Yesterday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals smacked down Obama, Holder & Co., ruling that an employee's (read that: "servant's") violation of an employer’s (read that: “Master’s”) computer policy cannot be prosecuted as hacking under the oft-misused Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (See:http://www.TheAmericanRepublic.com).
Today, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals landed a pile-driver, issuing an opinion regarding their February reversal of the 2010 conviction of Sergey Aleynikov, the former Goldman Sachs vice president accused of theft and espionage for downloading the source code for Goldman Sachs' high-speed trading system from the company’s computers.
Impeding the progress of the United States (government; a thing, not a place) never-ending attempts to expand power through exotic interpretations of law, the three-judge panel held that Goldman Sachs' market-manipulation code neither qualified as property under the National Stolen Property Act, nor was it a product designed for interstate or foreign commerce, an essential element in prosecution under the Economic Espionage Act.
Commenting upon the "enormous profits" (“many millions of dollars” each year, according to prosecutors), the appellate panel wrote “Because the HFT system was not designed to enter or pass in commerce, or to make something that does, Aleynikov’s theft of source code relating to that system was not an offense under the EEA.”.
As with the 9th Circuit's circumscription of the CFAA, the 2nd Circuit's newly-issued opinion "binds...down with chains" Obama, Holder & Co.’s ability to prosecute others for similar thefts of trade secrets under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (EEA).
- ▼ 2012 (28)
- ► 2010 (84)