We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 61

Accenture employee faked medical leave to work for a competitor while stealing data from Accenture computers

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 29 2010

The recent case of Accenture, LLP v. Sidhu, 2010 WL 4691944 (N.D. Ca. Nov. 9, 2010) is a classic example of how the 9th Circuit’s holding in LVRC Holdings, LLC v. Brekka, 581 F.3d 1127, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2009) has led to the dismissal of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) claims (or criminal counts) in circumstances in which an employee is clearly not authorized to access the company computers

Recognizing risks arising from invasion of privacy claims in the workplace

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 13 2013

One of the most significant liabilities that a company in California faces relates to claims that it has invaded an individual's privacy rights

California court permits company to subpoena Yahoo, Google and ISPs to identify anonymous computer hacker

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2010

A federal court in San Jose California last week permitted SolarBridge Technologies, Inc. (“SolarBridge”) to serve subpoenas on Yahoo, Google and various Internet Service Providers to identify the sender of an email containing SolarBridge’s confidential and trade secret protected data including schematics and other product designs of current and future products

Electronic data security after Riley v. California

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 12 2014

It's 10 p.m. Do you know where your company's data is? One of your administrative employees' cell phone may be sitting on his nightstand. Another

A weapon against hackers on the home front

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 14 2014

Over the past year the national press has repeatedly reported on the vulnerability of our intellectual property to nation-state hackers like

California court grants summary judgment to CISCO systems on computer fraud and abuse claim, holding that Brekka does not apply to ex-employees

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 28 2010

Last week a federal district court in California granted Cisco Systems, Inc. summary judgment on its Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) claim against an ex-employee who “on multiple occasions and without authorization, . . . used a Cisco employee’s password to gain access to Cisco’s computer systems and download Cisco’s proprietary and copyrighted software.”

How do you sue an unknown hacker?

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 19 2010

The question was answered this week by a federal district court in Connecticut in the case of GWA, LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc. and John Doe

United States Chess Federation embroiled in computer fraud prosecution

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 26 2010

Last week the federal district court in Northern California downgraded felony Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) counts to misdemeanors against Gregory Alexander who is charged with accessing “on thirty-four separate occasions . . . without authorization, the Yahoo! email account of Randall Hough, one of the board members of the United States Chess Federation (“USCF”).”

The conflicting rulings on employee data theft

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 13 2013

Employers should include access restrictions in agreements, limit access with technology and consider the jurisdiction. In all jurisdictions the

How to prove “loss” for Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 11 2010

To bring a civil action based on the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA") a plaintiff must show that the alleged violation "caused . . . loss . . . aggregating at least $5,000 in value.”