5 ms·

I know I'll be pilloried for saying this here, but I'm not sure it wasn't. If one doesn't come at it from the stance of an anti-government idealogue (and if one

I know I'll be pilloried for saying this here, but I'm not sure it wasn't. If one doesn't come at it from the stance of an anti-government idealogue (and if one understands the difference between statutory maximums and threats) this case is more complex than it's given credit for. It's quite possible Ortiz was overzealous. It's quite possible (in fact to some extent almost certain) that the system is broken and defines computer crimes poorly, and Ortiz was doing her job well in a very tough spot. It's possible we're better off with laws aimed to stop computer fraud, and that prosecuting those who commit it (even if they happen to be people we generally like) is a necessity in the 21st century. At the end of the day we have to remember, we need laws to prevent computer fraud, hacking, etc. Those laws will, almost by necessity, be written and enforced by non-programmers. Which is not to say Aaron deserved 17 felony charges. But it's overly simple to vilify Ortiz or the AG's office.

ihsw 14y ago
The problem is when laws are written ad hoc for politically inconvenient people, at that point the executive branch will throw their hands in the air and say "We're just enforcing the law!" and ignore the ethical and moral issues.
WalterSear 14y ago
There are mountains of computer crimes going on that are well within the current definitions. It's inconceivable that pursuing Aaron in this manner was useful for anything but making an example for the old bosses of intellectual property.
AnthonyMouse 14y ago
I think you can fairly argue that the prosecutors in this case, at the least, didn't do anything atypical. The fact that this sort of behavior is par for the course is a separate issue -- and one that deserves fixing, whether or not the fix involves the prophylactic purging from the system of some high profile participants. However, the idea that the CFAA is the best we can do in the way of legislation is just laughable. I really can't stand this futile notion that because the law can't be totally perfect, we might as well just give up and allow it to be catastrophically bad. No to that. We can't make it perfect but we can make it a lot better than it is.
- mpyne 14y ago
  > However, the idea that the CFAA is the best we can do in the way of legislation is just laughable. I really can't stand this futile notion that because the law can't be totally perfect, we might as well just give up and allow it to be catastrophically bad. No to that. We can't make it perfect but we can make it a lot better than it is. You're exactly right but careful about what you're arguing against. I don't think anyone is actually claiming that CFAA is the best achievable law we could have, or that we shouldn't try to improve it (even if we accept that the law will be mostly written and almost completely enforced by those without technical training in computers and networking).
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    The sense of the post I responded to was very much that what happened in this case was acceptable or understandable because justice is complicated, which implies that there is little to nothing that could or should be done about it. But complexity doesn't excuse failure. Mistakes may be inevitable but that is no excuse not to learn from them and do better next time.
- res0nat0r 14y ago
  Why is 3-6 months in jail for breaking in and repeatedly breaking the law overreach?
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    Does your question have anything to do with what I posted? OK, I'll bite. It's overreach because they charged him with a felony for doing something that shouldn't be a felony, and there is reason to suspect that they charged him and not any of the very large number of other people who violate that statute on a regular basis in significant part as a result of his political views.
    - res0nat0r 14y ago
      Repeated breaking and entering and unauthorized network access isn't a crime?

ihsw 14y ago

The problem is when laws are written ad hoc for politically inconvenient people, at that point the executive branch will throw their hands in the air and say "We're just enforcing the law!" and ignore the ethical and moral issues.

WalterSear 14y ago

There are mountains of computer crimes going on that are well within the current definitions. It's inconceivable that pursuing Aaron in this manner was useful for anything but making an example for the old bosses of intellectual property.

AnthonyMouse 14y ago

I think you can fairly argue that the prosecutors in this case, at the least, didn't do anything atypical. The fact that this sort of behavior is par for the course is a separate issue -- and one that deserves fixing, whether or not the fix involves the prophylactic purging from the system of some high profile participants. However, the idea that the CFAA is the best we can do in the way of legislation is just laughable. I really can't stand this futile notion that because the law can't be totally perfect, we might as well just give up and allow it to be catastrophically bad. No to that. We can't make it perfect but we can make it a lot better than it is.

mpyne 14y ago
> However, the idea that the CFAA is the best we can do in the way of legislation is just laughable. I really can't stand this futile notion that because the law can't be totally perfect, we might as well just give up and allow it to be catastrophically bad. No to that. We can't make it perfect but we can make it a lot better than it is. You're exactly right but careful about what you're arguing against. I don't think anyone is actually claiming that CFAA is the best achievable law we could have, or that we shouldn't try to improve it (even if we accept that the law will be mostly written and almost completely enforced by those without technical training in computers and networking).
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  The sense of the post I responded to was very much that what happened in this case was acceptable or understandable because justice is complicated, which implies that there is little to nothing that could or should be done about it. But complexity doesn't excuse failure. Mistakes may be inevitable but that is no excuse not to learn from them and do better next time.
res0nat0r 14y ago
Why is 3-6 months in jail for breaking in and repeatedly breaking the law overreach?
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  Does your question have anything to do with what I posted? OK, I'll bite. It's overreach because they charged him with a felony for doing something that shouldn't be a felony, and there is reason to suspect that they charged him and not any of the very large number of other people who violate that statute on a regular basis in significant part as a result of his political views.
  - res0nat0r 14y ago
    Repeated breaking and entering and unauthorized network access isn't a crime?