nik thinks the future looks like. =======================Simple Mining makes Bitcoin mining simple and accessible for everyone. We offer a premium white glove hosting service, helping you maximize the profitability of Bitcoin mining. For more information on Simple Mining or to get started mining Bitcoin, visit https://www.simplemining.io/=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Is AI-generated content in healthcare reckless—or revolutionary? In this episode, hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith challenge the fear around using AI in a regulated industry and explore how health systems can use generative AI safely, effectively, and strategically to create better content, faster. They dive into: AI + Content in a Regulated World – Why risk-averse culture and compliance concerns have slowed adoption—and why those fears might be outdated. The Reality of Today's AI Use – How non-PHI content (like patient education, provider bios, and public health materials) is already being generated by AI. AI as a Content Accelerator – From readability and ADA compliance to localization and SEO, AI is changing the content game in health systems. Prompt Engineering as a Strategic Skill – Why healthcare marketers need to think like prompt architects, not just copywriters, and how prompt styles like chain-of-thought, self-refine, and role-based prompting are becoming foundational. Later in the episode, they're joined by Diane Hammons of WG Content, who shares how custom LLMs and advanced prompting are driving content efficiency and brand consistency across the healthcare landscape. In 2025, the question isn't whether AI belongs in healthcare content—it's how well we're guiding it. Mentions from the show:  Medical content creation in the age of generative AI How to use AI safely for Content Creation in Hospital Marketing WG Content How AI search ranks healthcare content: A ChatGPT vs. Google experiment Diane Hammons on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode Legal Value Network board members Keith Maziarek and Justin Ergler discuss innovation in the legal industry with David Cunningham, Chief Innovation Officer at Reed Smith. They explore the challenges and benefits of adopting AI and technology, emphasizing the importance of a holistic approach that integrates various tools and processes. Cunningham highlights Reed Smith's strategy of leveraging existing models and working with both established and new companies to enhance legal services. They also discuss the significance of change management, data utilization, and the need for a clear roadmap to optimize business processes and client relationships.

In this episode, Melissa Ventrone of law firm Clark Hill and Arthur Armstrong of law firm Reed Smith joined The Insuring Cyber Podcast to unpack the Trump administration's … Read More » The post EP. 101: Insuring Cyber Risk in a Shifting Political Landscape appeared first on Insurance Journal TV.

In this episode, Melissa Ventrone of law firm Clark Hill and Arthur Armstrong of law firm Reed Smith joined The Insuring Cyber Podcast to unpack the Trump administration's … Read More » The post EP. 101: Insuring Cyber Risk in a Shifting Political Landscape appeared first on Insurance Journal TV.

In this episode, Melissa Ventrone of law firm Clark Hill and Arthur Armstrong of law firm Reed Smith joined The Insuring Cyber Podcast to unpack the Trump administration's … Read More » The post EP. 101: Insuring Cyber Risk in a Shifting Political Landscape appeared first on Insurance Journal TV.

In this episode, Reed Smith, MBA, Chief Consumer Officer at Ardent Health Services, discusses how the organization is leveraging technology to enhance patient experience, improve access to care, and support clinicians. Reed shares insights on the future of healthcare technology, including the importance of interoperability and prioritizing consumer needs in an evolving landscape.

In this episode, Reed Smith, MBA, Chief Consumer Officer at Ardent Health Services, discusses how the organization is leveraging technology to enhance patient experience, improve access to care, and support clinicians. Reed shares insights on the future of healthcare technology, including the importance of interoperability and prioritizing consumer needs in an evolving landscape.

Jason Les is the CEO and Director of Riot Platforms, a bitcoin mining and digital infrastructure company. This conversation was recorded at Bitcoin Investor Week in New York. In this conversation we talk about the bitcoin mining landscape, regulatory changes, the truth around bitcoin mining, buying vs mining bitcoin, how to deal with bear markets, and more.=========================Bitwise is one of the largest and fastest-growing crypto asset managers. As of December 31, 2021, the company managed over $1.3 billion across an expanding suite of investment solutions, which include the world's largest crypto index fund and other innovative products spanning Bitcoin, Ethereum, DeFi, and crypto equities. Whether you're an individual, advisor, or institution, Bitwise provides intelligent access to crypto with your unique circumstances in mind. Visit www.bitwiseinvestments.com to learn more. Certain of the Bitwise investment products may be subject to the extreme risks associated with investing in crypto assets. Visit www.bitwiseinvestments.com/disclosures/ to learn more.=========================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=========================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

On 4 December 2024 Future of Finance hosted a one-day event at the offices of AON in London. Entitled Digital asset custody: What do asset managers and asset owners need to know about digital asset custody and custodians?, the event attracted 160 registrants from asset managers, banks, custodian banks, digital asset custodians, exchanges, financial market infrastructures, insurers, investment consultants, law firms, regulators and technology vendors. This is an account of what they and the panellists contributed to the seven sessions that day, both live and in the multiple-choice questionnaire they completed in advance, the results of which are also published here.The panellists for this discussion were Laurent Kssis, Board Member and Strategic Advisor to Issuance.Swiss AG; Philip Rage, Director of Strategic Initiatives at Soter Insure; Tariq Rasheed, a Partner at Reed Smith; Jeet Singh, Partner and EMEA Blockchain Leader at EY; and, as moderator, Ed Pugh, Development Director, Fintech and Digital Assets, at Aon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On 4 December 2024 Future of Finance hosted a one-day event at the offices of AON in London. Entitled Digital asset custody: What do asset managers and asset owners need to know about digital asset custody and custodians?, the event attracted 160 registrants from asset managers, banks, custodian banks, digital asset custodians, exchanges, financial market infrastructures, insurers, investment consultants, law firms, regulators and technology vendors. This is an account of what they and the panellists contributed to the seven sessions that day, both live and in the multiple-choice questionnaire they completed in advance, the results of which are also published here.The panellists for this discussion were John Siena, Associate General Counsel and Co-Head of Regulatory Strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH); Monica Gogna, Partner and Head of the Financial Institutions Law Group at EY; Romin Dabir, partner at Reed Smith; and Yvonne Deane Harte, Director for Secondary Markets and Post Trade policy at UK Finance. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Healthcare operates under the mindset that failure is not an option—but what if that's actually slowing down innovation? While tech companies embrace rapid iteration, health systems often get stuck in pilot purgatory, unable to scale promising initiatives. In this episode, Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore why failing faster—when done smartly—is key to keeping pace with disruption. They dive into: Why Healthcare Resists "Fail Fast" Thinking – How risk aversion, compliance hurdles, and leadership discomfort prevent innovation. Lessons from Other Industries – How Google, Amazon, and pharma companies use structured experimentation to accelerate growth. How Tech Enables Smart Experimentation – Using AI, predictive modeling, and digital sandboxes to minimize risk while maximizing learning. Making the Case for Leadership Buy-In – How framing failing fast as an ROI strategy can help organizations embrace iterative improvements. Later in the episode, they are joined by Alan Shoebridge, who shares his insights on industry disruption, external threats, and why health systems must rethink their approach to change. In 2025, standing still isn't safe—healthcare must learn to fail fast, fail smart, and fail forward. Mentions from the show:  Failing Fast: Does It Apply to Health Care? Why Failing Fast Means Failing Forward AI, Data, and the Art of Failing Fast in Healthcare Innovation Amazon, CVS Health Follow Their Learn-Fast, Fail-Fast Models Alan Shoebridge on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eric Semler is the Chairman of Semler Scientific, Founder of TCS Capital Management, and serves on the board of Fundstrat Global Advisors. This conversation was recorded at Bitcoin Investor Week in New York. In this conversation we talk about why Semler Scientific put bitcoin on the balance sheet, feedback from customers and shareholders, challenges, thinking through leverage percentage, potential market reaction if companies start to sell bitcoin, and more. =======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Bitwise is one of the largest and fastest-growing crypto asset managers. As of December 31, 2021, the company managed over $1.3 billion across an expanding suite of investment solutions, which include the world's largest crypto index fund and other innovative products spanning Bitcoin, Ethereum, DeFi, and crypto equities. Whether you're an individual, advisor, or institution, Bitwise provides intelligent access to crypto with your unique circumstances in mind. Visit www.bitwiseinvestments.com to learn more. Certain of the Bitwise investment products may be subject to the extreme risks associated with investing in crypto assets. Visit www.bitwiseinvestments.com/disclosures/ to learn more.=======================BitcoinOS is bringing Bitcoin into a new era. For the first time, Bitcoiners can access real DeFi across the entire crypto ecosystem, powered by revolutionary zero-knowledge technology. No more trusting sketchy bridges or giving up security. BitcoinOS reunites all of crypto around the chain where it all began. Follow BitcoinOS on twitter @BTC_OS and Be early to Bitcoin again.=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Consumers expect personalized experiences in nearly every aspect of their lives—but in healthcare, is personalization truly delivering value, or is it just another marketing buzzword? Chris Boyer and Reed Smith break down the balance between helpful personalization and overreach, exploring how health systems can use data-driven insights to enhance patient engagement without crossing privacy lines. They dive into: The Need for Personalization – How shifting patient expectations, rising out-of-pocket costs, and digital health trends are fueling demand for tailored healthcare experiences. Personalization That Solves Problems – Why consumers prioritize guidance over recognition, and how health systems can simplify care navigation and reduce decision anxiety. The Role of AI & Data in Personalization – How predictive analytics, CRM systems, and psychographic segmentation can drive smarter, more effective patient engagement. Hyper-Personalization in Healthcare – How organizations are integrating real-time behavioral insights to create meaningful, omnichannel experiences. Later in the episode, they are joined by Teri Sun of White Rhino, who shares insights on how AI can add a human touch to personalization—ensuring patients feel understood, not just targeted. In 2025, healthcare personalization isn't about knowing more—it's about helping better. Mentions from the show:  The Consumerization of Healthcare and How Providers Can Adapt  Maximize the Impact of Personalization - Gartner The Future of Digital Products with AI — Peter Smart • MIT EmTech Digital 2024 What if you knew exactly what patients wanted from your website? Clicking with Patients - White Rhino newsletter Teri Sun on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Cagney is the co-founder and CEO of Figure Technologies, a member of the founding team of Provenance Blockchain and the co-founder and former CEO of SoFi. This conversation was recorded at Bitcoin Investor Week in New York. In this conversation we talk about using bitcoin as collateral for a home, why bitcoin is pristine collateral, stablecoins, blockchain RWA thesis, institutional adoption, KPIs to measure success, and what the future looks like. =======================Simple Mining makes Bitcoin mining simple and accessible for everyone.We offer a premium white glove hosting service, helping you maximize the profitability of Bitcoin mining. For more information on Simple Mining or to get started mining Bitcoin, visit https://www.simplemining.io/=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Polkadot is a scalable, secure, and decentralized blockchain technology aimed at creating Web3. Created by Gavin Wood, co-founder of Ethereum, Polkadot empowers users to build decentralized applications with ease. Backed by industry leaders, making it a preferred choice for big names, Polkadot stands out as a leading choice for investors seeking a reliable, future-proof solution in the growing world of Web3 technology. Learn more at https://polkadot.com/.=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Vivek Ramaswamy is the Co-Founder of Strive Asset Management, entrepreneur, author, and running to be the governor of Ohio. This conversation was recorded at Bitcoin Investor Week in New York. In this conversation we talk about how bitcoin is a new era for the United States, how bitcoin and leadership can drive excellence, Vivek's plan for Ohio, DOGE, and how citizens can help. ====================BitcoinIRA: Buy, sell, and swap 75+ cryptocurrencies in your retirement account. Take 3 minutes to open your account & get connected to a team of IRA specialists that will guide you through every step of the process. Go to https://bitcoinira.com/pomp/ to earn up to $500 in rewards.=======================Xapo Bank, the world's first fully licensed Bitcoin-enabled bank, offers military-grade security with an unmatched blend of physical and digital security, as well as pioneering regulatory oversight, so your funds are always protected. Beyond secure storage, they enable you to grow and use your Bitcoin. Earn daily interest in Bitcoin, spend with zero FX fees using a global card, and make instant payments via the Lightning Network for unrivalled access and convenience. Visit https://www.xapobank.com/pomp to join.=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

