OPM and Where The Lines Are

Jul 1, 2015

Reading Time : 2 min

By: Michelle A. Reed, Natasha G. Kohne, David S. Turetsky, Visiting Professor, College of Emergency Preparedness, Homeland Security, and Cybersecurity at the University of Albany

In the face of the hacking of personal information from OPM, reportedly including highly sensitive information from applications for high-level security clearances, both Vice President Biden and Treasury Secretary Lew publicly criticized what seemed to be a different set of hacking activities allegedly undertaken by China. Their comments, at least as reported in the press, addressed the alleged hacking by the Chinese of important commercial information from U.S. companies in order to provide it to Chinese companies and gain a competitive edge. Vice President Biden said, “Nations that use cyber technology and economic weapons to profit from the theft of intellectual property are sacrificing tomorrow’s gains for short-term gains today.” (The Wall Street Journal, June 23, 2015) Secretary Lew said, “We remain deeply concerned about government-sponsored cybertheft from companies and commercial sectors.” (The New York Times, June 23, 2015) If that seeming pivot was not readily noticed by all, its potential meaning became clearer when the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper commented, also last week, about the OPM hack, “You know on the one hand, please don’t take this the wrong way, but you have to kind of salute the Chinese for what they did,” Clapper said, speaking at the GeoInt Symposium in D.C. “If we had the opportunity to do that, I don’t think we’d hesitate for a minute.” (The Hill, June 25, 2015) Thus, it appears that whatever may be going on behind the scenes by way of response to the massive OPM thefts, including in the intelligence community, the U.S. government is publicly emphasizing its long-expressed concern with hacking by China of commercial secrets and use of those secrets to undermine competitive markets.  (See, e.g., President Obama: “We look to China to become an innovative economy that values the protection of intellectual property rights, and rejects cybertheft of trade secrets for commercial gain….” (The Hill, November 10, 2014))

While one alternative explanation for the posture last week could be that the United States has not wanted to attribute the OPM hacking to China publicly and therefore would not talk about China in that context, Director Clapper’s remarks, even with his clarification that China is certainly “the leading suspect,” suggests that there is more to it.

The line between commercial espionage that distorts competitive markets and the age-old practice of government spying is important for the U.S. government in its dealings with China and other nations. The United States’ desire to preserve and emphasize that line seemed to be on display last week.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Akin Trade Law

February 9, 2023

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2023-01-26

At the end of last year, World Trade Organization (WTO) members agreed that the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) of the WTO will take place in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), in February 2024. There is no doubt that the WTO is facing headwinds and is in need of a vigorous push forward. The UAE’s success in transforming itself into a global trade and digital hub and a leader in services trade could serve to drive a successful outcome at MC13.

...

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2023-01-17

On December 21, 2022, the appeal arbitrators in the Colombia – Frozen Fries (DS591) World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute circulated their award (the “Award”). This was the second appeal conducted under Article 25 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and the first appeal under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA), a framework created by a group of WTO members to overcome the challenges posed by the non-operational Appellate Body.

...

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2022-02-10

The United Kingdom just issued a new statutory instrument, effective immediately, which extends the authority to designate persons and entities under the U.K. sanctions against Russia.

...

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2020-06-10

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin Gump’s webinar, “Protecting the Crown Jewels - New U.K. National Security Rules for Foreign Investment in a Post-COVID-19, Post-Brexit World.

...

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2020-05-07

The clock is ticking down to the entry into force of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on July 1, 2020.  Leading up to that date, businesses have a unique advocacy opportunity to influence the implementing regulations and associated processes, such as legislative changes to Mexico’s domestic laws. Additionally, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), along with their Mexican and Canadian counterparts, have begun issuing guidance for the trade community seeking to obtain the benefits of the agreement. At this time, these guidance documents include a petition process for automakers to request alternative staging for the automotive rules of origin as well as general interim implementation instructions for USMCA entries. Still to come are regulations regarding the automotive labor value content requirements and Uniform Regulations regarding the customs provisions. Akin Gump and our partners at Dorantes Advisors in Mexico City have jointly developed brief summaries of these guidance documents and a timeline of key actions still to take place prior to entry into force. The materials are available here in both English and Spanish.

...

Read More

Akin Trade Law

2020-03-02

Last week, in a highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) concluded that Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 does not offend the non-delegation doctrine. To most observers, the ruling does not come as a surprise, but the story on Section 232 and the non-delegation doctrine is not yet over.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.