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.
Litigation
- Justices Seek Abitron Parties’ Help in Articulating Bounds of Extraterritorial Application of Lanham Act
- U.S. Taxpayers Should Not Be Paying for Private Patent Infringement
- UK Court Hands Down Key FRAND Ruling in InterDigital v. Lenovo
- Litigation Trends, Shared Core Technologies Make Wi-Fi 6 an Attractive SEP Monetization Target (Part 1)
- Federal Circuit: Known Technique Addressing Known Problem Satisfies KSR’s Motivation to Combine Analysis
Recent Posts
- Justices Seek Abitron Parties’ Help in Articulating Bounds of Extraterritorial Application of Lanham Act
- U.S. Taxpayers Should Not Be Paying for Private Patent Infringement
- UK Court Hands Down Key FRAND Ruling in InterDigital v. Lenovo
- Litigation Trends, Shared Core Technologies Make Wi-Fi 6 an Attractive SEP Monetization Target (Part 1)
- Other Barks & Bites: UK Rules in InterDigital-Lenovo SEP Fight; USPTO to add FDA Info to PTE Page; Copyright Office Launches Initiative to Explore AI’s Implications on Copyright Law