FEDERAL · 18 U.S.C. · Chapter 90
Economic espionage
Current through Pub. L. 119-102
(a)In General.—Whoever, intending or knowing that the offense will benefit any foreign government, foreign instrumentality, or foreign agent, knowingly—
(1)steals, or without authorization appropriates, takes, carries away, or conceals, or by fraud, artifice, or deception obtains a trade secret;
(2)without authorization copies, duplicates, sketches, draws, photographs, downloads, uploads, alters, destroys, photocopies, replicates, transmits, delivers, sends, mails, communicates, or conveys a trade secret;
(3)receives, buys, or possesses a trade secret, knowing the same to have been stolen or appropriated, obtained, or converted without authorization;
(4)attempts to commit any offense described in any of paragraphs (1) through (3); or
(5)conspires with one or more other persons to com
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
18 U.S.C. § 1831 (Economic espionage) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
United States v. Nosal
844 F.3d 1024 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Chung
659 F.3d 815 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Xiaorong You
74 F.4th 378 (Sixth Circuit, 2023)
United States v. Fei Ye, AKA Ye Fei Ming Zhong, AKA Zhong Ming AKA Andy Zhong
436 F.3d 1117 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Bellwether Cmty. Credit Union v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
353 F. Supp. 3d 1070 (D. Colorado, 2018)
Paradigm Alliance, Inc. v. Celeritas Technologies, LLC
722 F. Supp. 2d 1250 (D. Kansas, 2010)
POET, LLC v. Nelson Engineering, Inc.
(D. South Dakota, 2019)
Whaleco Inc. v. Shein Technology LLC
(District of Columbia, 2025)
Sandvig v. Sessions
(District of Columbia, 2018)
Ridge Corporation v. Altum LLC
(S.D. Ohio, 2025)
Prominence Advisors, Inc. v. Dalton
(N.D. Illinois, 2017)
Bhatia v. Vaswani
(N.D. Illinois, 2019)
LS3 Inc. v. Cherokee Nation Strategic Programs, L.L.C.
(D. Colorado, 2021)
LuckyShot LLC v. Runnit CNC Shop, Inc.
(D. Colorado, 2020)
(PS) Mackintosh v. Lyft, Inc.
(E.D. California, 2019)
TK Elevator Corporation v. Drzewiecki
(D. Maryland, 2025)
QSI, Inc. v. Neyhouse
(S.D. Ohio, 2024)
Traditions Health, LLC v. Huffman
(N.D. Oklahoma, 2024)
Source Credit
History
(Added Pub. L. 104–294, title I, §101(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3488; amended Pub. L. 112–269, §2, Jan. 14, 2013, 126 Stat. 2442.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
Amendments
2013—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–269, §2(a), substituted "not more than $5,000,000" for "not more than $500,000" in concluding provisions.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 112–269, §2(b), substituted "not more than the greater of $10,000,000 or 3 times the value of the stolen trade secret to the organization, including expenses for research and design and other costs of reproducing the trade secret that the organization has thereby avoided" for "not more than $10,000,000".
Amendments
2013—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–269, §2(a), substituted "not more than $5,000,000" for "not more than $500,000" in concluding provisions.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 112–269, §2(b), substituted "not more than the greater of $10,000,000 or 3 times the value of the stolen trade secret to the organization, including expenses for research and design and other costs of reproducing the trade secret that the organization has thereby avoided" for "not more than $10,000,000".