Hospitals and health systems are facing yet another wave of uncertainty and disruption—financial constraints, shifting regulations, and changing patient expectations are putting immense pressure on leadership. The fact is, traditional leadership models don't work in this new environment—adaptive change is now a critical skill. In this episode, hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore how marketing, communications, experience, and digital leaders can navigate this rapidly evolving landscape by embracing adaptive leadership strategies, diving into: Navigating Uncertainty – How financial pressures, policy shifts (like Medicare Advantage rate changes), and cybersecurity threats are reshaping healthcare leadership. Understanding Adaptive Leadership – Why healthcare organizations need cultural shifts, experimentation, and continuous learning rather than quick-fix solutions. Marketing & Digital's Role in Change Management – How marketing, communications, and digital teams can drive transformation by fostering customer-centricity, collaboration, and data-driven decision-making. Doing More with Less – Strategies for optimizing marketing and digital budgets, shifting from large-scale campaigns to high-ROI micro-targeted initiatives. Later in the episode, they are joined by Amy Comeau, author of Every Storm Runs Out of Rain, who shares insights from her front-line leadership experience in healthcare marketing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Her reflections offer a compelling perspective on resilience, change, and moving forward. In 2025, adaptive leadership isn't just about responding to change—it's about shaping the future of healthcare. Mentions from the show:  2025 US health care outlook Healthcare finance trends for 2025: accelerating change Top Marketing Strategies for Healthcare Organizations in 2025 Adaptive Change vs. Technical Change: Definitions and Differences Amy Comeau on LinkedIn Every Storm Runs Out of Rain website Every Storm Runs Out of Rain book on Amazon Amy Comeau on BlueSky Amy Comea Substack Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Followers of Yeshua are called to take up their cross—to become martyrs. This mandate inspired one filmmaker, Reed Smith, to explore the lives of those disciples who are risking everything to follow Yeshua. In the process, he found that the gospel message was inextricably tied to the exile and redemption of Israel. In this episode, filmmaker Reed Smith discusses the themes of his new film, Sojourners and Exiles, which explores the cost of discipleship for modern-day disciples of Yeshua. – Episode Takeaways – • The Call to Martyrdom and Discipleship – Followers of Yeshua are called to take up their cross, a theme that inspired filmmaker Reed Smith to explore modern discipleship and persecution. • The Gospel's Connection to Israel – Smith discovered that the message of the gospel is deeply tied to the exile and redemption of Israel, emphasizing that God's plan is Israel-centric. • "Sojourners and Exiles" Film – The documentary explores the cost of discipleship, focusing on real-life martyrs and their sacrifices for faith. • Western Christianity Lacks a Theology of Martyrdom – The podcast discusses how many Western Christians have not seriously considered martyrdom, while believers in other parts of the world face real persecution. • The Film's Unexpected Shift – While initially about martyrdom, the film evolves into a broader message about the Gospel of the Kingdom, the role of Israel, and the Jewish Messiah's return. • A Palestinian Jordanian's Journey – The film features a Palestinian Jordanian Christian who, despite cultural and religious opposition, embraces an Israel-centric gospel, demonstrating deep personal sacrifice. • Persecution for Supporting Israel – The discussion highlights how supporting Israel is becoming increasingly controversial, even within Christian circles, leading to potential persecution in the West. • The True Meaning of Matthew 25 – The film presents a compelling interpretation that Jesus' "least of these my brethren" in Matthew 25 refers to the Jewish people, challenging traditional Christian views. • Torah Club's Role in Spiritual Growth – Smith shares how joining a Torah Club has deepened his understanding of the Jewish context of Scripture, reinforcing the need to see Jesus within His Jewish identity. – Episode Resources – Sojourners and Exiles Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqSp8VmjHV0 Sojourners and Exiles Film: https://49tenfilms.vhx.tv/ I See Nations Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvgNZir8ns8 I See Nations Film: https://youtu.be/mDun8p4u9LM?si Messiah Podcast is a production of First Fruits of Zion (https://ffoz.org) in conjunction with Messiah Magazine. This publication is designed to provide rich substance, meaningful Jewish contexts, cultural understanding of the teaching of Jesus, and the background of modern faith from a Messianic Jewish perspective. Messiah Podcast theme music provided with permission by Joshua Aaron Music (http://JoshuaAaron.tv). “Cover the Sea” Copyright WorshipinIsrael.com songs 2020. All rights reserved.

Edan Yago is the CEO at BTCS OS & Core Contributor to BitcoinOS. In this conversation we talk about bitcoin, what is going right, areas of improvement for bitcoin, and how bitcoin can continue to scale to many different use cases. =======================Franzy makes franchise ownership accessible for dreamers, go-getters, and investors alike. With the AI-powered Franzy Fit Score, match with the best brands for your financials, experience, and goals. Explore franchise options, get pre-qualified, and access expert coaching to guide your journey. Ready to own a business? Visit https://franzy.com/pomp today!=======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Ledger has been trusted for 10 years to secure 20% of the world's digital assets. Their latest devices, Ledger Stax and Ledger Flex, feature secure touchscreens for safer, easier crypto management. Go to ledgerpomp.com to take control of your digital future=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

When we think about reputation management, our minds often jump to Google reviews and star ratings—but what if we're thinking too small? In this episode, Chris Boyer and Reed Smith challenge the traditional approach to ORM and explore how health systems can leverage reputation as a strategic asset beyond the review section.They dive into: Reputation as a Business Asset – Why ORM isn't just a marketing metric but a driver of partnerships, hiring, and regulatory trust. The Expanding Digital Footprint – How social media, AI-driven search, and misinformation shape brand perception. Operationalizing ORM – Moving reputation management beyond marketing to HR, legal, and corporate strategy. AI's Role in Reputation – How algorithms curate (and sometimes distort) what people see about your brand. Plus, they sit down with Dean Browell to discuss the declining influence of Google Reviews in assessing a health system's online reputation and what hospitals should focus on instead. Don't miss this deep dive into the future of reputation management in healthcare—because in 2025, your brand's trustworthiness isn't just about reviews, it's about strategy. Mentions from the show:  Reputation Management Statistics By Customer Reviews Impact, Revenue, Importance and Fake Review The Future of Online Reputation Management Services in 2025: What Businesses Must Know AI And Online Reputation Management: Five Trends For Brands To Keep Top Of Mind In 2025 Dean Browell on LinkedIn DiscoverFeedback.com Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Linden is the CEO of Mythical Games. In this conversation we talk about what's going on in the gaming world, why gaming is always at the tip of the innovation sphere, how this has infiltrated into the crypto world, and what it means for the future. =======================Reed Smith is a dynamic international law firm dedicated to helping clients move their businesses forward. With an inclusive culture and innovative mindset, Reed Smith delivers smarter, more creative legal services that drive better outcomes for their clients. Their deep industry knowledge, long-standing relationships and collaborative structure make them the go-to partner for complex disputes, transactions, and regulatory matters. Learn more at www.reedsmith.com=======================Polkadot is a scalable, secure, and decentralized blockchain technology aimed at creating Web3. Created by Gavin Wood, co-founder of Ethereum, Polkadot empowers users to build decentralized applications with ease. Backed by industry leaders, making it a preferred choice for big names, Polkadot stands out as a leading choice for investors seeking a reliable, future-proof solution in the growing world of Web3 technology. Learn more at https://polkadot.com/.=======================Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/=======================View 10k+ open startup jobs:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer explore the evolving role of content in healthcare marketing, diving into content composability, AI's impact on content creation, and how health systems can maximize their content strategies. They break down how healthcare organizations can move beyond simple content production to a structured, data-driven approach that enhances patient engagement. Later in the show, they are joined by Ahava Leibtag, who introduces the concept of a Content Stack, offering a framework for building, managing, and distributing healthcare content efficiently. Tune in for insights on how to future-proof your content strategy in an AI-driven world. Mentions from the show:  What is Content Composability? How AI is reshaping the content creator industry 16 Predictions About AI, Content Creation And Its Effect On Business Ahava Leibtag on LinkedIn Aha Media Group Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre celebrates its 40th anniversary, Reed Smith's J.P. Duffy welcomes Secretary-General Joanne Lau to discuss the center's major milestones, including the launch of its Beijing office and the updated 2024 rules. J.P. and Ms. Lau explore trends in the HKIAC's caseload, its goals for the next five to 10 years, and its strategies for maintaining its leadership in dispute resolution across the Asia-Pacific Region and beyond.

