On April 18, the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn Corporation in which the court clarified its position on an important topic: whether the common practice.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in HiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn that automated web scraping of publicly accessible websites does not violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse.
On June 3, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in
Van Buren v. United States,[1] holding that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA) does not create liability when a user who is authorized to access information on a computer does so in a manner that violates an acceptable use policy. The Court’s decision significantly narrows the scope of the CFAA, which now applies only to hackers that is, to users that breach code-based or otherwise absolute barriers in order to obtain access to information on a computer. In light of the Court’s narrow interpretation of the CFAA, which removes a deterrent to employee misconduct, business should take additional steps to protect against employee misuse of databases that contain personal information or sensitive business information.
Resolving a circuit split in the interpretation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA) - an anti-hacking statute - the Supreme Court recently held that the CFAA does.
Supreme Court’s decision in Van Buren v. United States resolved a decade-long circuit split concerning the exceeds authorized access clause of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act CFAA endorses the narrower reading of CFAA adopted by the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits