Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

e-Commerce Developments of Note

By Julian S. Millstein, Edward A. Pisacreta and Jeffrey D. Neuburger
July 30, 2004

Antispyware Legislation Advances in Congress

The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved antispyware legislation on June 24 that would authorize significant penalties for violations of its provisions. H.R. 2929 (108th Cong., 2d Sess.), the Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT). The amended version of the bill approved by the committee would, among other things, require clear and conspicuous notice prior to the installation of an “information collection program” on another's computer. The amended version would also pre-empt certain similar state antispyware laws. Also on June 24, another antispyware bill was introduced that would add a provision to the federal criminal code penalizing the unauthorized copying of a computer program or code onto a computer for the purpose of obtaining personal information with the intent to defraud or injure a person, or cause damage to a computer, or for the purpose of impairing the security protection of the computer. H.R. 4661 (108th Cong., 2d Sess.), the Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2004. (For more on this topic, see “Legislative Update.”)



Julian S. Millstein Edward A. Pisacreta Jeffrey D. Neuburger

Antispyware Legislation Advances in Congress

The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved antispyware legislation on June 24 that would authorize significant penalties for violations of its provisions. H.R. 2929 (108th Cong., 2d Sess.), the Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT). The amended version of the bill approved by the committee would, among other things, require clear and conspicuous notice prior to the installation of an “information collection program” on another's computer. The amended version would also pre-empt certain similar state antispyware laws. Also on June 24, another antispyware bill was introduced that would add a provision to the federal criminal code penalizing the unauthorized copying of a computer program or code onto a computer for the purpose of obtaining personal information with the intent to defraud or injure a person, or cause damage to a computer, or for the purpose of impairing the security protection of the computer. H.R. 4661 (108th Cong., 2d Sess.), the Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2004. (For more on this topic, see “Legislative Update.”)



Julian S. Millstein Edward A. Pisacreta Jeffrey D. Neuburger New York Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner LLP
Read These Next
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.