This Day in Legal History: First Formal Anti-slavery Resolution in American HistoryOn February 18, 1688, a group of Quakers in Germantown, Pennsylvania, drafted the first formal anti-slavery resolution in American history. Addressed to their local monthly meeting, the document condemned the practice of slavery and argued that it was incompatible with Christian teachings. The authors—Garret Henderich, Derick op de Graeff, Francis Daniel Pastorius, and Abram op de Graeff—compared enslaving Africans to the feared practice of Christian captives being taken by Turkish pirates. They pointed out the hypocrisy of Quakers, who sought religious freedom for themselves while denying liberty to others. The resolution questioned whether Christians had the moral right to enslave others based on race and emphasized the Golden Rule: treating others as one would want to be treated. It also warned of the possibility that enslaved people might eventually resist their oppression, raising the moral dilemma of whether their masters would then take up arms against them. The document urged Quakers to reconsider their complicity in slavery and to recognize the dignity and humanity of all people. Though the resolution was not immediately adopted by the broader Quaker community, it laid the groundwork for the abolitionist movement within the Society of Friends. Over time, Quakers became some of the most outspoken opponents of slavery in America. The Germantown protest stands as an early and courageous call for justice, foreshadowing the larger struggle for human rights that would unfold in the centuries to come.The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a judge's order blocking the removal of Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel, as litigation over his firing continues. Dellinger, appointed by former President Biden, was informed of his dismissal on February 7, but he sued, arguing that Trump lacked the authority to remove him without cause. Federal law allows the Special Counsel to be dismissed only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance.On February 12, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a temporary restraining order reinstating Dellinger, stating that his firing violated legal job protections. The Justice Department, calling the ruling an attack on presidential authority, argues that courts should not dictate whom the president retains in his administration. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the administration's appeal, deeming it premature.This case may set an important precedent for Trump's broader efforts to reshape the federal government by removing independent agency heads. It follows a pattern of dismissals, including Trump's recent firing of 17 inspectors general without explanation. The Special Counsel's Office plays a crucial role in protecting whistleblowers and enforcing restrictions on political activity among federal employees.Trump administration turns to US Supreme Court in bid to fire agency head | ReutersPresident Donald Trump announced he will nominate Edward Martin for a full term as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin, currently serving in an interim capacity, has drawn controversy for his past legal work. He previously represented individuals charged in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot and recently sought to drop charges against a defendant he once defended.Martin was also present outside the Capitol during the attack and has criticized the Justice Department's handling of the prosecutions. His nomination requires Senate approval, and ethical concerns have been raised about his involvement in cases related to former clients. Justice Department rules typically require attorneys to recuse themselves from such cases for at least a year.Trump, on his first day back in office, granted clemency to nearly all of the 1,600 people charged in connection with the riot. Martin's nomination is expected to face scrutiny due to his past legal advocacy for those involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.Trump to nominate top prosecutor Martin for permanent term as US attorney for DC | ReutersA former business development manager is suing Reed Smith LLP for at least $50,000 in unpaid overtime, claiming the firm misclassified her as a manager to avoid paying her for excessive work hours. Phoebe Medeiros filed the lawsuit in California state court, alleging she regularly worked 90-hour weeks, sometimes in shifts as long as 36 hours, despite official timesheets reflecting a standard 40-hour workweek.Medeiros, who transferred to Reed Smith's Southern California office in 2022, says she primarily worked under the direct instructions of partner Mark Pedretti, preparing business pitch materials and relaying information, rather than functioning as a true manager. Pedretti, who is not named as a defendant, has not commented on the lawsuit.Reed Smith has not responded to requests for comment, and neither Medeiros nor her attorneys from The Rutten Law Firm have provided statements. Medeiros has since left the firm and now works at Freshfields. The case, Medeiros v. Reed Smith, LLP, is being heard in California Superior Court for Los Angeles County.Reed Smith Sued by Business Development Manager for Overtime PayAnd in my column for Bloomberg Tax this week, I pitch the idea of tax-abatement bridge loans for office conversions. Post-pandemic, cities like New York, San Francisco, and Washington are struggling to revitalize commercial districts, with tax abatements for office-to-residential conversions proving ineffective because they only apply after project completion. Instead of making developers wait years to benefit, states should allow them to borrow against future tax savings through upfront, low-interest bridge loans—essentially restructuring the incentive rather than creating a new subsidy.  With record-high office vacancies and persistent housing shortages, conversions make obvious policy sense. However, they remain slow due to high costs and the difficulty of securing favorable loans in the current interest rate environment. Existing tax incentives only kick in post-construction, forcing developers to front conversion costs while facing uncertainty about future property tax rates. A bridge loan program secured by future abatements would mitigate this risk by locking in tax savings at financing, providing developers with stable, immediate capital.  The model would work through a public-private partnership: states would calculate future tax savings, commercial banks would underwrite low-interest loans secured by those abatements, and developers would repay the loans using the redirected tax breaks. Because funds would be deployed in phases based on project milestones, states wouldn't be on the hook for speculative projects that never materialize. Unlike grants or new subsidies, this wouldn't cost taxpayers beyond existing abatements, which are currently underutilized due to their delayed structure.  This approach should appeal across the political spectrum—expanding housing supply without direct handouts to developers satisfies progressive concerns, while a self-financing mechanism aligns with fiscal conservatism. Similar models have worked elsewhere, such as Wisconsin's senior housing loan program and widely used tax increment financing districts. Given the scale of the housing crisis, cities can't afford to wait—tax-backed bridge loans offer a practical fix to a well-documented problem. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode of Inclusivity Included, host Bareeq Barqawi speaks with Foley Hoag partner Arsalan Suleman and Reed Smith's Rizzy Qureshi and Wardah Bariabout their experiences as Muslim attorneys. This conversation explores the unique journeys, challenges, and triumphs of Muslim professionals in the legal field. Our panelists share personal stories about navigating identity in the workplace, addressing misconceptions about Islam, and fostering a culture of inclusion. Whether you're a legal professional or an ally, this episode offers valuable insights on how we can all contribute to a more equitable and supportive environment.

In this episode of Touch Point, hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore how retail healthcare's retreat, increasing regulations, cybersecurity risks, and private equity consolidation are reshaping industry competition. With Walmart and Walgreens pulling back from healthcare, new state-level regulations tightening mergers, and cybersecurity emerging as a financial risk, traditional health systems remain dominant—but must adapt fast. Chris and Reed break down key strategies to stay agile, consumer-focused, and competitive. Jonathan Pathuis, Managing Partner at Cast & Hue, joins to discuss how User-Centered Design and Jobs to Be Done help health systems identify both direct and indirect competition. He explains why patient decision-making is shifting, how strategic planning and marketing must collaborate, and how human-centered insights uncover hidden threats and opportunities. Whether you're rethinking market strategy or trying to understand evolving patient behavior, this episode provides practical takeaways for navigating healthcare's changing competitive landscape. Mentions from the show:  Becker's Hospital Review, What Big Retailers Did in Healthcare in 2024 Politico, Retail Giants Can't Figure Out Health Care National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), 2024 Legislative Recap: Health Care Consolidation and Competition National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), The Impact of Marketing Strategies in Healthcare Systems Invoca, How to Create a Healthcare Marketing Strategy: A Step-by-Step Guide ClearPoint Strategy, The 7 Most Effective Strategic Planning Models Used in Healthcare Kendall Hunt Publishing, Strategic Planning and Marketing in Healthcare Organizations National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), Integrated Marketing Communications: A Strategic Priority in Health Strata Decision Technology, Why Strategic Planning is Important in Healthcare Prezentium, Marketing Strategies, Tips to Create a Healthcare Marketing Plan Cascade, How To Implement Effective Strategic Planning In Healthcare Jonathan Pathuis on LinkedIn CastandHue.com How to Identify Competitors Through Jobs-to-be-Done Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Catherine Castaldo, Christian Leuthner and Asélle Ibraimova dive into the implications of the new Network and Information Security (NIS2) Directive, exploring its impact on cybersecurity compliance across the EU. They break down key changes, including expanded sector coverage, stricter reporting obligations and tougher penalties for noncompliance. Exploring how businesses can prepare for the evolving regulatory landscape, they share insights on risk management, incident response and best practices. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Catherine: Hi, and welcome to Tech Law Talks. My name is Catherine Castaldo, and I am a partner in the New York office in the Emerging Technologies Group, focusing on cybersecurity and privacy. And we have some big news with directives coming out of the EU for that very thing. So I'll turn it to Christian, who can introduce himself.  Christian: Thanks, Catherine. So my name is Christian Leuthner. I'm a partner at the Reed Smith Frankfurt office, also in the Emerging Technologies Group, focusing on IT and data. And we have a third attorney on this podcast, our colleague, Asélle.  Asélle: Thank you, Christian. Very pleased to join this podcast. I am counsel based in Reed Smith's London office, and I also am part of emerging technologies group and work on data protection, cybersecurity, and technology issues.  Catherine: Great. As we previewed a moment ago, on October 17th, 2024, there was a deadline for the transposition of a new directive, commonly referred to as NIS2. And for those of our listeners who might be less familiar, would you tell us what NIS2 stands for and who is subject to it?  Christian: Yeah, sure. So NIS2 stands for the Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems. And it is the second iteration of the EU's legal framework for enhancing the cybersecurity of critical infrastructures and digital services, it will replace what replaces the previous directive, which obviously is called NIS1, which was adopted in 2016, but had some limitations and gaps. So NIS2 applies to a wider range of entities that provide essential or important services to the society and the economy, such as energy, transport, health, banking, digital infrastructure, cloud computing, online marketplaces, and many, many more. It also covers public administrations and operators of electoral systems. Basically, anyone who relies on network and information systems to deliver their services and whose disruptions or compromise could have significant impacts on the public interest, security or rights of EU citizens and businesses will be in scope of NIS2. As you already said, Catherine, NIS2 had to be transposed into national member state law. So it's a directive, not a regulation, contrary to DORA, which we discussed the last time in our podcast. It had to be implemented into national law by October 17th, 2024. But most of the member states did not. So the EU Commission has now started investigations regarding the violations of the treaty of the functioning of the European Union against, I think, 23 member states as they have not yet implemented NIS2 into national law.  Catherine: That's really comprehensive. Do you have any idea what the timeline is for the implementation?  Christian: It depends on the state. So there are some states that have already comprehensive drafts. And those just need to go through the legislative process. In Germany, for example, we had a draft, but we have elections in a few weeks. And the current government just stated that they will not implement the law before that. And so after the election, the implementation law will be probably discussed again, redrafted. And so it'll take some time. It might be in the third quarter of this year.  Catherine: Very interesting. We have a similar process. Sometimes it happens in the States where things get delayed. Well, what are some of the key components?  Asélle: So, NIS2 focuses on cybersecurity measures, and we need to differentiate it from the usual cybersecurity measures that any organization thinks about in the usual way where they protect their data, their systems against cyber attacks or incidents. So the purpose of this legislation is to make sure there is no disruption to the economy or to others. And in that sense, the similar kind of notions apply. Organizations need to focus on ensuring availability, authenticity, integrity, confidentiality of data and protect their data and systems against all hazards. These notions are familiar to us also from the GDPR kind of framework. So there are 10 cybersecurity risk management measures that NIS2 talks about, and this is policies on risk analysis and information system security, incident handling, business continuity and crisis management, supply chain security. Security in systems acquisition, development, and maintenance, policies to assess the effectiveness of measures, basic cyber hygiene practices, and training, cryptography and encryption, human resources security training, use of multi-factor authentication. So these are familiar notions also. And it seems the general requirements are something that organizations will be familiar with. However, the European Commission in its NIS Investments Report of November 2023 has done research, a survey, and actually found that organizations that are subject to NIS2 didn't really even take these basic measures. Only 22% of those surveyed had third-party risk management in place, and only 48% of organizations had top management involved in approving cybersecurity risk policies and any type of training. And this reduces the general commitment of organizations to cybersecurity. So there are clearly gaps, and NAS2 is trying to focus on improving that. There are other couple of things that I wanted to mention that are different from NIS1 and are important. So as Christian said, essential entities are different, have different regime, compliance regime applied to them compared with important entities. Essential entities need to systematically document their compliance and be prepared for regular monitoring by regulators, including regular inspections by competent authorities, whereas important entities only are obliged to kind of be in touch and communicate with competent authorities in case of security incidents. And there is an important clarification in terms of the supply chain, these are the questions we receive from our clients. And the question is, does the supply chain mean anyone that provides services or products? And from our reading of the legislation, supply chain only relates to ICT products and ICT services. Of course, there is a proportionality principle employed in this legislation, as with usually most of the European legislation, and there is a size threshold. The legislation only applies to those organizations who exceed the medium threshold. And two more topics, and I'm sorry that I'm kind of taking over the conversation here, but I thought the self-identification point was important because in the view of the European Commission, the original NIS1 didn't cover the organizations it intended to cover and so in the European Commission's view, the requirements are so clear in terms of which entities it applies to, that organizations should be able to assess it and register, identify themselves with the relevant authorities by April this year. And the last point, digital infrastructure organizations, their nature is specifically kind of taken into consideration, their cross-border nature. And if they provide services in several member states, there is a mechanism for them to register with the competent authority where their main establishment is based, similar to the notion under the GDPR.  Catherine: It sounds like, though, there's enough information in the directive itself without waiting for the member state implementation that companies who are subject to this rule could be well on their way to being compliant by just following those principles.  Christian: That's correct. So even if the implementation international law is currently not happening. All of the member states, companies can already work to comply with NIS2. So once the law is implemented, they don't have to start from zero. NIS2 sets out the requirements that important and essential entities under NIS2 have to comply with. For example have a proper information security management system have supply chain management train their employees and so they can already work to implement NIS2 and the the directive itself also has an access that sets out the sectors and potential entities that might be in scope of NIS2 And the member states cannot really vary from those annexes. So if you are already in scope of NIS2 under the information that is in the directive itself, you can be sure that you would probably also have to comply with your national rules. There might be some gray areas where it's not fully clear if someone is in scope of NIS2 and those entities might want to wait for the national implementation. And it also can happen that the national implementation goes beyond the directive and covers sectors or entities that might not be in scope under the directive itself. And then of course they will have to work to implement the requirements then. I think a good starting point anyways is the existing security program that companies already hopefully have in place so if they for example have an ISO 27001 framework implemented it might be good to start but with a mapping exercise what NIS2 might require in addition to the ISO 27001. And then look if this should be implemented now or companies can wait for the national implementation. But it's recommended not to wait for the national implementation and don't do anything until then.  Asélle: I agree with that, Christian. And I would like to point out that, in fact, digital infrastructure entities have very detailed requirements for compliance because there was an implementing regulation that basically specifies the cybersecurity requirements under NIS2. And just to clarify, perhaps digital infrastructure entities that I'm referring to are DNS service providers, TLD name, registries, cloud service providers, data centers. Content delivery network providers, managed service providers, managed security service providers, online marketplaces, online search engines, social networking services, and trust service providers. So the implementing regulation is in fact binding and directly applicable in all member states. And the regulation is quite detailed and has specific requirements in relation to each cybersecurity measure. Importantly, it has detailed thresholds on when incidents should be reported, and we need to take into consideration that not any incident is reportable, only those incidents that are capable of causing significant disruption to the service or significant impact on the provision of the services. So please take that into consideration. And NISA also published implementing guidance, and it's 150 pages, just explaining what the implementing regulation means. And it's still a draft. The consultation ended on the 9th of January 2025, so there'll be further guidance on that.  Catherine: Well, we can look forward to that. But I guess the next question would be, what are some of the risks for noncompliance?  Christian: Noncompliance with NIS2 can have serious consequences for the entity's concern, both legal and non-legal. On the legal side, NIS2 empowers the national authorities to impose sanctions and penalties, breaches. They can range from warnings and orders to fines and injunctions. Depending on the severity and duration of the infringement. The sanctions can be up to 2% of the annual turnover or 10 million euros, whatever is higher for the essential entities, and up to 1.4% of the annual turnover or 7 million euros, whichever is higher for important entities. NIS2 also allows the national authorities to take corrective or preventive measures. They can suspend or restrict the provision of the services and take the or order the entities to take remedial actions or improve the security posture. So even if they have implemented security measures and the authorities understand or determine that they are not sufficient in light of the risk applicable to the entity, they can require them to implement other measures to increase the security. On the non-legal side, it's very similar to what we discussed in our DORA podcast. There can be civil liability if there is an incident, if a damage occurs. And of course, the reputational damage and loss of trust and confidence can be really, really severe for the entities if they have an incident. And it's huge because they did not comply with the NIS2 requirements.  Asélle: I wanted to add that, unfortunately, with this piece of legislation, member states can add to the list of entities to which this legislation will apply. They can apply higher cybersecurity requirements, and because of the new criteria and new entities being added, it now applies to twice as many sectors as before. So quite a few organizations will need to review their policies, take cybersecurity measures. And it's helpful, as Christian mentioned, that, you know, NIS already mapped the cybersecurity measures against existing standards. It's on its website. I think it's super helpful. And it's likely that, the cybersecurity measures and the general risk assessment will be done by cybersecurity teams and risk compliance teams within organizations. However, legal will also need to be involved. And often policies, once drafted, they're reviewed by in-house legal teams. So it's essential that they all work together. It's also important to mention that there will be an impact on the due diligence and contracts with ICT product providers and ICT service providers. So the due diligence processes will need to be reviewed and enhanced and contracts drafted to ensure they will allow the organization, the recipients of the services to be compliant with NIS2. And maybe last point, just to cover off the UK, what's happening in the UK for those who also have operations there. It is clear now that the government will implement a version of NIS2. It's going to follow the European Union in its steps. And we recently were informed of a government page on the new cybersecurity and resilience bill. It's clear that it's going to be covering five sectors, transport, energy, drinking, water, health, and digital infrastructure. And digital services, very similar to NIS2, such as online marketplaces, online search engines, and cloud computing services. We are expecting the bill to be introduced to Parliament this year.  Catherine: Wow, fantastic news. So it should be a busy cybersecurity season. If any of our listeners think that they need help and think that they may be subject to these rules, I'm sure my colleagues, Asélle and Christian, would be happy to help with the legal governance side of this cybersecurity compliance effort. So thank you very much for sharing all this information, and we'll talk soon.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's emerging technologies practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

