Week 1 Lectures 1 2 David Thaw University of Connecticut School of Law Class Overview Lecture 1 Introduction to Computer CrimesComputer Misuse Lecture 2 Use of Property Crimes to Punish Computer Misuse ID: 234774
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Cybercrime –" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Cybercrime – Week 1(Lectures 1, 2)
David Thaw
University of Connecticut School of LawSlide2
Class OverviewLecture 1: Introduction to Computer Crimes/Computer Misuse
Lecture 2: Use of Property Crimes to Punish Computer Misuse
Lecture 3: The CFAA (18 U.S.C. § 1030) and “Access”
DiscussionSlide3
Lecture 1 OverviewPreview of Course Themes:
Substantive crimes
Investigatory means/methods
Jurisdictional issues
Background – mine, yours, and getting the most out of the class
Casebook hypos
AdministriviaSlide4
Course Themes
Substantive Crimes
Focus on privacy and economic (property) interests rather than crimes-against-persons
Investigatory Means/Methods
Physical crimes: witnesses, physical evidence (think CSI)
Computer crimes: computer logs, other digital evidence
Jurisdiction
Physical crimes: traditionally province of the states
Computer crimes: (usually) shift to federal prosecutionSlide5
BackgroundMe: Law and Computer Science (Information Security)
You:
Required: first-year criminal law (that’s it!)
Helpful (but definitely not mandatory):
Criminal procedure
Internet law
Intellectual property
If you’re just taking the class because it sounds “fun” – great!Slide6
Cybercrime OverviewWhat makes a computer crime?
Substantive Law: crimes against/involving the use of computers
Procedural Law: crimes involving collection of evidence that exists in computerized (electronic) formSlide7
Cybercrime OverviewSubstantive Law
Computer Misuse Crimes – intentional interference with proper function of computers
Exs
: hacking, malware,
DDoS
Traditional Crimes – traditional crimes committed using/facilitated by computers
Exs
: Internet fraud, online threats, distribution of child pornography, theft of trade secretsSlide8
Cybercrime Overview
Procedural Law
Fourth Amendment
Digital evidence collection
when is retrieving evidence from a computer a “search”?
Statutory Privacy Law
Wiretap Act (1968)
Title III of Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
1986: Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) – amended Title III to include data transmission
Stored Communications Act (SCA) – Title II of ECPA
Pen Register Statute
Investigative/Prosecutorial Questions: Jurisdictional
Procedural SubstantiveSlide9
Computer MisuseOffenses involving interference with the proper functioning of computing and information systems
Why do I say “computing and info. systems”?
Forms of computer misuse:
Exceeding privileges
Interfering with (denying) others’ privilegesSlide10
DiscussionCases
United States v.
Seidlitz
State v. McGraw
Casebook
Hypotheticals
Fred Felony
KillerBee
/Bryan Smith
Sarah JonesSlide11
Casebook Hypo – Crimes/Investigation
Fred Felony – Jewelry Store “Stick-Up”
Jurisdictional?
Procedural?
Substantive?
Fred Felony – Credit Card Theft
Jurisdictional?
Procedural?
Substantive?
The answers to these questions often interrelate!Slide12
Casebook Hypo – Computer MisuseKillerBee
(Bryan Smith)
What “crimes” occurred?
Is punishment justified?
Utilitarian?
Retributive?
Damages – is there a “but for” (proximate causation) problem here?
Should
criminal law consider a proximate causation problem?
Differences among targets’ security/damages – do they matter?Slide13
Casebook Hypo – Computer MisuseSarah Jones
What “crimes” occurred?
Is punishment justified?
Utilitarian?
Retributive?
Are there (yet) damages?
What future damages might exist?
Who is more deserving of punishment, Bryan or Sarah?