Verdict Reversed in Goldman HFT Code Theft Case
![washington-dc washington-dc](/sites/default/files/styles/landscape_750_463/public/import/IMG/670/182670/washington-dc-580x358.jpg.webp?itok=YDcWrSoQ)
The US Second Circuit Court of Appeals has found that two key pieces of legislation do not adequately cover the theft of source code from Goldman Sachs’ high-frequency trading (HFT) engine in 2009 by a former employee.
In a unanimous opinion, the appeals court ruled that the transmission of Goldman's proprietary code by Sergey Aleynikov, a programmer at the bank, did not constitute a criminal offence by the definitions of the statutes used to bring charges. His prior conviction by a district court and subsequent imprisonment was reversed as a result.
Specifically, the lack of a tangible product removed from Goldman Sachs by Aleynikov, who uploaded significant portions of the code to a German server shortly before leaving the firm, could not come under the provisions of the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA). The law makes it a criminal offence to knowingly transport stolen goods, but as the code was not a physical asset, it could not be defined as such in a legal framework. Although Aleynikov, who left Goldman to take on a lead role at Chicago-based Teza Technology with the specific aim of building an HFT engine, later allegedly transported the code on flash drives, this also did not come under the remit of the law. The transfer of an intangible property to a tangible medium, said the ruling, did not transform the good itself into stolen property.
The second charge, relating to the Economic Espionage Act (EEA), was also dismissed by the court as being insufficient as a matter of law. As Goldman's HFT engine was proprietary in nature, and the firm had no visible intention of placing it into the marketplace, or making a product derived from it to do so, the court ruled, it did not constitute an offense under the EEA.
A third charge, that Aleynikov exceeded his authority by accessing the source code, was struck down on the grounds that his level of privilege adequately covered his activities in this regard.
The key aspect of the ruling was the ephemeral nature of the digital product, as opposed to anything that could be readily identified as a tangible good stolen from Goldman under the provisions of the statutes invoked. In summary, the court said that it would decline to "stretch or update statutory words of plain and ordinary meaning in order to better accommodate the digital age."
While Aleynikov's actions, in the appeal court's ruling, did not constitute a criminal offense, he could be liable for civil action depending on the circumstances of the case.
SST Analysis
The ruling by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, while correct in the literal interpretation of the law and prior cases, raises questions about the ability of legislation to keep up with technological development.
In particular, the increasingly electronic nature of trading makes it difficult to identify physical assets, which the legal framework of federal crimes such as this are built around. If cases such as this continue to occur, as seems likely, the importance of technical innovation in financial services and other sectors could force a legal review.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
Chevron’s absence leaves questions for elusive AI regulation in US
The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron deference presents unique considerations for potential AI rules.
Aussie asset managers struggle to meet ‘bank-like’ collateral, margin obligations
New margin and collateral requirements imposed by UMR and its regulator, Apra, are forcing buy-side firms to find tools to help.
The costly sanctions risks hiding in your supply chain
In an age of geopolitical instability and rising fines, financial firms need to dig deep into the securities they invest in and the issuing company’s network of suppliers and associates.
Industry associations say ECB cloud guidelines clash with EU’s Dora
Responses from industry participants on the European Central Bank’s guidelines are expected in the coming weeks.
Regulators recommend Figi over Cusip, Isin for reporting in FDTA proposal
Another contentious battle in the world of identifiers pits the Figi against Cusip and the Isin, with regulators including the Fed, the SEC, and the CFTC so far backing the Figi.
US Supreme Court clips SEC’s wings with recent rulings
The Supreme Court made a host of decisions at the start of July that spell trouble for regulators—including the SEC.
This Week: FCA, Plato/Turquoise, Franklin Templeton, and more
A summary of the latest financial technology news.
Insurers deny cyber premiums are rising
Contrary to banks’ complaints, underwriters and brokers claim current market for policies is soft.