In this episode, hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore the evolution of patient experience, from its holistic roots to today's data-driven strategies. They discuss how healthcare's focus on patient satisfaction metrics, Chief Experience Officers, and financial incentives has reshaped care—raising the question: are we truly improving experiences or just measuring them better? They also examine how digital engagement has transformed patient interactions, from search-driven healthcare decisions and AI-powered personalization to telehealth and omnichannel experiences.  Joining them is John Berndt of Valtech, who shares insights from the 2025 Emerging Experiences in Consumer Healthcare Report, including the shift toward vertical integration, the role of call centers in digital efforts, and how LLMs are shaping content supply chains for health systems. Mentions from the Show:  “The Evolution of Patient Experience: From Holistic Care to Human Experience” - Patient Experience Journal The growing disconnect between virtual health availability and consumer demand Integrating digital health tools to help improve the whole consumer experience Patients have more patience, comfort with digital healthcare tools Digital transformation in healthcare Virtual health care and fitness find their rhythm The Role of Digital Marketing in the Future of Healthcare   The impact and challenges of digital marketing in the health care industry during the digital era and the COVID-19 pandemic The Evolution of Healthcare Marketing: From Medicine 1.0 to Medicine 3.0 What is Marketing's Role in the Digital Patient Journey? John Berndt on LinkedIn Valtech website The 2025 Emerging Experience in Consumer Healthcare report Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith explore the shifting landscape of digital advertising in 2025, from privacy-first strategies and AI-driven targeting to the rise of connected TV (CTV) and retail media networks. They discuss how these trends are reshaping direct-to-consumer healthcare advertising and the critical role of Customer Data Platforms (CDPs) in adapting to Meta's evolving ad ecosystem. Joining them is Adam Putterman of OursPrivacy, who shares expert insights on leveraging CDPs, navigating Meta's changes, and future-proofing digital marketing strategies for health systems. Mentions from the Show:  Looking Ahead: 2025 Predictions and End-of-Year Outlook in Digital Advertising 2025 Digital Ad Trends and Predictions: Time to Turn the Page The State of Digital Marketing in 2025: What the Data Shows Harnessing AI to reshape consumer experiences in healthcare Tackling healthcare's biggest burdens with generative AI Healthcare Marketing: 2024 Benchmarks for CMOs Health media: How consumer content informs the future of healthcare Meta's Free-Speech Shift Made It Clear to Advertisers: ‘Brand Safety' Is Out of Vogue Social Media: a HIPAA Danger Zone A healthcare team's guide to HIPAA compliance on social media OursPrivacy.com Adam Putterman on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Catherine Castaldo, Christian Leuthner and Asélle Ibraimova  break down DORA, the Digital Operational Resilience Act, which is new legislation that aims to enhance the cybersecurity and resilience of the financial sector in the European Union. DORA sets out common standards and requirements for these entities so they can identify, prevent, mitigate and respond to cyber threats and incidents as well as ensure business continuity and operational resilience. The team discusses the implications of DORA and offers insights on applicability, obligations and potential liability for noncompliance. This episode was recorded on 17 January 2025. ----more---- Transcript:  Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Catherine: Hi, everyone. I'm Catherine Castaldo, a partner in the New York office of Reed Smith, and I'm in the EmTech Group. And I'm here today with my colleagues, Christian and Asélle, who I'll introduce themselves. And we're going to talk to you about DORA. Go ahead, Christian. Christian: Hi, I'm Christian Leuthner. I'm a Reed Smith partner in the Frankfurt office, focusing on IT and data protection law.  Asélle: And I'm Asélle Ibraimova. I am a council based in London. And I'm also part of the EmTech group, focusing on tech, data, and cybersecurity.  Catherine: Great. Thanks, Asélle and Christian. Today, when we're recording this, January 17th, 2025, is the effective date of this new regulation, commonly referred to as DORA. For those less familiar, would you tell us what DORA stands for and who is subject to it? Christian: Yeah, sure. So DORA stands for the Digital Operational Resilience Act, which is a new regulation that aims to enhance the cybersecurity and resilience of the financial sector in the European Union. It applies to a wide range of financial entities, such as banks, insurance companies, investment firms, payment service providers, crypto asset service providers, and even to critical third-party providers that offer services to the financial sector. DORA sets out common standards and requirements for these entities to identify, prevent, mitigate, and respond to cyber threats and incidents as well, as to ensure business continuity and operational resilience.  Catherine: Oh, that's comprehensive. Is there any entity who needs to be more concerned about it than others, or is it equally applicable to all of the ones you listed?  Asélle: I can jump in here. So DORA is a piece of legislation that wants to respect proportionality and allow organizations to deal with DORA requirements that will be proportionate to their size, to the nature of the cybersecurity risks. So, for example, micro-enterprises or certain financial entities that have only a small number of members will have a simplified ICT risk management framework under DORA. I also wanted to mention that DORA applies to financial entities that are outside of the EU, but provide services in the EU so they will be caught. And maybe just to also add in terms of the risks. It's not only the size of the financial entities that matter in terms of how they comply with the requirements of DORA, but also the cybersecurity risk. So let's say an ICT third-party service provider, the risk of that entity will depend on the nature of that service, on the complexity, on whether that service supports critical or important function of the financial entity, generally dependence on ICT service provider and ultimately on its potential to disrupt the services of that financial entity.  Catherine: So some of our friends might just be learning about this by listening to the podcast. So what does ICT stand for, Asélle?  Asélle: It is informational communication technology. So in other words, it's anything that a financial entity receives as a service or a product digitally. It also covers ICT services provided by a financial entity. So, for example, if a financial entity offers a platform for fund or investment management or a piece of software or its custodian services are provided digitally, those services will also be considered an ICT service. And those financial entities will need to cover their customer-facing contracts as well and make sure DORA requirements are covered in the contracts.  Catherine: Thank you for that. What are some of the risks for noncompliance? Christian: The risks for noncompliance with DORA are significant and could entail both financial and reputational consequences. First of all, DORA empowers the authorities to impose administrative sanctions and corrective measures on entities that breach its provisions. Which could range from warnings and reprimands to fines and penalties to withdrawals of authorization and licenses, which could have significant impact on the business of all the entities. The level of sanctions and measures will depend on the nature, gravity and duration of the breach, as well as on the entity's cooperation and remediation efforts. So better be positive to help the authority in case they identify the breach. Second, non-compliance with DORA could also expose entities to legal actions and claims from the customers, investors, or other parties that might suffer losses or damages as a result of cyber incident or disruption of service. And third, non-compliance with DORA could also damage the entity's reputation and trustworthiness in the market and affect its competitive advantage and customer loyalty. Therefore, entities should take DORA seriously and ensure that they comply with its requirements and expectations.  Catherine: If I haven't been able to start considering DORA, and I think it might be applicable to me, where should I start?  Asélle: It's actually a very interesting question. So from our experience. We see large financial entities such as banks, etc. Look at this comprehensively. Comprehensively, obviously, all financial entities had quite a long time to prepare, but large organizations seem to look at it more comprehensively and have done the proper assessment of whether or not their services are caught. But we are still getting quite a few questions in terms of whether or not DORA applies to a certain financial entity type. So I think there are quite a few organizations out there who are still trying to determine that. But once that's clear although DORA itself is quite a long kind of piece of legislation, in actual fact, it is further clarified in various regulatory technical standards and implementing technical standards, and they clarify all of the cybersecurity requirements that actually appear quite generic in DORA itself. So those RTS and ITS are quite lengthy documents and are all together around 1,000 pages. So that's where kind of the devil is in the detail there and organizations will find it may appear quite overwhelming. So I would start by assessing whether DORA applies, which services, which entities, which geographies. Once that's determined, it's important to identify whether financial entities' own services may be deemed ICT services, as I just explained earlier. The next step in my mind would be to check whether the services that are caught also support critical or important functions, and also when kind of making registries of third party ICT service providers, also making sure, kind of identifying those separately. And the reason is quite a few of the requirements, additional requirements applied to critical and important functions. For example, the incident reporting obligations and requirements in terms of contractual agreements. And then I would look at updating contracts, first of all, with important ICT service providers, then also checking if customer-facing contracts need to be updated if the financial entity is providing ICT services itself. And also not forgetting the intra-group ICT agreements where, for example, a parent company is providing data storage or word processing services to its affiliates in Europe. So they should be covered as well.  Catherine: If we were a smaller company or a company that interacts in the financial services sector, can we think of an example that might be helpful for people listening on how I could start? Maybe what's the example of a smaller or middle-sized company that would be subject to this? And then who would they be interacting with on the ICT side?  Asélle: Maybe an example of that could be an investment fund or a pensions provider. I think most of this compliance effort when it comes to DORA will be driven by in-house cybersecurity teams. So they will be updating their risk management and risk frameworks. But any updates to policies, whenever they have to be looked at, I think will need to be reviewed by legal and incident reporting policies, contract management policies, I don't think they depend on size. If there are ICT service providers supporting critical or important functions, additional requirements will apply regardless of whether you're a small or a large organization. It's just the measures will depend on what level of risk, say, certain ICT service provider presents. So if this internal cybersecurity team has kind of put, you know, all the risk, all the IST assets in buckets and all the third-party IST services in various buckets based on criticality, then that would make the job of legal and generally compliance much easier. However, what we're seeing right now is that all of that work is happening all at the same time in parallel as people are rushing to get compliance. So that will mean that there may be gaps and inconsistencies and I'm sure they can be patched later.  Catherine: Thank you for that. So just another follow-up question, maybe Christian can respond, would my data center contract be subject to DORA regulations if I was a financial services entity? Christian: It's worth to look into that and see if it's an ICT provider that you use to provide your services. So I'm pretty sure you need to look into that and see if you can implement at least the contractual requirements that arise from DORA.  Asélle: I would just add to support Christian's response and say that the definition of ICT services is quite broad and covers digital and data services provided through ICT systems. So, I mean, as you can see, it's just so generic and I'm pretty sure it would cover data centers, but I guess not directly because say a financial entity was receiving a service of a cloud service provider, then data centers are probably a second or third kind of level subcontractor. And unfortunately, or fortunately, DORA has very detailed requirements in terms of subcontracting and the obligations don't stop at a certain level. Therefore, data centers are likely to be caught somehow and will be receiving DORA addenda to their contracts.  Catherine: Thank you for that clarification. I was, like probably many people have tried to digest this regulation, a little confused on how broad the coverage for information and communication technology went. But that's very helpful then, I'm sure. Any final thoughts?  Asélle: We are helping a few organizations and learning a lot as we work with them. And the legislation is pretty complex and requires in-house teams to work together as well. And Christian and I would be very happy to assist and navigate this complex framework. Christian: And if you haven't started yet, of course, it's a huge regulation. There's so many requirements to tackle, but there's one day you have to start. So then start today, look into it, and implement the requirements that arise from DORA.  Catherine: Well, thank you so much, Christian and Asélle, and everybody, as we said before, we're talking about DORA today, because today, January 17th, is the day that it becomes effective. So if, like Christian said, you haven't started, today's a good day to start. And I'm sure you can reach out to one of my colleagues to get some assistance. Thanks for joining. Christian: Thanks for having us, Catherine.  Asélle: It was a pleasure. Thank you.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's emerging technologies practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved.  Transcript is auto-generated.

