The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: An Uncertain Path for Bringing Trade Secrets Litigation in Federal Court


As part of its sweeping Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Congress enacted a criminal statute prohibiting the “unauthorized access” of information contained in federal government computers and computers employed by certain federally-related financial institutions. The law is codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1030. The Act was intended to punish hackers who tap into computers to disrupt or destroy computer functionality and persons who hack into specified computers to steal the information stored therein.

As the various methods of computer fraud grew, the Act was amended. In 1986 it became known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”). In 1994, Congress added a private civil right of action under the CFAA (18 U.S.C. § 1030(g)), seemingly allowing federal claims for stealing trade secrets stored on a protected computer. The Act now provides that it is unlawful if a person (1) “intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains . . . information from any protected computer [§ 1030(a)(2)(C)]; (2) knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of value . . . [in excess of $5,000 in one year] [§ 1030(a)(4)]; or (3) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damages or loss. [§ 1030(a)(5)(iii)].” A “protected computer” is defined as one “used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce” [§ 1030(e)(2)(B)]. That definition is usually broad enough to cover any computer used in trade secret theft.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.