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: 11-20 of 23

Recent developments for the fourth quarter 2011

  • Baker & McKenzie
  • -
  • Canada, China, Denmark, European Union, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • March 15 2012

The end of the year and beginning of a new year is always a busy time for us, as it is for most of our clients

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

Pennsylvania Federal Court salvages customer lists as basis for UTSA claim, but shreds liquidated damages provision and rejects fiduciary claim

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 3 2012

In the most recent ruling in long-running litigation styled AMG National Trust Bank v. Ries, NO. 06-CV4337, 09-cv-3061 (E.D. Pa.) (decided Dec. 29, 2011), the Eastern District of Pennsylvania partially granted the defendant Stephen Ries’s motion for summary judgment, jettisoning the plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty claims and plaintiff’s request for liquidated damages, but permitting the case to proceed for alleged breach of a restrictive covenant in his employment agreement

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

Non-competition v. unfair competition in California

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 29 2011

We all know that California does not permit enforcement of non-compete agreements

Ninth Circuit reverses course on Computer Fraud & Abuse Act

  • Fisher & Phillips LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 16 2011

More often than not when a management law firm informs its clients of recent case developments, the news is not good

Your licensee knows your confidential, proprietary technology and just acquired your main competitor: can you sue for threatened trade secret misappropriation?

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 28 2011

A federal court in Washington State issued a ruling last week in Edifecs, Inc. v. Tibco Software, Inc., further limiting grounds for seeking trade secret relief arising out of the acquisition by a licensee of the licensor’s primary competitor

Top five technology decisions of the Delaware Court of Chancery for 2010

  • Fish & Richardson PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 3 2011

Long recognized as the nation's leading business court, the Delaware Court of Chancery continues to be a top forum for litigating complex disputes over technology such as trade secret misappropriation or enforcement of noncompete or licensing agreements

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”

The "authorized access" issue under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Epstein Becker Green
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 2 2010

Earlier this year, Aon Risk Services Northeast Inc. (“Aon”) brought suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Marsh USA Inc., Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (together, “Marsh”), and three former employees

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

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