Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) is the sort of broadly worded criminal statute which gives white-collar prosecutors considerable power — and makes defense counsel and judges uneasy. The law prohibits obtaining information by "access[ing] a computer without authorization or exceed[ing] authorized access." Computer hacking — "access[ing] a computer without authorization" — clearly violates the law. But the meaning of the other operative words, "or exceed[ing] authorized access," is not so clear.
The different ways of interpreting the statute have led to a split in the Courts of Appeals. Four circuits have read the statute broadly: An individual "exceeds authorized access" when she accesses a computer and obtains information for an improper purpose, even if the person's access to the information is authorized. Four other circuits have read the statute narrowly: An individual "exceeds authorized access" only if she obtains information that she is not allowed to access, even if the purpose is improper. In practical terms, if a company Human Resources officer peeks at sensitive information out of idle curiosity, not because of work, would that be a crime because of the improper purpose, or would it not be a crime because the HR officer had the authority to review personnel files?
The meaning of "exceeds authorized access" will soon be taken up by the Supreme Court in United States v. Van Buren, 940 F.3d 1192 (11th Cir. 2019), cert. granted, 2020 WL 190655 (Mem.) (U.S. April 20, 2020). Oral argument was scheduled for Nov. 30, 2020. This article describes the circuit split and explore different methods used by appellate courts to interpret the operative words of the CFAA. In Van Buren, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity once more to articulate its approach to interpreting white-collar criminal statutes.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.