In a long-awaited decision, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split about whether an individual with access to a computer system violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) by accessing information for an improper purpose. By a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Barrett, the Court held that an individual does not “exceed authorized access” within the meaning of the CFAA by misusing access to obtain information that is otherwise available to that person. While the case heard by the high court was a criminal case involving a former law enforcement officer’s criminal conviction, the decision nonetheless has broad ramifications for trade secrets and restrictive covenant litigation, as CFAA claims were often brought against employees who misused access rights to misappropriate information. The CFAA is a criminal statute that also provides a civil remedy, and CFAA claims were commonly raised to acquire federal subject matter jurisdiction, especially prior to the enactment of the Defend Trade Secrets Act in 2016, which provided an independent private cause of action in federal court for trade secret misappropriation.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split on Access Under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Supreme Court Issues Decision Significantly Expanding the Scope of FOIA’s Confidentiality Exemption
On June 24, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media and resolved fractured circuit splits about the parameters for when the government may withhold information from a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request based on responsive information being confidential or a trade secret. Earlier this year, we reported on this case when the Supreme Court granted certiorari and predicted that the case would have significant ramifications for the protections given to sensitive information submitted by companies to the government.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Issues Decision Significantly Expanding the Scope of FOIA’s Confidentiality Exemption
Seyfarth Attorneys Author Article on Trade Secret Protection and Social Media
Seyfarth Shaw Partner Erik Weibust and Associate Alex Meier published a Law360 article about trade secret protections related to social media. Weibust and Meier discuss risks employers face when employees access social media accounts, as well as some e-discovery considerations for social media. To learn more, check out “Trade Secret Protection and Social Media: A 5-Year Update” from Law360 here
Continue Reading Seyfarth Attorneys Author Article on Trade Secret Protection and Social Media
Supreme Court Grants Cert. to Interpret Meaning of “Confidential” or “Trade Secret” Under FOIA
On January 11, 2019, the Supreme Court accepted certiorari to reconcile fractured circuit tests on when the government may withhold information from a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request based on responsive information being confidential or a trade secret. The case has major potential ramifications for the protections given to sensitive information submitted by companies to the government.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Grants Cert. to Interpret Meaning of “Confidential” or “Trade Secret” Under FOIA
Webinar Recap! Protecting Trade Secrets Abroad and Enforcing Rights Abroad and in the U.S.
In Seyfarth’s sixth installment in its 2018 Trade Secrets Webinar Series, Seyfarth attorneys Daniel Hart, Marjorie Culver, Alex Meier, and Paul Yovanic Jr. focused on how to identify the greatest threats to trade secrets, tips and best practices for protecting trade secrets abroad, and enforcement mechanisms and remedies.
As a conclusion to this well-received webinar, we compiled a summary of
Continue Reading Webinar Recap! Protecting Trade Secrets Abroad and Enforcing Rights Abroad and in the U.S.
Upcoming Webinar! Protecting Trade Secrets Abroad and Enforcing Rights Abroad and in the U.S.
Please join us for a one-hour CLE webinar on Monday, September 24, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern / 12:00 p.m. Central / 10:00 a.m. Pacific.
Trade secrets are critical intellectual property for most businesses, and the threat to trade secrets continues to increase year after year. It’s vital for companies to protect trade secrets, both in the U.S. and abroad.
Continue Reading Upcoming Webinar! Protecting Trade Secrets Abroad and Enforcing Rights Abroad and in the U.S.
Report on Sedona Conference on Trade Secrets
On December 6-8, the inaugural Sedona Conference on trade secrets took place in Scottsdale, Arizona. The invitation-only conference brought together outside counsel, in-house counsel, and experts to have an in-depth discussion of developments in trade secrets law.
The conference provided us with some great insights into the issues on practitioners’ and companies’ minds. After a post-conference debrief, a few common notes emerged, and we have prepared a short summary of what we consider to be a few key takeaways.
Continue Reading Report on Sedona Conference on Trade Secrets
Are My Customer Lists a Trade Secret?
A lawyer’s favorite phrase might be “it depends.” And when an employer asks whether its customer lists qualify as a trade secret, “it depends” is often the answer. But even if it’s difficult to definitively state whether customer lists qualify as a trade secret, the converse—whether customer lists might not constitute a trade secret—can be helpful to assessing how much protection a court will provide.
With the advent of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”), no state categorically denies trade-secrets status to customer lists. That’s because the default definition of a “trade secret” under the UTSA includes compilations of information, and several states modified the default definition to explicitly include customer lists as potential trade secrets. See, e.g., Conn Gen. Stat. § 35-51(d); O.C.G.A. § 10-1-761(4); Or. Rev. Stat. § 646.461(4); 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5302. Other states opted to mention that a “listing of names, addresses, or telephone numbers” may qualify as a trade secret if the listing, like any trade secret, has independent economic value because it is not readily ascertainable and is subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. See, e.g., Co. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 7-74-102(4); Oh. Rev. Code Ann. § 1333.61(D).
States still, however, apply varying degrees of scrutiny before conceding that customer lists constitute a trade secret. In more skeptical jurisdictions, courts decline to confer trade-secrets status on customer lists for one of three reasons.
Continue Reading Are My Customer Lists a Trade Secret?
Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act Turns Five Years Old: Assessing the Impact of Georgia’s Law Five Years On
While the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act is garnering a great deal of attention, it’s worthwhile to remember that state law remains critically important in drafting restrictive covenants. This week, May 11, 2016, marks the fifth anniversary of Georgia’s revised trade secrets act, which fundamentally recast how courts view and enforce restrictive covenants.
Prior to enactment of the new law,
Continue Reading Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act Turns Five Years Old: Assessing the Impact of Georgia’s Law Five Years On
Effective Carve-Outs to Seek Injunctive Relief from the Court in Arbitration Provisions
Christopher Pike: “That’s a technicality.”
Spock: “I am a [lawyer], sir. We embrace technicalities.”
Arbitration is no longer the final frontier. Instead, arbitration is often the first and only forum for resolving disputes. The business community has embraced arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution, but sophisticated parties still maintain a preference favoring court resolution
Continue Reading Effective Carve-Outs to Seek Injunctive Relief from the Court in Arbitration Provisions