Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On June 3, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued a 6-3 opinion in Van Buren v. United States, No. 19-783, resolving the circuit split regarding what it means to “exceed authorization” for purposes of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The Court held that only those who obtain information from particular areas of the computer which they are not authorized to access can be said to “exceed authorization,” and the statute does not — as the government had argued — cover behavior, like Van Buren’s, where a person accesses information which he is authorized to access but does so for improper purposes. This was a long-awaited decision interpreting the CFAA, which has become an important statute in both criminal and civil enforcement relating to computer crime and hacking.
*May exclude premium content
By Nicholas Gaffney
A Q&A with Bobby Malhotra, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Los Angeles
By Colin Jennings, David Meadows, Nicole Wells and John Winkler
The landscape of corporate investigations has changed dramatically in the last year. New regulations, new market pressures, new data sources and more challenging…
By Tomas Suros
A summary of the key technology principles addressed in Formal Opinion 498, in which the ABA revised Model Rule 1.1 addresses virtual work environments and practices.
By Elkan Abramowitz and Jonathan S. Sack
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA’s new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.