550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 279,746 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Holding that a company that scraped a competitor's website to obtain data for marketing purposes likely committed trespass to chattels, because scraping could—although it did not yet—cause physical harm to the plaintiff's computer servers
Holding that while the "difference between access ‘without authorization’ and ‘exceeding authorized access' is paper thin," an employee who breached a duty of loyalty terminated the agency relationship and exceeded authorized access in using company laptop
Holding that violations of a confidentiality agreement or other contractual restraints could give rise to a claim for unauthorized access under the CFAA
Finding that the court was unable to make "the fact-intensive choice-of-law determination on the record before it," and deferring the choice-of-law decision until the factually record was more fully developed
535 F. Supp. 2d 962 (D. Ariz. 2008) Cited 65 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plain language of the CFAA, its legislative history, and principles of statutory construction support a narrow reading of "authorization"