In the latest issue of Vanity Fair financial writer Michael Lewis tells the fascinating story of Serge Aleynikov, a programmer who copied a small bit of computer code when changing jobs. For this he was convicted in federal court and sentenced to eight years in prison.

Serge had left Goldman Sachs, which frowned upon having its “propriety material” taken. (Whether or not the code was proprietary is itself somewhat questionable, since Goldman claims all open source code as its own once its programmers have modified it, even if the improvements aren’t specific to the company.)

This case is a stark reminder that not every dispute needs to end up in the legal system, which was ill-equipped to deal with the issues it presented. The FBI agent who interviewed Serge parroted computer terms he didn’t comprehend. That’s not surprising – Serge’s specialty, high-frequency trading, is highly complex and esoteric. At trial, the jury was hard-pressed to understand, let alone pass judgment on, the testimony. Jury members were mostly high school graduates, none with programming experience. Even the government’s expert witness couldn’t say whether the disputed code had any value.

Lewis convened a group of experts knowledgeable about programming, high-frequency trading, and/or Goldman Sachs. They questioned Serge at length and concluded that the code included none of Goldman’s trade secrets and gave no benefit to his new employer.

So what if, instead of calling in the feds, Goldman had sat down with Serge to learn exactly what he had taken and his purpose in doing so. (Yes, in an alternate universe. Suspend disbelief.) I picture a group that would include an independent programming expert, as well as someone familiar with high-frequency trading. Counsel for both sides. And a prosecutor with some fluency with programming and Wall Street. Let them question Serge as Lewis’ “jury” did, and then decide whether to throw the book at him.

My instincts tell me that a fair-minded prosecutor would recognize that no crime was committed – at least nothing worth 8 years in slammer. The parties could come to agreement, including things like the return of Goldman’s intellectual property; Serge’s promise to never use a scrap of the code; perhaps a period where Serge would be monitored by an independent party. Would that not have better met everyone’s needs than a federal trial?

Fortunately for Serge, the Court of Appeals apparently understood the issues. Immediately after oral argument, it ordered him released from prison. But his victory was short-lived. A few months later, he was re-arrested for the same actions, this time on state charges. His attorney turned down a plea offer of time served. The charges are pending.