Four very different thoughts here... 1.There is precedent for criminal convictions of pretexting as part of some larger criminal social engineering act. Perso

Four very different thoughts here... 1.There is precedent for criminal convictions of pretexting as part of some larger criminal social engineering act. Personally, I think bullying is a stretch. It's a feature of the Internet, and if a person can't shrug off anonymous Internet bullying then that person has deeper psychological problems. 2.Should go back and re-examine (and possibly overturn) all criminal cases in which pretexting and/or false identities were used by the authorities? If there is precedent that this behavior is illegal, then we need to reinforce that law enforcement tactics are not above the law. 3.The shell of anonymity is only safe when it is perfect -- leaks create the opportunity for blackmail. In many situations it is more important that you are not in a position to be blackmailed, than to disclose any 'undesirable' behavior or association. 4.How could this case stand on appeal? Didn't the judge essentially interpret breach of contract into criminal law? MySpace obviously granted Ms. Drew's account -- her access to the system could not have been "unauthorized" as claimed in the wire fraud charge. Most contracts and TOS have pretty clear terms about what happens when one party breaches, so this should have been a simple case of "you broke the TOS, we closed your account, as stated in the TOS." In my opinion, the more serious crime here is that the judge decided he could usurp the legislature's power and turn random contract text into criminal law.