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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 156

Employee GPS Tracking - Is it Legal?
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • January 26 2016

Over the past several years, technology has dramatically increased employee accountability in the workplace. For example, in an office environment


Top 10 DevelopmentsHeadlines in Trade Secret, Computer Fraud, and Non-Compete Law in 2015
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2016

Continuing our tradition of presenting annually our thoughts concerning the top 10 developmentsheadlines this past year in trade secret, computer


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


The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and disloyal employees: a narrow bridge to nowhere?
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 15 2013

An old folk melody describes the world as "a very narrow bridge," where one misstep can bring disaster. The song seeks to inspire, calling on people


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


Better Sit Down For This: Court Clarifies “Suitable Seating” Rules
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 6 2016

Suitable seating is required in California where tasks performed at a particular location reasonably permit sitting, and where providing a seat would


California Federal District Court reaffirms that Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claims are available for violations of employers’ “access restrictions” despite Ninth Circuit’s Nosal decision
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 13 2012

Last month we blogged about a district court for the Northern District of California that distinguished the Ninth Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Nosal decision and allowed an employer to bring a counterclaim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act against a former employee for alleged violations of a verbal computer access restriction


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


First Apple, now Dell: IBM pursues a departing executive
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 13 2009

In the wake of its ultimately successful efforts to obtain an injunction against former executive Mark Papermaster following Papermaster’s move to Apple, IBM recently sought to enjoin David Johnson from joining Dell


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