In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer check in on the state of social media for healthcare, and discuss the various changes to these social platforms - from content moderation, to managing algorithmic changes, a brief touch on paid social strategies and share information for health systems on how to plan for and adapt to future changes in social strategies. They are joined by Jenny Bristow of Hedy & Hopp who shares her insights on how healthcare clients can navigate the various changes in social today.  Mentions from the show:  Meta's shift to ‘community notes' risks hurting online health info providers more than ever Meta's New Content Policy Will Harm Vulnerable Users. If It Really Valued Free Speech, It Would Make These Changes How Will AI, Social Media, and Partnerships Shape Healthcare Marketing? Jenny Bristow on LinkedIn Hedy & Hopp Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tamara Box is a partner at Reed Smith LLP, Chair at Interpath Advisory & The Eve Appeal, NED at Hanover Capital, and Trustee at the Chartered Management Institute. Tune in to hear her thoughts on: Why and how did you put in place an advisory board at Reed Smith? (2:10) Given the talent around the table, why are so many boards dysfunctional? (6:21) How did your advisory board add value to you, and where could it have added more value? (9:29) What would you do differently if you were setting up your advisory board again? (15:49) What challenges did the InterPath board face, transitioning to PE ownership? (19:03) As a board member, what heuristics do you use to understand professional services businesses? (22:21) How do you engage with the exec on vision and strategy? (27:30) How do professional services boards think about beating competition? (28:50) What opportunities did PE ownership provide you as a board? (33:18) How have you built your plural career? (36:37) As Chair, what are you looking for in candidates? (41:35) ⚡The Lightning Round ⚡(44:01) Host: Oliver CummingsProducer: Will Felton Music: Kate Mac Audio: Nick Kold Email: podcast@nurole.com Web: https://www.nurole.com/nurole-podcast-enter-the-boardroom

In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer discuss the elements of developing an inclusive digital patient experience strategy, why it matters and the impact it has on a healthcare organization. Melissa Fors Shackelford joins to share her insights in the impacts of stigma for certain populations and how inclusivity efforts in marketing and communications are most effective.  Mentions from the Show:  People with disabilities appear in 1% of TV ads The Simone Biles Effect: Destigmatizing Mental Health Breaks In Athletics And Beyond Why ADA Compliance Matters in Health Care Marketing Inclusive Marketing - Disabilities The Business Case for Inclusive Advertising Melissa Fors Shackelford on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In our annual “Best-of” 2024 show, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer reflect back on the past year and the various episodes and topics we discussed, and share results from our annual listener choice awards, including favorite episode and favorite guest. Congratulations to all of our winners and thanks for making this show amazing! Mentions from the Show:  Best Episode:  #3: TP375 - What Does 'Digital First' Really Mean? #2: TP368 - How Consumerism Is Challenging Healthcare Leadership #1: TP367 - It's the End of Search as We Know It (and I Feel Fine) Best Guest: #3: Chris Bevolo #2: Ben Dillon #1: Carrie Liken Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this week's episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer share their perceptions and insights on patient access - what it is, what internal and external factors are impacting access and then they dive into a recent study by Experian that implies that both patients and providers are feeling optimistic about access improvements in health systems. Lastly, they share some ways to implement a consumer-centric access strategy.  Mentions from the Show: Experian Health Report: The State of Patient Access – 2024 Consumer-Centric Patient Access: Insights from Top Providers Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The US healthcare system is undergoing significant disruption due to innovations that fundamentally alter how services are delivered, how the market operates, or how patients are receiving care. In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer outline five major disruptive trends and discuss how health systems need to prepare to be resilient through this disruption.   Mentions from the Show: 2024 healthcare services outlook: Challenges and opportunities The healthcare disruptors expected to make an impact in 2024 Driving growth through consumer centricity in healthcare 2024 Outlook: 'Blurring of the lines' as providers, retailers and payers plotting primary care plays Moody's upgrades healthcare outlook from negative to stable for 2024  Healthcare's next chapter: What's ahead for the US healthcare industry  A tough 2024 is on the horizon. Here's how Deloitte says healthcare leaders should prepare  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Shannon Llenza, Assistant General Counsel at Microsoft and Commander, U.S. Navy Reserve (retired), reflects with Reed Smith data coordinator Mark Butterfield, a member of RSVets, Reed Smith's veterans business inclusion group, on how her military service has impacted her legal, governmental, and corporate career.

