
Court overturns conviction for theft of Goldman source code - iProject
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/04/a-federal-appeals-court-has-2.ars
======
jshintaku
The defense that prop trading source code didn't count as interstate commerce
because it was for internal use and therefore didn't fall under applicable
federal statues is brilliant. However the defense that this was a digital
transfer and therefore didn't count as "goods, wares or merchandise" seems
questionable. What really is the difference between me purchasing and
downloading a song on iTunes and buying a CD online on amazon.com. Effectively
I am doing the same thing in my books. I believe that law should be updated.

~~~
alttag
It's an interesting turn, because initially the concept of interstate commerce
was very broadly defined to include production designated for personal, non-
market consumption only, using the argument that the very act of producing it
lessened the market for the product.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn>

I'd be interested to hear an actual lawyer's opinion on the topic.

~~~
jshintaku
Just thinking out loud I believe wheat and other similiar commodities are
traded across state lines and therefore the personal growth of a commodity can
exert a substantial effect on the overall industry which because it is traded
across state lines is regulated by the federal government. The source code for
proprietary trading is done within the state and all for the in-house use of
the firm developing the product so I am not sure if you can transfer the
analogy to growth of a commodity such as wheat for personal use. A lawyers
opinion would be nice to hear though. I assume because there is no substantial
market for source code development of prop trading systems and because it is
not traded and sold for use by multiple firms across state lines this wouldn't
apply?

------
Tuna-Fish
Note that he is still likely to go to prison. He was convicted under two
federal laws, and the appeals court disagreed on their use, not his guilt. As
he has essentially confessed to criminal copyright infringement and some
lesser crimes as a part of the appeals process, the prosecution will most
likely charge him under some state laws next. (The state laws have much lower
maximum sentences.)

