U.S. businesses violating the Economic Espionage Act of 1996

[Max <mjsion@earthlink.net>]

I am currently working as an independent consultant in organizational
systems development and competitive intelligence.

Back in 1996 I worked as a consultant developing organizational management
systems and joined in the  beginning of 1997 one company in Atlanta for the
period of six months. It became obvious that some people in this company
had some SECRET information about me that they could have only obtained by
listening my private audio diary recordings or my conversations at my
private property (either my car or my house). It is obvious that their
intelligence collection was actually initiated before I joined their
company (which actually does not make any difference since they were
collecting the information at my private property (house and car)). So
since they collected my business information at my private property, they
indeed violated the Economic Espionage Act of 1996. So the U.S. companies
ARE actively violating this Act. What else can I tell you about doing the
business in the U.S.A - and what can I conclude about the United States of
America ... ?

I have listed some previously communicated details below:

(In fact, there have been some interesting cases, where the U.S.A. locals
in Atlanta have been very deceitful toward their international managers (I
have seen this) and ownership for the benefit of local investments and
companies ---> actually the excellent use of the EEA against the U.S.A.
locals.)

1. I talked in my car with another close person about specific personal
issues and I had never discussed these issues before this discussion. Soon
after a director at my work place started talking about exactly same  my
personal  issues to me in a private meeting. PRIVATE AUTOMOBILE
COMMUNICATIONS, Atlanta, U.S.A., January-1997.

2. A person came to the same barbershop in Atlanta and started asking some
specific personal questions. This person worked for the same company as I
did. This event is very unusual, because Atlanta is a large city and has
never happened to me before. HUMAN, Atlanta, U.S.A., May-1997

3. I was forced to resign from a company based on private audio diary
recordings at my private home. The director used same words and topics
during the exit meeting as I had used prior to this event in my private
diary recordings at my home. PRIVATE PROPERTY COMMUNICATIONS, Atlanta,
U.S.A., June-1997

And there are many other items for the future. All of these situations are
linked to specific companies and certain US intelligence arrangements. If
you are a CEO of any international corporation in the U.S.A., you might
just stop trusting certain telephone companies.

-----

EEA = Economic Espionage Act of 1996

However, I think that this issue can be viewed in many different ways.
National law enforcement agencies (E.U., U.S. France) tend to have their
own views and how they are allocating their resources to specific
activities. Sometimes their counter-intelligence activities may just be
offensive activities against certain commercial interests. Corporate
security personnel have their own approaches and not necessarily
dependent on any CI professionals and/or law enforcement agencies.
Competitive intelligence professionals have their views and are often
confused about their roles, their codes of ethics if any and their legal
liabilities if any. Then there are those intelligence agencies such as the
C.I.A., N.S.A. and other unnamed organizations who really do not care about
any ethics or any legislation - they just steal and steal. And finally
there are lawyers who have their views and interpretations. I have found
lawyers' interpretations and points of views most beneficial and helpful.

There is a good seminar proceeding from the SCIP's (Society for Competitive
Intelligence Professionals) conference: "Trade Secret Law, The EEA and CI",
Chicago, 1998 - CI-803. This session addresses many legal aspects of the
EEA, trade secret laws in general and how they are often misinterpreted. In
general, most CI professionals many have extreme misunderstandings and may
not be qualified to interpret existing legislation and law. The
presentation also addresses many legal and ethics issues. In practice, many
EEA threats and public advises by some SCIP members and other people are
misleading and often deceiving. Do not believe what controlled media
stations are telling you.

--