An annual feature of the Touch Point podcast is a retrospective look at other podcasts on our network. In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer share two episodes of the newest podcast on the Touch Point Media Network - “Surprise, It's Not a Toaster.” This show is hosted by Ed Bennett and Chris Boyer and is a lighthearted look at online experiences and their subsequent annoyances, unveiling innovative technology tools, and challenge Gen AI's limits. Give this a listen, and if you enjoy - be sure to like and subscribe.  Mentions From the Show: Surprise - It's Not a Toaster: Episode 22: CarPlay, Computer Monitors and Caterpillars Surprise - It's Not a Toaster: Episode 29 – It's All About the Algorithm TouchPoint 2024 Listener Survey Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Ed Bennett on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Ed Bennett of BlueSky Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In its first leading judgment (decision of November 18, 2024, docket no.: VI ZR 10/24), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dealt with claims for non-material damages pursuant to Art. 82 GDPR following a scraping incident. According to the BGH, a proven loss of control or well-founded fear of misuse of the scraped data by third parties is sufficient to establish non-material damage. The BGH therefore bases its interpretation of the concept of damages on the case law of the CJEU, but does not provide a clear definition and leaves many questions unanswered. Our German data litigation lawyers, Andy Splittgerber, Hannah von Wickede and Johannes Berchtold, discuss this judgment and offer insights for organizations and platforms on what to expect in the future. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Andy: Hello, everyone, and welcome to today's episode of our Reed Smith Tech Law Talks podcast. In today's episode, we'll discuss the recent decision of the German Federal Court of Justice, the FCJ, of November 18, 2024, on compensation payments following a data breach or data scraping. My name is Andy Splittgerber. I'm partner at Reed Smith's Munich office in the Emerging Technologies Department. And I'm here today with Hannah von Wickede from our Frankfurt office. Hannah is also a specialist in data protection and data litigation. And Johannes Berchtold, also from Reed Smith in the Munich office, also from the emerging technologies team and tech litigator. Thanks for taking the time and diving a bit into this breathtaking case law. Just to catch everyone up and bring everyone on the same speed, it was a case decided by the German highest civil court, in an action brought by a user of a social platform who wanted damages after his personal data was scraped by a hacker from that social media network. And that was done through using the telephone number or trying out any kind of numbers through a technical fault probably, and this find a friend function. And through this way, the hackers could download a couple of million data sets from users of that platform, which then could be found in the dark web. And the user then started an action before the civil court claiming for damages. And this case was then referred to the highest court in Germany because of the legal difficulties. Hannah, do you want to briefly summarize the main legal findings and outcomes of this decision?  Hannah: Yes, Andy. So, the FCJ made three important statements, basically. First of all, the FCJ provided its own definition of what a non-material damage under Article 82 GDPR is. They are saying that mere loss of control can constitute a non-material damage under Article 82 GDPR. And if such a loss of the plaintiffs is not verifiable, that also justified fear of personal data being misused can constitute a non-material damage under GDPR. So both is pretty much in line with what the ECJ already has said about non-material damages in the past. And besides that, the FCJ makes also a statement regarding the amount of compensation for non-material damages following from scraping incident. And this is quite interesting because according to the FCJ, the amount of the claim for damages in such cases is around 100 euros. That is not much money. However, FCJ also says both loss of control and reasonable apprehension, also including the negative consequences, must first be proven by the plaintiff.  Andy: So we have an immaterial damage that's important for everyone to know. And the legal basis for the damage claim is Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulation. So it's not German law, it's European law. And as you'd mentioned, Hannah, there was some ECJ case law in the past on similar cases. Johannes, can you give us a brief summary on what these rulings were about? And on your view, does the FCJ bring new aspects to these cases? Or is it very much in line with the European Court of Justice that already?  Johannes: Yes, the FCJ has quoted ECJ quite broadly here. So there was a little clarification in this regard. So far, it's been unclear whether the loss of control itself constitutes the damage or whether the loss of control is a mere negative consequence that may constitute non-material damage. So now the Federal Court of Justice ruled that the mere loss of control constitutes the direct damage. So there's no need for any particular fear or anxiety to be present for a claim to exist.  Andy: Okay, so it's not. So we read a bit in the press after the decision. Yes, it's very new and interesting judgment, but it's not revolutionary. It stays very close to what the European Court of Justice said already. The loss of control, I still struggle with. I mean, even if it's an immaterial damage, it's a bit difficult to grasp. And I would have hoped FCJ provides some more clarity or guidance on what they mean, because this is the central aspect, the loss of control. Johannes, you have some more details? What does the court say or how can we interpret that?  Johannes: Yeah, Andy, I totally agree. So in the future, discussion will most likely tend to focus on what actually constitutes a loss of control. So the FCJ does not provide any guidance here. However, it can already be said the plaintiff must have had the control over his data to actually lose it. So whether this is the case is particularly questionable if the actual scrape data was public, like in a lot of cases where we have in Germany right here, and or if the data was already included in other leaks, or the plaintiff published the data on another platform, maybe on his website or another social network where the data was freely accessible. So in the end, it will probably depend on the individual case if there was actually a loss of control or not. And we'll just have to wait on more judgments in Germany or in Europe to define loss of control in more detail.  Andy: Yeah, I think that's also a very important aspect of this case that was decided here, that the major cornerstones of the claim were established, they were proven. So it was undisputed that the claimant was a user of the network. It was undisputed that the scraping took place. It was undisputed that the user's data was affected part of the scraping. And then also the user's data was found in the dark web. So we have, in this case, when I say undistributed, it means that the parties did not dispute about it and the court could base their legal reasoning on these facts. In a lot of cases that we see in practice, these cornerstones are not established. They're very often disputed. Often you perhaps you don't even know that the claimant is user of that network. There's always dispute or often dispute around whether or not a scraping or a data breach took place or not. It's also not always the case that data is found in the dark web. I think this, even if the finding in the dark web, for example, is not like a written criteria of the loss of control. I think it definitely is an aspect for the courts to say, yes, there was loss of control because we see that the data was uncontrolled in the dark web. So, and that's a point, I don't know if any of you have views on this, also from the technical side. I mean, how easy and how often do we see that, you know, there is like a tag that it says, okay, the data in the dark web is from this social platform? Often, users are affected by multiple data breaches or scrapings, and then it's not possible to make this causal link between one specific scraping or data breach and then data being found somewhere in the web. Do you think, Hannah or Johannes, that this could be an important aspect in the future when courts determine the loss of control, that they also look into, you know, was there actually, you know, a loss of control?  Hannah: I would say yes, because it was already mentioned that the plaintiffs must first prove that there is a causal damage. And a lot of the plaintiffs are using various databases that list such alleged breaches, data breaches, and the plaintiffs always claim that this would indicate such a causal link. And of course, this is now a decisive point the courts have to handle, as it is a requirement. Before you get to the damage and before you can decide if there was a damage, if there was a loss of control, you have to prove if the plaintiff even was affected. And yeah, that's a challenge and not easy in practice because there's also a lot of case law already about these databases or on those databases that there might not be sufficient proof for the plaintiffs being affected by alleged data breaches or leaks.  Andy: All right. So let's see what's happening also in other countries. I mean, the Article 82, as I said in the beginning, is a European piece of law. So other countries in Europe will have to deal with the same topics. We cannot come up with our German requirements or interpretation of immaterial damages that are rather narrow, I would say. So Hannah, any other indications you see from the European angle that we need to have in mind?  Hannah: Yes, you're right. And yet first it is important that this concept of immaterial damage is EU law, is in accordance with EU law, as this is GDPR. And as Johannes said, the ECJ has always interpreted this damage very broadly. And does also not consider a threshold to be necessary. And I agree with you that it is difficult to set such low requirements for the concept of damage and at the same time not demand materiality or a threshold. And in my opinion, the Federal Court of Justice should perhaps have made a submission here to the ECJ after all because it is not clear what loss of control is. And then without a material threshold, this contributes a lot to legal insecurity for a lot of companies.  Andy: Yeah. Thank you very much, Hannah. So yes, the first takeaway for us definitely is loss of control. That's a major aspect of the decision. Other aspects, other interesting sentences or thoughts we see in the FCJ decision. And one aspect I see or I saw is right at the beginning where the FCJ merges together two events. The scraping and then a noncompliance with data access requests. And that was based in that case on contract, but similar on Article 15, GDPR. So those three events are kind of like merged together as one event, which in my view doesn't make so much sense because they're separated from the event, from the dates, from the actions or non-actions, and also then from the damages from a non-compliance with an Article 15. I think it's much more difficult to argue with a damage loss of control than with a scraping or a data breach. That that's not a major aspect of the decision but I think it was an interesting finding. Any other aspects, Hannah or Johannes, that you saw in the decision worth mentioning here for our audience?  Johannes: Yeah so I think discussion in Germany was really broadly so i think just just maybe two points have been neglected in the discussion so far. First, towards the ending of the reasoning, the court stated that data controllers are not obliged to provide information about unknown recipients. For example, like in scraping cases, controllers often do not know who the scrapers are. So there's no obligation for them to provide any names of scrapers they don't know. That clarification is really helpful in possible litigation. And on the other hand, it's somewhat lost in the discussion that the damages of the 100 euros only come into consideration if the phone number, the user ID, the first name, the last name, the gender, and the workplace are actually affected. So accordingly, if less data, maybe just an email address or a name, or less sensitive data was scraped, the claim for damages can or must even be significantly lower.  Andy: All right. Thanks, Johannes. That's very interesting. So, not only the law of control aspect, but also other aspects in this decision that's worth mentioning and reading if you have the time. Now looking a bit into the future, what's happening next, Johannes? What are your thoughts? I mean, you're involved in some similar litigation as well, as so is Hannah, what do you expect, What's happening to those litigation cases in the future? Any changes? Will we still have law firms suing after social platforms or suing for consumers after social platforms? Or do we expect any changes in that?  Johannes: Yeah, Andy, it's really interesting. In this mass GDPR litigation, you always have to consider the business side, not always just the legal side. So I think the ruling will likely put an end to the mass GDPR litigation as we know it in the past. Because so far, the plaintiffs have mostly appeared just with a legal expenses insurer. So the damages were up to like 5,000 euros and other claims have been asserted. So the value in dispute could be pushed to the edge. So it was like maybe around 20,000 euros in the end. But now it's clear that the potential damages in such scraping structures are more likely to be in the double-digit numbers, like, for example, 100 euros or even less. So as a result, the legal expenses insurers will no longer fund their claims for 5,000 euros. But at the same time, the vast majority of legal expenses insurers have agreed to a deductible of more than 100 euros. So the potential outcome and the risk of litigation are therefore disproportionate. And as a result, the plaintiffs will probably refrain from filing such lawsuits in the future.  Andy: All right. So good news for all insurers in the audience or better watch out for requests for coverage of litigation and see if not the values in this cube are much too high. So we will probably see less of insurance coverage cases, but still, definitely, we expect the same amount or perhaps even more litigation because the number as such, even if it's only 100 euros, seems certainly attractive for users as a so-called low-hanging fruit. And Hannah, before we close our podcast today, again, looking into the future, what is your recommendation or your takeaways to platforms, internet sites, basically everyone, any organization handling data can be affected by data scraping or a data breach. So what is your recommendation or first thoughts? How can those organizations get ready or ideally even avoid such litigation?  Hannah: So at first, Andy, it is very important to clarify that the FCJ judgment is ruled on a specific case in which non-public data was made available to the public as a result of a proven breach of data protection. And that is not the case in general. So you should avoid simply apply this decision to every other case like a template because if other requirements following from the GDPR are missing, the claims will still be unsuccessful. And second, of course, platforms companies have to consider what they publish about their security vulnerabilities and take the best possible precautions to ensure that data is not published on the dark web. And if necessary, companies can transfer the risk of publication to the user simply by adjusting their general terms and conditions.  Andy: Thanks, Hannah. These are interesting aspects and I see a little bit of conflict between the breach notification obligations under Article 33, 34, and then the direction this caseload goes. That will also be very interesting to see. Thank you very much, Hannah and Johannes, for your contribution. That was a really interesting, great discussion. And thank you very much to our audience for listening in. This was today's episode of our EU Reed Smith Tech Law Talks podcast. We thank you very much for listening. Please leave feedback and comments in the comments fields or send us an email. We hope to welcome you soon to our next episode. Have a nice day. Thank you very much. Bye bye.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's emerging technologies practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved.  Transcript is auto-generated.

