US v. Chastain. Jury instructions are tricky! Because “the wire fraud statute reaches only traditional property interests,” we must decide whether confidential business information qualifies as a traditional property interest even if it lacks commercial value to the business. Ciminelli, 598 U.S. at 316; see also Cleveland, 531 U.S. at 24. We conclude that it does not. Like confidential business information, trade secrets are intangible and kept confidential but receive legal protection. A trade secret has commercial value. Information cannot qualify as a traditional property interest if its holder has no economic interest in its exclusive use or in otherwise keeping the information confidential. The district court instructed the jury that the government did not need to show that OpenSea had a commercial interest in the featured NFT information as long as the information was “acquired or created by [OpenSea] for a business purpose” and OpenSea “both considered and treated that information in a way that maintained the company’s exclusive right to that information.” If the wire fraud statute criminalized conduct that merely departed from traditional notions of fundamental honesty and fair play, “almost any deceptive act could be criminal.” On this record, we cannot confidently conclude that the jury did not convict Chastain on the theory that although the featured NFT information did not have commercial value to OpenSea, Chastain nevertheless acted unethically by using the information for his own benefit. As a result, we vacate the judgment of conviction for wire fraud and for money laundering predicated on the fraud.