Van Buren v. United States
View Official PDFSummary
A short, plain-English overview of Van Buren v. United States.
In Van Buren v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed whether Nathan Van Buren, a former police sergeant, violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) by accessing a database for non-law-enforcement purposes. The Court examined the interpretation of 'exceeds authorized access' under the CFAA, ultimately disagreeing with the Eleventh Circuit's decision that Van Buren's actions constituted a violation. The Court's decision focused on the statutory language and structure, emphasizing that Van Buren did not exceed authorized access as defined by the CFAA.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Van Buren v. United States.
The Court held that an individual 'exceeds authorized access' when accessing areas of a computer that are off-limits, not merely by misusing access they otherwise have.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Van Buren v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
An individual 'exceeds authorized access' when he accesses a computer with authorization but then obtains information located in particular areas of the computer.
Van Buren's account of 'so' best aligns with the term's plain meaning as a term of reference.
The Government's interpretation of the 'exceeds authorized access' clause would attach criminal penalties to a breathtaking amount of commonplace computer activity.