In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer celebrate some of the most memorable guest interviews of the year. First, hear from Susannah Fox who discussed insights from her new book about digital innovation, then Jeremy Mittler joins for a good discussion on privacy-first advertising strategies. Lastly, Danny Fell joins to discuss healthcare disruption. These are a few of our best interviews of the year. Be sure to vote for your most favorite episode and favorite guest in our annual 2024 Touch Point Podcast Listener Survey.  Mentions From the Show: TP370 – Has the Social Internet Democratized Patient Empowerment? Rebel Health book SusannahFox.com Susannah Fox on LinkedIn TP381 – Digital Advertising's Role in Patient Experience Jeremy Mittler on LinkedIn TP383 – Does Consumerism Drive Disruption? Danny Fell on LinkedIn BVK.com TouchPoint 2024 Listener Survey Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Reed Smith on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This year, we commemorated National Disabilities Employment Awareness Month by exploring how employers can work toward providing access to good jobs for persons with disabilities in the legal profession; the tangible benefits of employing persons with disabilities; the feasibility of providing accommodations; and the use of assistive technology. Our speakers provided their thoughts on best practices, shared personal journeys and insights, and reflected on how far employers have come and where we need to focus to increase future employment opportunities for persons with disabilities in the legal profession and beyond. Our guests included Kevin Hara: Counsel, Reed Smith; Ronza Othman: President, National Association of Blind Government Employees – a division of the National Federation of the Blind; Nicholas Carden: Associate General Counsel, Coinbase, and former Board Member of Disability:IN; and Laurie Allen: Microsoft, Senior Accessibility Technology Evangelist. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Welcome to the Reed Smith Podcast, Inclusivity Included, Powerful Personal Stories. In each episode of this podcast, our guests will share their personal stories, passions, and challenges, past and present, all with a goal of bringing people together and learning more about others. You might be surprised by what we all have in common, Inclusivity Included.  Kevin: Hello, everybody. Welcome back to an episode of Inclusivity Included. Thank you, everyone, for joining. My name is Kevin Hara. I'm counsel at Reed Smith in the Life Sciences and Health Industries Group, and I'm proud to commemorate National Disabilities Employment Awareness Month, which is in October of every year. And this year's theme is access to good jobs for all. We have a number of distinguished panelists today joining us, including Ronza Othman, who is president of the National Association of Blind Government Employees, a division of the National Federation of the Blind. Nick Carden, associate general counsel from Coinbase, a former board member of Disability:IN. And Laurie Allen from Microsoft, a senior accessibility technology evangelist. So thank you, Ronza, Nick, and Laurie for joining us. We're thrilled to have you here as part of our podcast. And without further ado, I would like to ask Ronza to talk a little bit about your journey, how you have arrived where you are, and some of the important steps you took that led you to where you are today.  Ronza: Great. Thank you so much. I'm really delighted to be here. I am a blind attorney and my training was initially as a high school STEM teacher. And that's what I did to get myself through law school. And ultimately I've had a number of different legal jobs, but in state and local government and private sector, ultimately ended up in the federal government where now I manage civil rights programs for a large federal agency. And so my journey has been one of exploration and learning, not only because, you know, being a lawyer, an attorney is always difficult for any person, but also when you add the complications of inaccessible technology and perceptions about people with disabilities and what they can and cannot do, and the obstacles that those negative attitudes create, there's definitely been some really interesting experiences along the way, but I think that I'm optimistic in terms of where we are now. So my paid job, of course, is with the government. And as a volunteer, I serve as the president of the National Association of Blind Government Employees, where we have a number of blind and low vision employees of state, local, federal, and pseudo-government agencies that are members that are experiencing life as public servants, supporting this country at the local and state and national level. It is an honor to represent them and us in a variety of different circumstances, and I've gotten to do a lot of really cool things as a result.  Kevin: That's great. Thank you so much, Ronza. And Nick, if you'd like to share a little bit about your path that led you to where you are today.  Nicholas: Thanks, Kevin. And thanks to Reed Smith for having us. This is a great opportunity to speak about an important issue that impacts all of us on this call. I, like Ronza, I am a lawyer with a disability. I started my career right out of law school in-house, which is somewhat unusual, but it sort of led me to where I am today in the sense that early in my career, I was a true corporate generalist, and through various personnel changes and responsibility changes, I was at a consumer products manufacturing company and had the opportunity to pick up some, advertising and marketing and entertainment legal work. And I really enjoyed that type of work. It's a lot of fun. It's fast paced and it's highly creative and interesting work. So I've stayed in that sort of practice area as an in-house lawyer through my career to today where at Coinbase, I lead a global marketing legal team.  Kevin: Great. Thank you, Nick. And Laurie, we'd love to hear a little bit about the path you took to where you are today.  Laurie: Thanks, Kevin. And thank you again for inviting us to join you to talk about this great topic. So I am not an attorney. I work at Microsoft, as you mentioned. And I've been in tech for about 30 years. I've only been at Microsoft for a little over two. But my journey actually into accessibility started about nine and a half years ago when I had a spinal cord injury. and became quadriplegic. The only thing that didn't dramatically change about my life in that moment was my ability to do my job. And that's because of accessible technology that was available to me. And frankly, my job was quite literally a lifeline for me. So I'm so grateful that people came before me to create this technology. And about three years ago, I had this epiphany. How did this technology get created? And who built it? And why am I not part of the solution. So that's when I started pivoting my career into accessibility. So I feel quite fortunate to be in a role where I can combine my background in technology with my lived experience as a person with disability to help empower others like me, find meaningful employment, and succeed and thrive.  Kevin: Thank you so much. All of you have had such unique experiences and out to the successful careers that you are now engaged in today, but it hasn't always been easy for persons with disabilities in the legal profession and other professions to succeed. So I'd like to stay with you, Laurie, and to ask you, what do you believe are some of the barriers or challenges for persons with disabilities to find access to good jobs?  Laurie: And I think Ronza had mentioned it earlier, it's access to technology. It's discoverability, I find, that can be a barrier. People just don't know what technologies are available to support them in their work environments. And beyond that, it's finding companies who've built inclusive work environments for employees with disabilities, so that when they go through the interview process, they feel included, they feel supported, and as they're onboarded and as they can continue through their career. And then understanding that there are platforms that are available, like Mentra, for example, is a Microsoft partner. It's an amazing neurodiversity hiring platform. But I think just knowing what's available is sometimes quite difficult. And, you know, when people incur a disability like I did, they're starting from scratch, and they don't know what to ask for because it's a new environment for them.  Kevin: Thank you. That's a really good point. Having the access to the proper tools is key for anybody with a disability to succeed in any career path. Ronza, how about your perspective? How would you characterize some of the challenges people are facing and ways to overcome them?  Ronza: I think that the biggest challenge that the people with disabilities are really facing in terms of employment and just moving about society and contributing meaningfully in employment settings, but also in every setting, is the negative attitudes that people at large have about disability. Negative stereotypes. The unemployment rate for people with disabilities in the United States is over 50%. The unemployment rate for people who are blind and low vision in the United States is half again that almost at 75%. It's currently at 73%. That's mind boggling. These are people who want to work for the most part, but can't because nobody will hire them or because they don't have the proper training to be able to perform the jobs where there is a need. But all that really comes down to society's low expectations for people with disabilities and the barriers, artificial, usually, that society creates and puts in our way. One of the things that I really like to do as a hiring manager is I love meeting with and interviewing people with disabilities because they're so creative in their problem-solving. Their solutioning is out of the box thinking. And just to get to work in the morning, to get to the job, they have to have solved a whole bunch of problems in an environment, in a situation, in a society, not necessarily built for them. Whether it's the broken elevator, or whether it's the bus that didn't roll up to the bus stop where it was supposed to, or whether it's the technology that didn't work because somebody pushed a security update, so it broke its ability to communicate with assistive technology, or whether it's somebody, a well-meaning, you know, abled person who decided that they know where this person is trying to go and they're going to force them to go there as opposed to where the person is actually trying to go. All of those things, people with disabilities problem solve before they, you know, really start their day or as they're starting their day. And so I think we don't give enough credit to the workforce of folks with disabilities in terms of what they can do, what they have done, frankly, and then society just has negative expectations. The biggest aspect of disability isn't the disability itself. It's people without disabilities or people who don't understand disabilities who get in our way.  Nicholas: I'd love to add to that because I agree with a lot of that. And I think thinking about access to jobs, the question that comes to mind to me is, do employers want to hire persons with disabilities. And I think there's no clear answer to that. And obviously, companies themselves are just made up of other human beings. And so there's, to Ronza's point, the stigma attached to hiring persons with disabilities is ever present. But I'll share specifically in the legal industry, I think this industry does a particularly poor job of being intentional about hiring a truly diverse workforce. And this is, I'm calling out the legal industry as somebody who's in it, but I don't think it's unique to the legal industry in the sense that I still don't think when law firms are hiring for diverse candidates that they make a particular effort to recruit persons with disabilities. I think it can be as simple as asking for a voluntary disclosure on an application. And I still don't think as an industry we're doing those types of things. So there seem to be opportunities if the answer to the question of do you want to hire persons with disabilities is yes.  Ronza: I'll just add to that, if I may. When you look at the United States census data on people with disabilities, somewhere between 20% and 25% of the population of this country has a disability. When you look at the census in the legal profession, when you look at the numbers in the legal profession, and the American Bar Association has done extensive research trying to sort this out, figure it out, as some other entities, it's less than 1%. Less than 1% of attorneys in the United States are willing to disclose that they have a disability. And those who are, it's usually an obvious or very visible disability, as opposed to some of these hidden disabilities that there's still so much stigma in the legal profession around. In the regular generic work industry generally, not specifically the legal profession, but everywhere, there's this misconception that it's going to be really expensive to hire somebody with a disability because you have to accommodate them or you have to adjust schedules or policies and so forth and so on. The Job Accommodation Network, which is a free resource to employers and employees about what's available in terms of reasonable accommodations for those with disabilities, did a study and they determined that the average cost of a reasonable accommodation is less than $100. So talking about negative attitudes and negative perceptions, one of them for employers, It's that it's going to cost me a lot of money or somehow the work I'm going to receive from this person is going to be less in terms of quality or quantity than other non-disabled employees and so forth and so on. And all of that is just not accurate. It's not supported by research and it's certainly not supported by those of us in the community with lived experience in the workforce.  Kevin: That's an excellent point, Ronza, and Nick as well. You both have captured the problem that we're facing in providing good jobs to persons with disabilities. I think dispelling the myths and misconceptions is one of the important steps. And I also think technology can play an important role. We alluded to this a little bit more, but Laurie, if you would like to speak a little bit more about how technology can really help people with disabilities succeed.  Laurie: Thanks, Kevin. So the way we approach it at Microsoft is we build with the community, not for the community. We mentioned it in the last question. We bring people with lived experience into our company. We want that diverse lived experience in our product making. I have a spinal cord injury. I know what it's like to have a mobility disability. I don't know what it's like to be blind and rely on a screen reader. And I can't assume what someone who uses a screen reader needs. So we take an approach of building in early. We build in accessibility into the design phase of our product development life cycle. We bring testers in who have different types of disabilities to test our products before we release them. And what we find, and Ron's mentioned it earlier, is that we get really creative solutions because, as she mentioned, we have to be creative to get out the door every morning. And when we do this, we find that everyone benefits. When we call it Built for One, Extend to Many. When we build with the disability community, everyone benefits. And I'll give you an example. For example, live captions were built for people who are deaf or hard of hearing, but 50% of Americans watch videos with live captions on, and if you narrow that down to Gen Z, it goes up to about 80%. So when we build for people with disabilities, everyone benefits.  Kevin: I think that's a really astute observation. It's not just about helping one particular segment, but including people with disabilities when you're building the technology is really important. And, you know, I couldn't thank you more for that approach, Laurie, because, you know, I also have a mobility disability, a spinal cord injury. So I understand from my perspective. But as you said, I wouldn't be able to talk about or understand what the needs of a person with a visual or other disability might be. So that's really good. And Ronza or Nick, would you like to weigh in on technology, how it has helped you, or how do you think it can help others?  Ronza: So technology really is, it leveled the playing field for many populations within the disability community. And so, for example, for the blind community, so much of the information that we receive is visual. So much as paper had historically been paper-based but you know street signs billboards all of the things that happen visually and on the computer though now we can have access to that same information or I can go to an ATM machine and I can plug in my headphones and I can pull out my money I can go to a voting booth in most states and I can privately and independently but vote my ballot. You know there's still places where of course there's work to do but in general the proliferation of technology solutions over the last 20 or 30 years has really made a huge impact on our ability to access information engage in the world and especially with our jobs, so whether it's a screen reader or whether it's a software that's used that is speech to text for those with manual dexterity challenges or whether it's a foot pedal instead of a mouse or whatever the case may be. There's just been such advances in technology that have made it more possible for an individual with a disability to work in so many different fields. Think about all the technology that exists now. Surgeons are doing surgery with robots some of the time. Technology is super cool. It's super advanced and it's only going to get more and more advanced. And so hopefully that means that participation of the disability community at work and in other places is also going to increase. Now, the drawback is, the more innovated the technology, the more risk of potential opportunities to make it inaccessible. And so we have to be really careful when we embrace technology because that's really important, but that it also is accessible. It is compatible with that assistive technology that I mentioned, but also that we're not so focused on creativity and innovation that we're cutting people out that we've recently gave access to these platforms and applications. And we're seeing that. We are seeing technology become less inclusive in lots of different spaces. And then, you know, so build it accessibly, you know, talking to our friends at Microsoft and everywhere else who are thinking about this every day. But also, whether we're building technology or whether we're building buildings or physical spaces or virtual spaces, you know, thinking about what does it mean for us to be inclusive? Who are we building for? And not related to technology, but when we started putting in curb cuts when the ADA was passed, that was primarily done for people who were using wheelchairs and other kinds of mobility devices. And now the population that is the most vocal, the biggest fans, are parents and caregivers of small children that are pushing strollers. And so, you know, again, that sort of universal effort, the Ray-Ban Metaglasses is another example. It wasn't built for people with disabilities, but people with disabilities are using it because it had inclusive universal design built into it. We're using it to read menus and help with navigation indoor and outdoor and wayfinding and all sorts of amazing things happening with technology and beyond. So the key is it's fabulous, but we also have to make sure that it stays fabulous by being inclusive and accessible.  Laurie: You make such a good point there, Ronza, and I think with this wave of generative AI and everyone racing to get products to market, it's more important than ever to be rigorous and disciplined in continuing to build accessibility in from the beginning and test it thoroughly all the way through before it's released.  Ronza: 100%.  Kevin: Ronza and Laurie, those are excellent points that you made. And I really think technology will go a long way to helping people with disabilities of all types become part of the workforce, become part of the legal profession. And I think we have all lived through recently the pandemic that, you know, was affected everyone, not just persons with disabilities. But I think one of the things that came out of that was the importance of remote work and how that can really change the landscape. And Nick, I believe Coinbase is, you said, almost all remote. So can you comment on how that has impacted you and how you think that affects people with disabilities in terms of having access to jobs?  Nicholas: Yeah, Coinbase is a remote first company. So everyone in the company has the option to be remote first. We do have some office locations in some major cities if some people feel like they want to go into an office, but there's no requirement to do that. And in my view, I don't know that remote work benefits just persons with disabilities. I think we can all agree that it benefits a lot more groups than just persons with disabilities. To me, the bottom line of the benefit of remote work is it levels the playing field for everyone. So if we're all remote, we don't. There's no small group or other group or specific individual or groups of individuals that have to worry about what's happening in an office. Are some people getting ahead by having lunches or just getting that face time that they otherwise aren't able to do to be into the office? Whether that's because they live somewhere else where the office isn't, or they're a person with a disability and it's not easy to get into the office, or for any other reason of why it doesn't make sense. I think specifically for parents with children who are working. Remote work is a great benefit. So I love what remote work does for everyone. And it's been a real benefit. I think Coinbase deserves a lot of credit. For being one of the first companies in I think it was may of 2020 to decide that is how we're going to operate our company we think we can do it effectively and so far now you know four plus years later they're doing really well and um i don't have any knowledge that that Coinbase is changing their practices but it works very well for Coinbase and I'm sort of discouraged to see some of these companies deciding to go to a hybrid or fully return to office status. But obviously, that's their decision. And the people that are making that are thinking that it's in their best interest. I just don't know how much input they're getting from a voice of someone with a person with a disability.  Laurie: One other point is it expands the talent pool that employers can recruit from. They're not limited to just their area or just the people who can come into the office, but it really broadens that talent pool and once again, enables them to bring a more diverse workforce into their organization.  Ronza: So I'll say that, you know, in the government workforce, we have seen this switch, right? So prior to the pandemic, there were some people that were working remotely, but not very many because the perception was, no, no, no, we can't do this work remote in a remote way. We need to serve the people, the public, etc. And then the pandemic happened and bam, we have to work remotely in order to serve the people. And then everything was moving along. And I think that was really the renaissance for the disability community and government. And then government started shifting back to more in-person presence and more and more in-person presence. And the thought was, well, if you need to work from home, you can request a reasonable accommodation. And while that's true, it can be very isolating. If we're not building work, community. In a way that's hybrid or in a way that is inclusive of those that are working from home for whatever reason, then we are excluding those people. And so giving them the ability to work from home as a reasonable accommodation, if that's the solution, it can't be the only solution because what it does is it creates a different expectation and standard and isolation. And all these people with a disability are over here and everyone else is over here. And so I think employers need to really be thinking mindfully about what a hybrid work environment looks like and how to ensure inclusion for those who, for whatever reason, are working from home all or much of the time. And we can do it. We have done it. We've been very creative in the last five years. But I think we're just not thinking about it. We're letting the economic and other considerations and, you know, the ease. My favorite phrase that people give me was, well, we need people in the building because of line of sight supervision. And I always say, well, I'm a manager and I'm blind. So line of sight supervision doesn't do anything for me. Are you saying I'm not as good of a manager as you? And then, you know, they don't mean it that way, but that's how it comes off. And that's really how they're thinking. They're thinking they have to be in my space for me to effectively manage them, which we have proven doesn't have to be the case. In fact, we can be very effective as if not more productive with people in their own comfortable environment.  Kevin: Ronza, you expressed that better than I could ever have done. I think that's a really important aspect of remote work. It could not put anyone at a disadvantage or be isolating. With the last couple minutes we have left, I'd just like to hear from everyone about where we have come from and what you'd like to see in the future, some progress we've made, and where you think we still need to improve. So Nick, if you'd like to talk a little bit about that.  Nicholas: Yeah, I'll say I can recall an instance about 12, 13 years ago, maybe, where I was interested in a summer internship with a law firm. And I noticed they had a diversity recruitment event, something like that. And they were looking for women and ethnically diverse or persons of color to attend. And I recall thinking to myself, well, I am a white male, but if they're looking for diverse candidates, I would assume that they would be interested in a person with a disability. So I emailed the firm's event organizer and I sort of posed the question of, can I attend? And of course the answer was yes, but it really goes to show where we were 12 to 14 years ago. And we may still be there in terms of what diversity is and or how law firms specifically view diversity. It may just be that they focus on these two categories. And that is a fine thing. It's just not an inclusive thing. I sort of commend the efforts. And I think we've gone farther than that over the past 12 to 14 years. But if we want to create an inclusive industry, doing so in an exclusive manner is not going to get us there. And I would encourage firms in their recruitment efforts to think about all of the minority groups or underrepresented groups in this industry and make intentional efforts to be inclusive for all of them.  Kevin: Thank you, Nick. Ronza, would you like to add?  Ronza: Sure, I 100% agree. I think that it's not just in the legal profession, it's in a lot of professions that the focus on diversity has been on race and gender and, you know, the SOGI areas. And there hasn't been as much advancement with disability, but this is certainly an opportunity. The American Bar Association currently has a campaign called the Be Counted Campaign for lawyers specifically and those in the legal profession who do have disabilities who can, you know, confidentially essentially be counted as a member of the disability community so that we can get a better number of who in fact is in this profession because we know it's not half a percent. You know, we know it's more than that. And we need to eliminate the stigma in this and every profession for those that are comfortable, psychologically safe, identifying as people with disabilities, even if it's anonymized, to be able to do so. I am optimistic in terms of where we're headed. I think the effort that we've put forward as a disability community and nothing about us without us has really tremendously borne some fruit. And I think though there's work to do, I think we've come a long way. I think that the ADA regulations on Title II that were the Department of Justice released are going to be a game changer. I think that when the Title III regulations are released, whenever that is, it's going to be another huge game changer. I think that Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act is very, very much in need of a refresh and some updates. And when that happens, and I know there's some effort in Congress already, that's going to help. And I think some of the fundamental civil rights laws and protections in states and in the federal sector are going to continue this progress. But those are just the underpinning. It's the attitudes of people. It's listening to a podcast like this and learning about people you didn't think about before or aspects you didn't think about before, and then becoming a good ally to those communities. If you are in the community and feel comfortable speaking up with your lived experience, that's going to be a game changer too. 25% of this country. That's who we are. And so everybody knows somebody. Everybody has a family member who is a person with a disability who've experienced some of these challenges. Listen to their stories. Ask about their stories. Educate yourself and become a good ally so that the next generation has an easier time. That's what I'm excited about because I see it happening much more often. And I think it will continue to happen in this generation and the ones to come.  Kevin: Thank you so much. Laurie, how about you? what do you see in the future?  Laurie: Well, I think these are all such great points. And I'm going to go back to Nick's example. You know, I think historically DE&I has included, you know, a lot of minority groups except the disability community. And more and more, as I'm speaking with, you know, our enterprise customers, they're starting to add accessibility into that equation and really target disability hiring and bringing disabled talent into their pipelines. A lot of organizations are creating neurodiversity centers of excellence and neurodiversity hiring programs to specifically target that part of the population. So like Ronza said, I'm encouraged and I'm seeing this become a much higher priority for our enterprise customers. And again, to echo what she just said, I think the more we talk about it, the more we have podcasts and people listen to podcasts, the more comfortable and confident we get. I think we don't talk about accessibility because we're uncomfortable talking about disability, because people are afraid they're going to say the wrong thing. And at some point, we are all going to say the wrong thing, and that's okay. It's a learning opportunity for all of us. So again, thank you for the opportunity for us to come together today and talk about this really, really important topic.  Kevin: Well, I just want to say very heartfelt thanks to all of you, Laurie, Ronza, and Nick for all of your insights today, for your time, and for the lessons you've shared with us. I think people will really get a lot out of this. And for our listeners, thank you for joining us for Inclusivity Included, and please stay tuned for future episodes. Thanks, everyone.  Outro: Inclusivity Included is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.   All rights reserved.  Transcript is auto-generated.

