4 ms·

I'm referring to the case where that woman posed as a high school student and drove a girl that her daughter didn't like to suicide via cyber bullying. They tri

by pyre 9y ago

I'm referring to the case where that woman posed as a high school student and drove a girl that her daughter didn't like to suicide via cyber bullying. They tried to charge her under the CFAA for violating Facebook's ToS against misrepresenting yourself. Edit: It was MySpace. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Drew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Drew > United States v. Drew[1] is the final decision in a criminal case that charged Lori Drew of violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) over the alleged cyberbullying of a 13-year-old, Megan Meier, who committed suicide. Also: > On September 4, 2008, the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of Drew's motion to dismiss the indictment.[10] The brief argued that Drew's indictment was wrongful because Drew's alleged violation of the Myspace terms and conditions was not an "unauthorized access" or a use that "exceeds authorized access" under the CFAA statute; that applying the CFAA to Drew's conduct would constitute a serious encroachment of civil liberties; and that interpreting the CFAA to apply to a breach of a website's Terms of Service would violate the Due Process protections of the Constitution and thereby render the statute void on the grounds of vagueness and lack of fair notice.

cookiecaper 9y ago
Thanks for the reference. It's great that that the absurdity of the CFAA was reigned in on that case. My understanding is that since this decision occurred at the district court level, it does not have a precedential effect, so I don't think anyone with a pending case can necessarily relax or assume that a similar outcome will be easily obtained. Note also that in this case, a guilty verdict was entered for the defendant before being vacated by the district court almost a year later. If other CFAA cases have to go through the same process to get a similar outcome, that's better than nothing, but not really something to get excited about from the perspective of someone who has not yet been convicted. Obviously I'm not privy to the details of weev's legal strategy, but this case didn't seem to help him either in preventing his conviction or in securing his exoneration. His conviction was overturned on unrelated grounds. Perhaps this would've been significant if the venue was not improper. (I haven't read the decision overturning weev's conviction, so it may discuss the applicability of this case regardless). --- re the EFF's amicus brief, amicus briefs are an opportunity for the public to file their comments on the case for the court's consideration. They merely express the author's opinion and hold no value. The EFF opposes the CFAA as written as well as several other bad laws, but that's nothing new. IANAL.
- pyre 9y ago
  I realize that the amicus brief isn't part of the decision, but it was just including it for reference.

by pyre 9y ago

cookiecaper 9y ago

Thanks for the reference. It's great that that the absurdity of the CFAA was reigned in on that case. My understanding is that since this decision occurred at the district court level, it does not have a precedential effect, so I don't think anyone with a pending case can necessarily relax or assume that a similar outcome will be easily obtained. Note also that in this case, a guilty verdict was entered for the defendant before being vacated by the district court almost a year later. If other CFAA cases have to go through the same process to get a similar outcome, that's better than nothing, but not really something to get excited about from the perspective of someone who has not yet been convicted. Obviously I'm not privy to the details of weev's legal strategy, but this case didn't seem to help him either in preventing his conviction or in securing his exoneration. His conviction was overturned on unrelated grounds. Perhaps this would've been significant if the venue was not improper. (I haven't read the decision overturning weev's conviction, so it may discuss the applicability of this case regardless). --- re the EFF's amicus brief, amicus briefs are an opportunity for the public to file their comments on the case for the court's consideration. They merely express the author's opinion and hold no value. The EFF opposes the CFAA as written as well as several other bad laws, but that's nothing new. IANAL.

pyre 9y ago
I realize that the amicus brief isn't part of the decision, but it was just including it for reference.