{"id":1306,"date":"2019-08-22T18:12:36","date_gmt":"2019-08-22T18:12:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.bfvlaw.com\/what-to-know-employees-and-computer-fraud-in-the-workplace\/"},"modified":"2019-08-22T18:12:36","modified_gmt":"2019-08-22T18:12:36","slug":"what-to-know-employees-and-computer-fraud-in-the-workplace","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bfvlaw.com\/what-to-know-employees-and-computer-fraud-in-the-workplace\/","title":{"rendered":"What to Know: Employees and Computer Fraud in the Workplace"},"content":{"rendered":"
When an employer discovers that a departing employee has misappropriated information using a computer, there may be a remedy under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). In many cases, employees who misappropriate information using a computer expose themselves to potential civil and criminal liability under the CFAA<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Some federal Circuit Courts of Appeal construe the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act narrowly, holding that an employer must show that the employee had specifically<\/em> exceeded express limitations on access.\u00a0 Other circuits construe the CFAA more expansively, holding that an employee\u2019s authority to access information automatically terminates when the employee forms the intent to leave his employer and is therefore no longer a \u201cloyal\u201d agent.\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/u><\/strong>The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act gives employers a civil cause of action against an employee who \u201cintentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access\u201d and obtains or misuses certain information obtained from the computer.\u00a0 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 1030.\u00a0 While the CFAA defines the phrase \u201cexceeds authorized access,\u201d it does not define \u201cwith authorization\u201d or \u201cwithout authorization.\u201d\u00a0 These terms have been interpreted differently by the various circuits, causing the reach<\/a> of the CFAA to vary by jurisdiction.<\/p>\n