Facebook, Inc. v. Power Ventures, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
844 F.3d 1058 (2016)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Power Ventures, Inc. (Power) (defendant) was a social-media company owned by Steven Vachani (defendant). Power operated a website, Power.com, that aggregated information from its users’ accounts on other social-networking platforms, including Facebook.com. Power ran a promotional campaign in which users were encouraged to invite their friends to the network. The use of a Power.com icon to send these invitations often resulted in messages being sent to Facebook users within the Facebook messaging system. Facebook, Inc. (plaintiff) became aware of this use of its system and sent Power a cease-and-desist letter. Power continued its campaign. Facebook blocked Power’s internet protocol (IP) access to its system. Power switched IP addresses and continued to access Facebook’s system. Facebook then brought suit against Power in federal district court, alleging violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA), which established criminal and civil liability for unauthorized computer use. Facebook also alleged violation of a state law that was similar in purpose to the CFAA. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Facebook and awarded damages. Power moved for reconsideration, which was denied. Power and Vachani appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Graber, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 833,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
