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 43

An employee is stealing company documentsthat can’t be protected activity, right?

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 3 2013

A supervisor discovers that an employee has recently downloaded thousands of pages of confidential Company billing and financial information, and

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act circuit split remains unresolved: United States Supreme Court challenge dismissed

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 7 2013

The parties in the WEC Carolina Energy Solutions LLC v. Miller matter recently agreed to dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari filed with the United

No damages? Illinois federal court tosses Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim alleging hacking of law firm network

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 13 2013

An Illinois federal court recently found in the favor of the defendant on a plaintiff's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim because the plaintiff

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

Mississippi Federal District Court allows Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim to proceed against former employee

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 18 2012

A recent Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) case from the Southern District of Mississippi further muddies the water with respect to the circuit split regarding the application of the law against former employees who violate computer usage policies or violate their duties of loyalty to their employer by stealing company data from company computer systems

California federal district court distinguishes Ninth Circuit’s Nosal decision and finds that Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claims are available for violations of employer’s “access” restrictions

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 14 2012

On June 19, 2012, a district court for the Northern District of California distinguished the Ninth Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Nosal decision and allowed an employer to bring a claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) against a former employee for alleged violations of a verbal computer access restriction

Washington State passes social networking privacy legislation

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 27 2013

On May 21, 2013, Washington Governor Jay Inslee signed into law Senate Bill 5211, which with certain exceptions prohibits mandatory employee

Attorney-Client Privilege and Waiver in Employee Email on Company Systems

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 27 2011

In this issue of Seyfarth eDIGital, Seyfarth Shaw's eDiscovery and Information Governance practice group newsletter, we will continue the discussion of employee privacy in communications transmitted on company servers

The use of digital forensics in trade secret matters (Part 2 of 3)

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 23 2012

This post is designed to build on Part 1 of this three part series on digital forensics

Ninth Circuit en banc panel tells employers that Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is only to combat hacking, not employee trade secret misappropriation: United States Supreme Court may need to resolve circuit split

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 10 2012

On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, a Ninth Circuit en banc panel released its highly anticipated decision in United States v. Nosal and affirmed the judgment of the district court dismissing criminal counts against a former employee of a headhunter firm accused of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030 et seq. by conspiring with employees of the former employer to log on to the employer's confidential database and send proprietary files to a competitor