In this episode, hosts Reed Smith and Chris Boyer discuss seven technology trends that are innovating healthcare and medicine - some old and some radically new. With an increased focus on solving gaps in rural healthcare and addressing modern consumerism needs. This show is a fun look forward to support future planning.  Mentions From the Show: Consumers rule: Driving healthcare growth with a consumer-led strategy - McKinsey Bracing for impact: Navigating the surge in healthcare costs - WTW The next frontier of care delivery in healthcare 7 Healthcare Trends That Will Transform Medicine In 2025 TouchPoint 2024 Listener Survey Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join hosts Chris Boyer and Reed Smith for a special episode that celebrates the season of thankfulness with a unique twist. This week, they share never-before-aired conversations featuring four insightful “Three Questions with Chris” segments with industry leaders Patty Riskind, Dean Browell, Christy Pretzinger, and Matt Gove. These candid discussions reveal a fresh perspective on some of healthcare's brightest minds. As a bonus, enjoy an encore interview with digital expert John Berndt, who dives into the transformative power of adopting a composability framework and its potential to drive significant value for health systems. Don't miss this engaging and gratitude-filled episode! Mentions from the Show:  Thanksgiving horror stories Patty Riskind on LinkedIn Dean Browell on LinkedIn John Berndt on LinkedIn Christy Pretzinger on LinkedIn Matt Gove on LinkedIn Reed Smith on LinkedIn Chris Boyer on LinkedIn Chris Boyer website Chris Boyer on BlueSky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices