Cyberwarfare and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
John Thurston As technology proliferates, cyberspace is becoming increasingly polluted with crime targeted at private enterprises. The escalation is the result of ineffective cybercrime laws. Although an international solution may be ideal, no treaty seems imminent. The U.S. government should focus on a more attainable solution in the short-term: amending the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). This Essay considers how revising the CFAA to allow qualified private companies to engage in offensive tactics would alter incentive structures. It concludes that such a revision would be an efficient solution to increase deterrence and reduce cybercrime. Read Full Text Here
Don’t Sue Meme, It’s a Parody
Lea Silverman Memes have become one of the most prolific posts on social media websites. Memes exploit familiar templates of existing images overlaid with text, typically to make a point or a joke. There have been very few court cases and almost no rulings on the issue of memes and copyright infringement. By applying a fair use analysis and the Supreme Court’s 1994 decision in Campbell v. Rose-Acuff Music, Inc., this Essay argues that meme creators can successfully assert the parody defense to copyright infringement. Read Full Text Here
Hackback to the Drawing Board: Ambiguity and Risk in the Active Cyber Defense Certainty Act
Robert Andrea Cyber criminals, both state-sponsored and unaffiliated, are targeting private corporations and individuals more frequently. For several years, there have been calls for legislation that would allow private entities to defend themselves in cyberspace by “hacking back” against their attackers. The Active Cyber Defense Certainty Act is a recent proposal to amend the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to permit private entities to take active defensive measures without exposing themselves to criminal liability. Although a well-intentioned proposal, the bill uses vague language to identify when, and against whom, private entities can take defensive measures. Enabling private entities to begin...
Litigation Misconduct and the Inequitable Conduct Defense: An Argument for Limiting Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V.
Connor Romm Inequitable conduct is a defense to a claim of patent infringement that can invalidate the underlying patent. At its inception, the defense was meant to encourage honest representations in the patent prosecution process. It later morphed into a source of troubling litigation tactics. In May 2011, in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, sought to address disturbing trends in the doctrine and raised the standard required to prevail on the defense. In July 2017, in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V., the same court...