The United States Supreme Court today ruled that a former police sergeant did not flout Section (a)(2) of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) because that provision “does not cover those who…have improper motives for obtaining information that is otherwise available to them.” The opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, contradicts the U.S. government’s reading of the statute. Three justices dissented from the majority.
SCOTUS Says Former Police Sergeant Did Not Violate CFAA, Snubbing Government’s Reading
No Comments
Litigation
- CAFC Remands Walker Process Antitrust Issue to Fifth Circuit under Xitronex I Precedent
- After Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, it Might Be Time to Pay Attention to Prosecution Laches
- SCOTUS Says Former Police Sergeant Did Not Violate CFAA, Snubbing Government’s Reading
- Supreme Court Grants Cert in Unicolors v. H&M to Consider Whether Section 411 Includes Intent-to-Defraud Requirement
- Nokiaand Harting at the CJEU: The Issues Explained
Recent Posts
- Game On: How IP Helps the Video Game Industry Level Up
- CAFC Affirms District Court Section 101 Dismissal in Patent Infringement Suit Brought Against Samsung/Apple; Newman Dissents
- CAFC Remands Walker Process Antitrust Issue to Fifth Circuit under Xitronex I Precedent
- Geltor is seeking a Senior Patent Agent
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, June 11: EU Parliament Calls for TRIPS Patent Waiver, Innovation and Competition Act Passes Senate, and Foreign Lawyers Can Now Sit for China’s Patent Bar