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.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 26

New York State court rejects double jeopardy argument in data theft case

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 10 2013

We have previously written about Sergey Aleynikov, a former computer programmer for an investment bank who beat federal charges of trade secret theft

New U.S. laws criminalize theft of quantitative trading and investment models and other trade secrets and dramatically increase potential monetary penalties for thefts which benefit non-U.S. entities

  • Dechert LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 4 2013

The U.S. Congress recently passed two laws that raise the stakes dramatically for employees of financial services firms and anyone else who

Discovery of information on personal devices still at issue in trade secret disputes

  • Fredrikson & Byron PA
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 24 2013

In trade secret litigation, we often seek to uncover whether a former employee has taken confidential trade secret information and stored it on a

Top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law in 2012

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 31 2012

As part of our annual tradition, here is our list of the top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law for 2012

California court affirms that customer lists can qualify as trade secrets

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 24 2012

Under California’s trade secret laws, a trade secret is information that (a) is not generally known in the industry, to the public, or to others who can realize economic value from its disclosure or use; (b) has independent economic value that derives from its secrecy; and (c) is subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy

The use of digital forensics in trade secret matters

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 5 2012

Welcome to part 3 of this three part series

Washington court clarifies pleading requirements for CFAA claims

  • Littler Mendelson
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 9 2012

Trade secret disputes increasingly center on an ex-employee copying trade secret information from the former employer’s computer system and using that information to benefit his or her new employer

Ninth Circuit narrows scope of CFAA

  • Thompson Hine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 20 2012

On April 10, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its highly anticipated decision interpreting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), in U.S. v. Nosal, 10-10038

Is Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for hackers only? Ninth Circuit says yes, and Supreme Court may have to make final call

  • Constangy Brooks & Smith LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 19 2012

Employers looking to hold employees liable for misappropriation of trade secrets or violations of company computer policies under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act may have to find another avenue for relief

Ninth Circuit en banc decision in Nosal creates federal appellate court split on scope of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act's reach to protect trade secrets

  • Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 16 2012

In a much anticipated decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in an en banc decision in United States v. Nosal that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA") was not intended to cover employee misappropriation of trade secrets, violations of corporate computer use policies or violations of an employee duty of loyalty

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy