Isn't that the whole point?
Any prosecution would be complicated because of the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that confidential information leaked to a news organization could be legally broadcast, although that case did not deal with physical property and the radio station did not pay its source.
The Macalope’s no lawyer (YOU’VE BEEN WARNED), but isn’t that what makes it complete uncomplicated? There’s no damage to the public good by publishing the information — indeed, the public good is often served in exactly this way by whistleblowers. But there is damage to the public good by making a market for stolen proprietary information. At least in the Macalope’s opinion. The law may state otherwise.