Active Users:375 Time:01/05/2025 12:45:29 AM
The case that decided information can't be stolen dates from 1987. Tim Send a noteboard - 20/01/2011 09:35:31 AM
Grant v Allan 1987 JC 71. In short, an employee was prosecuted for making copies of confidential information to sell to his employer's business rivals. He said "this isn't a crime", and the sheriff (first-instance judge) rejected his argument, but on appeal the High Court said he was right.

By the way, in Scots criminal law the prosecution doesn't have to name the crime it thinks you've committed. It just has to say what it claims you did, and if the charge discloses any crime, it will be relevant. In this case that is precisely how the prosecution went about it: they didn't mention the word "theft" at all. So what this case means is that copying confidential information isn't a crime at all, not just that it isn't theft.

However, it is totally uncontroversial that what he allegedly did constituted the delict of "breach of confidence".

(You'll note that I didn't say he actually did it. This is because he successfully defended himself by saying "what I'm accused of isn't a crime", so the prosecution never got a chance to prove he did it.)
Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt.

—Nous disons en allemand : le guerre, le mort, le lune, alors que 'soleil' et 'amour' sont du sexe féminin : la soleil, la amour. La vie est neutre.

—La vie ? Neutre ? C'est très joli, et surtout très logique.
Reply to message
Why is downloading "illegally" really illegal? - 19/01/2011 03:30:57 PM 1447 Views
Hmmm - 19/01/2011 05:00:16 PM 1109 Views
I think - 19/01/2011 05:11:56 PM 1020 Views
you can't legally record and distribute TV shows - 19/01/2011 05:21:06 PM 1097 Views
Re: you can't legally record and distribute TV shows - 19/01/2011 09:52:48 PM 1184 Views
Many shows (especially sports) forbid the duplication of said show in a statement or the credits. - 20/01/2011 03:22:10 AM 1055 Views
I haven't been able to read the credits for TV shows in years. - 20/01/2011 03:51:40 AM 916 Views
Ignorance of the law is not a valid defence *NM* - 21/01/2011 01:21:25 PM 480 Views
How do you figure that? - 21/01/2011 02:08:13 PM 1006 Views
Re: How do you figure that? - 21/01/2011 09:09:19 PM 1064 Views
Re: How do you figure that? - 21/01/2011 09:19:46 PM 935 Views
Re: How do you figure that? - 22/01/2011 08:33:04 PM 1426 Views
What is an imaginary island? - 23/01/2011 04:47:40 AM 1053 Views
In some places it's exactly that - 23/01/2011 07:35:32 AM 1289 Views
A lot of it's volume. - 19/01/2011 05:32:03 PM 988 Views
Your argument lacks merit. - 19/01/2011 05:50:11 PM 1002 Views
Agreed. - 19/01/2011 06:01:13 PM 872 Views
Both terms lack accuracy in this case really. - 19/01/2011 06:37:29 PM 1138 Views
That's what I mean right there. - 19/01/2011 06:48:38 PM 1041 Views
The punishable crime is - 21/01/2011 01:57:54 PM 1073 Views
Re: Your argument lacks merit. - 20/01/2011 03:40:20 PM 952 Views
In my opinion - 19/01/2011 09:22:29 PM 993 Views
The battle is over, the internet won - 19/01/2011 10:12:50 PM 983 Views
We need to distinguish between a crime and a tort. - 19/01/2011 10:17:30 PM 1099 Views
Very interesting. - 19/01/2011 10:28:35 PM 1136 Views
Another scrabble word for you is "delict". That's what we call tort in Scotland. - 19/01/2011 10:37:08 PM 1030 Views
I saw. - 19/01/2011 10:41:27 PM 932 Views
It won't get you very many points. - 19/01/2011 10:37:26 PM 894 Views
I would set me up for tortellini. - 19/01/2011 10:40:45 PM 915 Views
Also in most circumstances you could use "trot" instead. *NM* - 19/01/2011 10:42:26 PM 543 Views
Very nice legal overview, also I like Scotland's approach a lot - 19/01/2011 11:21:47 PM 953 Views
The case that decided information can't be stolen dates from 1987. - 20/01/2011 09:35:31 AM 1721 Views
Unfortunately, damages can result in thousands of dollars for one song - 22/01/2011 08:19:40 PM 883 Views

Reply to Message