Original title which was edited for length: Federal Court Rules Cease-and-Desist Letter Insufficient to Revoke Authorization for CFAA Claim The case is L’Occi

Original title which was edited for length: Federal Court Rules Cease-and-Desist Letter Insufficient to Revoke Authorization for CFAA Claim The case is L’Occitane, Inc. v. Zimmerman Reed LLP, et al. > Here, the court found that L’Occitane’s website – like LinkedIn’s public profiles – falls into the first category, and thus L’Occitane could not revoke authorization to its public website under the CFAA through a cease-and-desist letter alone. Put another way, an unwanted visitor continuing to access a public website after receipt of such a letter is not akin to “breaking and entering” – an analogue that the Ninth Circuit found to have guided Congress’ intent in enacting the CFAA. > Despite the uncertain future of cease-and-desist letters in different contexts, we can confidently catalog this decision in the growing body of CFAA case law because the court dismissed L’Occitane’s claim without leave to amend. In a subsequent filing shortly thereafter on April 22, 2024, L’Occitane conceded the court’s reasoning and agreed to a total dismissal of its CFAA claim.