Transnational state-sponsored cyber economic espionage poses a threat to the economy of developed countries whose industry is largely reliant on the value of information. In the face of rapid technological development facilitating cyber economic espionage from afar on a massive scale, the law has not developed apace to effectively address this problem. Applicable United States domestic laws have been ineffective in addressing the problem due to lack of enforcement jurisdiction, sovereign immunity, and inability to hold the state sponsor accountable. Customary international law principles offer little help in combatting the issue, as countermeasures are typically unavailable since espionage may not be ongoing by the time a victimized state can confidently attribute it to a state and retortions are a relatively weak response. Although existing treaties have not been effective in addressing this problem, a multilateral global treaty specifically addressing transnational state-sponsored cyber economic espionage may be a promising way forward.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Cyber means relating to information technology such as computers, computer networks, and the internet (Nato Cooperative Cyber Defence Center of Excellence 2019).
Ajayi, E.F.G. 2016. Challenges to Enforcement of Cyber-Crimes Laws and Policy. Journal of Internet and Information Systems 6: 1–12.
Al Azzam, F.A.F. 2019. The Adequacy of the International Cooperation Means for Combatting Cybercrime and Ways to Modernize it. JANUS.NET E-journal of International Relations 10: 66–83.
Anderson, P.C. 2017. Cyber Attack Exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Cornell Law Review 102: 1087–1113.
Argento, Z. 2013. Killing the Golden Goose: The Dangers of Strengthening Domestic Trade Secret Rights in Response to Cyber-Misappropriation. Yale Journal of Law & Technology 16: 172–235.
Bande, L.C. 2018. Legislating Against Cyber Crime in Southern African Development Community: Balancing International Standards with Country-Specific Specificities. International Journal of Cyber Criminology 12: 9–26.
Banks, W. 2017a. Cyber Espionage and Electronic Surveillance: Beyond the Media Coverage. Emory Law Journal 66: 513–525.
Banks, W. 2017b. State Responsibility and Attribution of Cyber Intrusions After Tallinn 2.0. Texas Law Review 95: 1487–1513.
Beard, J.M. 2014. Legal Phantoms in Cyberspace: The Problematic Status of Information as a Weapon and a Target Under International Humanitarian Law. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 47: 67–144.
Beauchamp, K. 2017. The Failures of Federalizing Trade Secrets: Why the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 Should Preempt State Law. Mississippi Law Journal 86: 1031–1074.
Blinderman, E., and M. Din. 2017. Hidden by Sovereign Shadows: Improving the Domestic Framework for Deterring State-Sponsored Cybercrime. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 50: 889–931.
Brenner, S.W., and B.-J. Koops. 2004. Approaches to Cybercrime Jurisdiction. Journal of High Technology Law 4: 1–46.
Broadhurst, R., and L.Y. Chang. 2013. Cybercrime in Asia: Trends and Challenges. In Handbook of Asian Criminology, ed. J. Liu, B. Hebenton, and S. Jou, 49–63. New York, NY: Springer.
Carlin, J.P. 2016. Detect, Disrupt, Deter: A Whole-of-Government Approach to National Security Cyber Threats. Harvard National Security Journal 7: 391–435.
Cerezo, A.I., Lopez, J., and Patel, A. 2007. International Cooperation to Fight Transnational Cybercrime. In Proceedings of the International 2nd Annual Workshop on Digital Forensics & Incident Analysis; 27 August 2007, Samos, Greece, https://doi.org/10.1109/wdfia.2007.4299369.
Clough, J. 2014. A World of Difference: The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime and the Challenges of Harmonization. Monash University Law Review 40: 698–736.
Crootof, R. 2018. International Cybertorts: Expanding Accountability in Cyberspace. Cornell Law Review 103: 565–644.
Danielson, M.E.A. 2009. Economic Espionage: A Framework for a Workable Solution. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology 10(2): 503–548.
Eichensehr, K.E. 2017a. Data Extraterritoriality. Texas Law Review 95: 145–160.
