Wong & Comedy Iii Cases Essay Example
Wong & Associates 1
Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc. v. William Nichols
BUS 340 Ethical and Legal Issues in Business
Wong & Associates 2
Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc. I. According to the court document of Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc, v. William M. Nichols Judge Charles P. Kocoras, of the United States District Court in N.D. Illinois’ Eastern Division, the court granted Nichols’ motion regarding the §1030 (a)(5) claim (Leagle. 2008). This ruling occurred due to the fact Wong’s plead regarding “damages” is not interpreted the same under the CFAA. In addition, Wong failed to elaborate on the total amount of loss (Leagle. 2008).
An employee that violates restrictions or exceeds authorized use of a computers access, may be held criminally responsible and charged. However, “damages” according to the CFAA is defined as “impairment to the integrity or availability of data, program, system or information” (Leagle. 2008. Sec.1,par.3). In order for damages to be filed as a civil suit, Nichols would have had to erase or dispose of, or infect the files on the computer, in which he did not. Furthermore, Wong failed to specify an exact amount with detailed information regarding the loss he incurred through Nichols’ actions. However, Wong can file an amended claim for loss (Leagle. 2008).
Wong & Associates 3
II. Nichols made no attempt to damage the data of Wong’s computer system; he merely accessed the files without authorization. The court document does not indicate Nichols was going to use the information in a fraudulent manner, other than Wong’s allegations. Therefore, section §1035 (a)(5) of the CFAA does not apply to this alleged instance of trade secret misappropriation. However, according to the Illinois Trade Secret Act §1065/2 (b)(2)(A) and (d)(2), “misappropriation means disclosure or use of a trade secret of a person without expressed or implied consent by another person”, and “trade secret means
Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc. v. William Nichols
BUS 340 Ethical and Legal Issues in Business
Wong & Associates 2
Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc. I. According to the court document of Garelli Wong & Associates, Inc, v. William M. Nichols Judge Charles P. Kocoras, of the United States District Court in N.D. Illinois’ Eastern Division, the court granted Nichols’ motion regarding the §1030 (a)(5) claim (Leagle. 2008). This ruling occurred due to the fact Wong’s plead regarding “damages” is not interpreted the same under the CFAA. In addition, Wong failed to elaborate on the total amount of loss (Leagle. 2008).
An employee that violates restrictions or exceeds authorized use of a computers access, may be held criminally responsible and charged. However, “damages” according to the CFAA is defined as “impairment to the integrity or availability of data, program, system or information” (Leagle. 2008. Sec.1,par.3). In order for damages to be filed as a civil suit, Nichols would have had to erase or dispose of, or infect the files on the computer, in which he did not. Furthermore, Wong failed to specify an exact amount with detailed information regarding the loss he incurred through Nichols’ actions. However, Wong can file an amended claim for loss (Leagle. 2008).
Wong & Associates 3
II. Nichols made no attempt to damage the data of Wong’s computer system; he merely accessed the files without authorization. The court document does not indicate Nichols was going to use the information in a fraudulent manner, other than Wong’s allegations. Therefore, section §1035 (a)(5) of the CFAA does not apply to this alleged instance of trade secret misappropriation. However, according to the Illinois Trade Secret Act §1065/2 (b)(2)(A) and (d)(2), “misappropriation means disclosure or use of a trade secret of a person without expressed or implied consent by another person”, and “trade secret means