Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brad from Tennessee
Nor could Aleynikov be punished under the Economic Espionage Act (“EEA”), the court concluded, because the HFT source code was not a product that was “produced for” or “placed in” interstate commerce, as required under the EEA. Goldman Sachs planned to keep the HFT source code secret, having no intention to sell or license it to anyone in the market.

That is an extremely narrow viewpoint. Companies rarely sell or provide their source code. This ruling would seem to open the door to pulling source code for anything, even delivered products. Why? Because the source code - generally just text files on a computer - is rarely if ever delivered. Instead, source code is typically processed through a program called a compiler where it is turned into a stream of instructions for the particular computer it will be running on. (eg. windows based PC, or Mac OS/X PC, Android device, etc.) Source isn't delivered, executable binaries are delivered.

If you don't believe that reasoning, if you take the (reasonable) view that the source is well, the source of the delivered product... Then why this decision? Are not tools that enable the development, compilation, and delivery of the binaries, the delivered product, also protected? This is a tough spot here. Where do you draw the line on delivered/licensed/sold product and that which brings it to market?

9 posted on 04/14/2012 10:46:16 PM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obama now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ThunderSleeps
As I remember, the patent for this software is in Aleynikov’s name though it is owned by Goldman. The program is connected to banks of telephone switches for rapid trading. This appears to be industrial espionage but it falls through legal cracks. Goldman's lobbyists are probably working on an amendment to the federal statute.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/second_circuit/2012/04/second-cir-explains-sergey-aleynikov-source-code-theft-reversal.html

13 posted on 04/14/2012 11:26:09 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee (A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: ThunderSleeps

I think this s an excellent decision, regardless of how the law interfaces with the software industry. Federal commerce power is limited. Perhaps you comments are valid, but this is an issue that should be addressed to state law, not federal. The less federal power the better.


34 posted on 04/16/2012 6:21:11 AM PDT by frithguild (You can call me Snippy the Anti-Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson