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 29

Virginia Supreme Court overturns multi-million dollar "goodwill" damages award in trade secrets conspiracy case

  • Epstein Becker Green
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 13 2012

One of the most elusive forms of damage that a company may suffer when its trade secrets are misappropriated or its former employees breach their post-employment restrictive covenants is the loss of goodwill

Federal courts address question of employer-employee ownership of business-related social media accounts

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 5 2012

The question of whether an employer is entitled to trade secret protection over social media accounts used for business purposes is unfolding in several well-publicized cases currently pending in federal courts throughout the country

An employer’s guide to implementing EU-compliant whistleblowing hotlines

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union, USA
  • -
  • August 23 2011

Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges are required to establish a system, often called a “whistleblowing hotline,” for employees to internally report concerns over questionable auditing or accounting matters

State AGs in the news

  • Dickstein Shapiro LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 19 2014

Apple Inc. has agreed to settle the antitrust class action lawsuit brought by 33 AGs and consumers alleging that it conspired with publishers to fix

Printing hard copies of stolen source code: the difference between freedom and incarceration in the Second Circuit

  • Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 13 2013

Whenever an appeals court kicks off a 65-page opinion by describing you (or your client) as a thief, and posits that the question before it is

Employers beware: Fourth Circuit adopts narrow interpretation of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 6 2012

On July 26, 2012, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided WEC Carolina Energy Solutions LLC v. Miller, holding that departing employees are not liable under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) for mere violations of a company computer use policy

Eworkplace policies social-media, privacy & internet-security

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 3 2012

Traditional concerns for employers have included: harassing or other discriminatory actions; other conduct leading to liability to third-parties; forbidden fraternizing; criminal activity; “frolic and detour” or other slacking; and protection of trade secrets

Privacy reforms will impact offshore share incentives for Australian employees: are you ready?

  • DLA Piper LLP
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • December 18 2013

Does your company offer offshore equity incentives for Australian employees? If so, the changes to the Privacy Act 1988, including the introduction

Colorado Federal Court rules that former employer stated a claim against former executive and his new employer under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act regardless of differing circuit interpretations of the act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 9 2012

In its order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss in SBM Site Services, LLC v. Garrett, et al., Case No. 10-cv-00385, a Colorado federal court identified a circuit split over the interpretation of “unauthorized access” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and then found a former employer had stated a CFAA claim against a former executive and his new employer regardless of the different circuit interpretations based upon his post-termination computer activities

The Eleventh Circuit splits with the Ninth Circuit in interpreting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 7 2011

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' December 27, 2010 decision in U.S. v. Rodriguez, Appeal No. 09-15265, -- F.3d --, 2010 WL 5253231 (11th Cir. Dec. 27, 2010) may mark a significant split among the federal appellate circuits over the meaning of the phrases “without authorization” and “exceeds authorized access” under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030 et seq. (“CFAA”