Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Ninth Circuit CFAA Case May Draw High Court Review

In <i>United States v. Nosal</i>, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, <i>en banc</i>, held that the prohibition against "exceed[ing] authorized access" to a computer under the CFAA does not apply when an employee has been granted access to the company computer infrastructure but uses that access, against company policy and the obvious interests of the company, to copy valuable, confidential information in order to take business from the company. For various reasons, articulated well in the dissent by Judge Barry Silverman (joined by only one other judge), the Ninth Circuit is wrong.

31 minute readMay 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM
By
Leonard Deutchman
Ninth Circuit CFAA Case May Draw High Court Review

In United States v. Nosal, No. 10-10038, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7151(9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2012), http://1.usa.gov/J8AJZC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Letter Agreement Between Landlord and Tenant Did Not Extinguish GuarantyTreble Damage Award Upheld; Landlord Failed to Establish Overcharge Was Not WillfulDenying Access to Landlord Constituted Breach Entitling Landlord to PossessionTenant Entitled to Yellowstone Injunction With Respect to Taxes and Sewer Charges

March 01, 2026

New York is one of the first states to adopt laws to regulate artificial intelligence use in advertising and to strengthen post-mortem publicity rights regarding AI-generated replicas and “synthetic performers.” Given the state’s role as a bellwether for consumer-protection and advertising regulation, these new laws, combined with the state’s broader AI legislative framework, represent a shift toward transparency, consent and accountability.

March 01, 2026

State app store age verification regimes do more than reallocate responsibility between platforms and developers. They create a new data supply chain for age knowledge, one that can move COPPA questions from “do we ask age?” to “what do we do when the platform tells us?” The teams that handle this best will treat platform age signals as sensitive compliance inputs: minimize them, tightly control where they flow, and design product behavior so that minors do not trigger unnecessary collection or disclosure.

March 01, 2026

The firms leading right now chose to ask what would become possible if they managed the entire revenue lifecycle — from invoice generation to cash receipt — in one place, and what AI could actually accomplish with complete data instead of partial feeds. That is the Power of One.

March 01, 2026

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.

March 01, 2026