Electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
<h3>
What is economic espionage?</h3>
- Economic espionage includes electronic hacking and illegal trespassing to obtain a competitor's proprietary information.
- Economic espionage is defined as the illegal or covert targeting or acquisition of sensitive financial, trade, or economic policy information; proprietary economic information; or technological information.
- Using bribery, cyber-attacks, "dumpster diving," and wiretapping.
- Creating seemingly innocent relationships with US companies in order to gather economic intelligence, including trade secrets.
- President Clinton signed the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 into law.
- It criminalizes the theft or misappropriation of trade secrets.
- It is notable for being the first federal statute to broadly define and severely punish such misappropriation and theft.
Therefore, electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
Know more about economic espionage here:
brainly.com/question/28218496
#SPJ4
Answer: recidivism
Explanation:
The return of a former correctional client to criminal behavior, as measured by new arrests or other problems with the law is known as recidivism.
Hope this helps!!! Good luck!!! ;)
Disproportional misconduct
Everyone benefits from most public goods and services, so
everyone pays for them through their taxes.
<u>Explanation:</u>
Every citizen of a country uses public goods and services for their own use and they also pay tax to the government. Public goods and services are necessities like highways,water,police and others which are provided by the government.
There will not be much corruption in the country if people pays their tax properly. The government can earn major source of income through public goods and services.
Answer:On January 12, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury requires that federal sentencing guidelines be advisory, rather than mandatory. 1 In doing so, the Court struck down a provision in law that made the federal sentencing guidelines mandatory 2 as well as a provision that permitted appellate review of departures from the guidelines. 3 In essence, the Court's ruling gives federal judges discretion in sentencing offenders by not requiring them to adhere to the guidelines; rather, the guidelines can be used by judges on an advisory basis. 4 As a result of the ruling, judges now have discretion in sentencing defendants unless the offense carries a mandatory sentence (as specified in law).
Explanation: :)
