VCCA and Jeremy JaynesVirginia Computer Crimes ActSlide 3PowerPoint PresentationSlide 5Jeremy Jaynes vs. VirginiaJaynes – JurisdictionJurisdiction and the InternetJaynes – Jurisdiction and ProcedureJaynes – Substantive IssuesSlide 11Jaynes – Implications?Jurisdictional IssuesOnline Music File-Sharing SitesVCCA and Jeremy JaynesVirginia Computer Crimes ActOutlaws use of computer or network without authority with intent to:•Obtain property/services by false pretenses•Embezzle or commit larceny•Remove or alter data or programs •Cause injury to property•Make unauthorized copies•Cause computer to malfunctionVirginia Computer Crimes ActOutlaws use of computer or network (even with authority) with intent to:•Invade privacy by examining personal financial information•Communicate obscene, vulgar, profane or indecent language with intent to coerce, intimidate, harass•Use encryption to further criminal activity (separate offense)•Falsify electronic transmissions in connection with bulk unsolicited email, or provide software that does so.Virginia Computer Crimes Act•Criminal penalties – may be prosecuted as a felony (e.g., Jaynes)•Civil suit for damagesJeremy Jaynes vs. Virginia•Jaynes was mass e-mailer •Lived in North Carolina•Used false email addresses, disguising sender, to send commercial spam.•Convicted of felony, sentenced to nine years•Appealed.Jaynes – JurisdictionJurisdiction and the Internet•Internet communication can begin anywhere, be transmitted and pass through anywhere.•Is internet/website passive or active? Should jurisdiction depend on whether communication is “pulled” by recipient or “pushed” by content provider?•Scenario 7-4: Texas resident “visits” gambling Web site, whose server is in Nevada.It is legal to gamble online in Nevada, but not in Texas.Did Texas resident “break the law?” In which state did crime take place?Jaynes – Jurisdiction and ProcedureVirginia Supreme Court held:•Jurisdiction exists because Jaynes knew and intended that emails would use servers located in Virginia, and acts produced harm within Virginia (“long arm statutes”) [Note standard of review.]•Jaynes has “standing” to challenge statute as overbroad because it reaches protected activity (even though Jaynes did not engage in protected activity),•Section of statute is not “trespass statute,” since it would apply even if service provider allowed it.•Unlike other sections, elements of crime do not include “without authority” limitation.Jaynes – Substantive Issues•Anti-spam provisions are constitutionally overbroad and violate First Amendment because law doesn’t make distinction between types of email or types of speech.•“Right to engage in anonymous speech, particularly political or religious speech, is protected by First Amendment.” Prohibiting false routing information “infringes on that protected right.” (E.g., Federalist Papers, published “anonymously” by “Publius”)Jaynes – Substantive Issues•When law burdens core political speech, it is subject to “strict scrutiny” test, and must be narrowly drawn.•Anti-spam provisions are not narrowly drawn because they are not limited to commercial or fraudulent email or obscenity or defamation.•Court declines to apply narrowing construction.Jaynes – Implications?•Can burglar break into your home as long as he is reciting the Gettysburg Address?•What about restrictions on radio/television stations, use of mailboxes, or noise limits? Are they different? How?Jurisdictional Issues•Scenario 7-5 (hypothetical): XYZ develops and releases, globally, software product that is defective and causes computer systems to crash, resulting in disruption and damage to system resources.•What recourse should consumers and organizations who purchase this product have?–U.S. has strict liability laws.–Other countries may have different laws.–Where is jurisdiction? What laws should apply?–Can XYZ be sued in every jurisdiction where its product is sold?–“Long arm statutes” may allow suits against out-of-state/country web-meisters who allegedly “target” person or industry in state.Online Music File-Sharing Sites•Digital piracy is international.•Internet users around the world downloaded proprietary music from Napster Web site (whose central servers resided in US). •Many illicit file sharing sites that use Napster system have operated outside US. –E.g., servers for KaZaA, (P2P file sharing site) resided in Netherlands. •Scenario 7-6: Pirate Bay Web site case. –Prosecution in Sweden; therefore no issue re jurisdiction or