Introduction
Every year, the American economy spends billions of dollars on economic espionage. In addressing the increasing theft of trade secrets, the Economic espionage act was enacted by Congress in 1996. According to Evans, M. (2018), the main objectives of EEA are to protect secrets regarding to trading against anyone unauthorized and to secure the secrets from theft by foreign agents acting on behalf of their governments. The act addresses essential features such as permitting courts to take action to protect trade secrets and advocating for the institution of civil actions by the attorney general. According to (Kahn R. A. 2017), many espionage cases within the US have been reported in the recent past. A good example is an incident involving a couple that devised to trade details of US nuclear information to an unknown government. The criminals unknowingly sold information concerning technology used on US submarines to a foreigner, who was an FBI agent in disguise (Ozomaro, K. O. 2022).
Research Questions and Hypothesis
The present essay addresses the question of; how has the implementation of EAA protected trading in the US? Which are the ordinary channels propagating Economic Espionage? What operational gaps in the act have read to the continuation of industrial espionage? (Grabiszewski, K., and Minor, D. 2019). Responses are highlighted by analyzing impacts of the US Economic Espionage Act of 1996 on business environment.
Discussion
EEA has protected the intellectual property of traders (Wu, S. 2022). By instituting legal measures against anyone who misuses the private information of any company, malicious insiders have been eliminated accordingly. The study observed that employees who do not have the firm’s best interest at heart can now be subjected to the effect of the law. Trading Secrets may be in the form of codes, recipes or formulas that businesses uphold for authenticity. In light of the act, businesses are trading healthily, and risks associated with competition have been minimized. EEA also promotes fairness by fining a company that is caught possessing trade secrets of their competitor. Hiring a competitor’s company employees to access information about a competitor’s secrets is a punishable offence. EEA has also managed to control thefts both in the US and outside the US. The law applies if the action happened in the country or a US citizen committed the crime.
According to the act, information theft happens through channels such as electronic gadgets, malicious insiders or portable USB drives (Mayers, A. M. 2018). Practically, foreign states may sponsor an agent to work directly with a rival company to gain their secrets. Current technological progress has minimized the chances of detecting information spies. Malicious employees are therefore using gadgets such as iPods to transfer trading secrets. Even with such vulnerability of secret information, the act symbolizes the government’s efforts to secure the operations of its businesses (Lawson, E. T. 2019). Information accessibility calls for keenness in the settings of your business devices. According to (Wright L. 2017), subordinate staffs are also capable of trading company secrets. Some of them, like cleaners, interact with machines in their routines as they dust them, which may be tempting. Administrators, therefore, should be keen to lock computers when they are not in use.
The current study found that EEA fails to accommodate the technological advancement of the present day (Mohseni, S. M. 2021). Most trade secret thefts happen digitally through the internet, but the act does not define their handling. The competency of handling digital theft cases is therefore questionable. Lack of popularity in cases presented under the act is another disadvantage. Very few cases have been documented about it; consequently, any reported complaint would be challenging to handle. From an analysis of past issues, the punishments given by EEA are relatively below average (Fang, H., and Li, M., 2021). Most of them are in the form of fines or prison sentences, making the benefits of committing economic espionage appear better than the punishments (Evans M. 2019). Lenient charges may not be sufficient to hinder an espionage criminal from returning to the crime. The hitches present a call for the amendment of the act by lawmakers.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the essay overviews the Economic Espionage Act of 1996. Ways in which it has impacted the country’s business environment are highlighted in the piece. Some are like creating healthy competition, disciplining malicious trade agents and minimizing risks related to trading secret thefts. The article also focuses on the popular ways economic espionage occurs and the act’s shortcomings. Amending the clause is a recommendation from the study.
References
Evans, M. (2019). CRIMINAL PENALTIES UNDER THE ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE ACT (1996-2017). Southern Law Journal, 29(1).
Evans, M. (2018). Effectiveness of Available Civil Remedies as a Factor Influencing Prosecution of Economic Espionage Act Cases. Washburn LJ, 57, 463.
Fang, H., & Li, M. (2021). Red Scare? A Study of Ethnic Prejudice in the Prosecutions under the Economic Espionage Act (No. w29272). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Grabiszewski, K., & Minor, D. (2019). Economic espionage. Defence and Peace Economics, 30(3), 269-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2018.1477400
Kahn, R. A. (2017). Economic espionage in 2017 and beyond: 10 shocking ways they are stealing your intellectual property and corporate mojo. Business Law Today, 1-5.
Lawson, E. T. (2019). A guide to lessons learned and best practices in using the statutes in the economic espionage act of 1996.
Mayers, A. M. (2018). A study on cyber economic espionage affects US national security and competitiveness (Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University).
Mohseni, S. M. (2021). The scope of the crime of economic and industrial espionage with a look at the 1996 law of the United States Congress. 2-Studies of Islamic Jurisprudence and Basis of Law, 14(42), 261-283. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/fvh.2021.7355.1160
Ozomaro, K. O. (2022). Social Movement Splintering: An Examination of Stockton Stands with Minneapolis and News Media Representation (Doctoral dissertation, University of the Pacific
Wu, S. (2022). The Extraterritorial Application of Chinese Trade Secret Criminal Law: With the Analysis of the Economic Espionage Act of the US. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 1, 20-26. https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v1i.624
Wright, L. (2017). Economic Espionage and Business Intelligence. In People, Risk, and Security (pp. 91-105). Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95093-5_7
write