Eichensehr, K.E. 2017b. Public-Private Cybersecurity. Texas Law Review 95: 467–538.
Finnemore, M., and D.B. Hollis. 2016. Constructing Norms for Global Cybersecurity. American Journal of International Law 110: 425–479.
Hock, B. 2017. Transnational Bribery: When is Extraterritoriality Appropriate? Charleston Law Review 11: 305–352.
Inserra, D. 2017. Cybersecurity Beyond U.S. borders: Engaging Allies and Deterring Aggressors in Cyberspace. The Heritage Foundation, 14 July, https://www.heritage.org/cybersecurity/report/cybersecurity-beyond-us-borders-engaging-allies-and-deterring-aggressors. Accessed 20 July 2019.
Kosseff, J. 2019. Hacking Cybersecurity Law. SSRN, 8 February, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331350.
Levine, D.S., and C.B. Seaman. 2018. The DTSA at One: An Empirical Study of the First Year of Litigation UNDER the Defend Trade Secrets Act. Wake Forest Law Review 53: 105–156.
Levandoski, S.D. 2018. To Seize the Initiative: Assessing Constitutional Due Process Challenges to the Defend Trade Secret Act’s ex parte Seizure Provision. New York University Law Review 93: 865–902.
Lotrionte, C. 2015. Countering State-Sponsored Cyber Economic Espionage Under International Law. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 40: 443–541.
Marion, N.E. 2010. The Council of Europe’s Cyber Crime Treaty: An Exercise in Symbolic Legislation. International Journal of Cyber Criminology 4: 699–712.
Margulies, P. 2013. Sovereignty and Cyber Attacks: Technology’s Challenge to the Law of State Responsibility. Melbourne Journal of International Law 14: 496–520.
NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Center of Excellence. 2019. Cyber definitions. https://ccdcoe.org/cyber-definitions.html. Accessed 6 Jan 2019.
Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive 2011. Foreign Spies Stealing U.S. Economic Secrets in Cyberspace: Report to Congress on Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage, 2009-2011. Washington, DC: Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Perloff-Giles, A. 2018. Transnational Cyber Offenses: Overcoming Jurisdictional Challenges. Yale Journal of International Law 43: 191–227.
Pun, D. 2017. Rethinking Espionage in the Modern Era. Chicago Journal of International Law 18: 353–391.
Reid, M. 2016. A Comparative Approach to Economic Espionage: Is Any Nation Effectively Dealing with this Global Threat? University of Miami Law Review 70: 757–829.
Rowe, E.A. 2016. RATs, TRAPs, and Trade Secrets. Boston College Law Review 57: 381–426.
Schmitt, M.N. (ed.). 2013. Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, M.N., and L. Vihul. 2014. Proxy Wars in Cyberspace: The Evolving International Law of Attribution. Fletcher Security Review I (II): 55–73.
Schmitt, M.N., and L. Vihul (eds.). 2017. Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Tran, D. 2018. The Law of Attribution: Rules for Attributing the Source of a Cyber-Attack. Yale Journal of Law & Technology 20: 376–441.
Walton, B.A. 2017. Duties Owed: Low-Intensity Cyber Attacks and Liability for Transboundary Torts in International Law. Yale Law Journal 126: 1460–1519.
Watts, S., and T. Richard. 2018. Baseline Territorial Sovereignty and Cyberspace. Lewis & Clark Law Review 22: 772–840.
Wu, M. 2016. The “China, Inc”. Challenge to Global Trade Governance. Harvard International Law Journal 57: 261–324.
Yannakogeorgos, P.A. (2013) Strategies for Resolving the Cyber Attribution Challenge. Montgomery, AL: Air University Press. Air Force Research Institute Paper CPP-1.
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (1986), 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (2015).
Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (2012 & Supp. IV 2017).
Economic Espionage Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C.§§1831-1839 (2012).
Uniform Trade Secrets Act (1979).
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Rowe, B.I. Transnational state-sponsored cyber economic espionage: a legal quagmire. Secur J 33, 63–82 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-019-00197-3
- Transnational crime
- International law
- State crime