Slashdot Mirror
ToS Violations No Longer a Crime (On Their Own)
nonprofiteer writes "The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act previously made 'unauthorized access to a computer system' a crime — meant to apply to hackers, it also criminalized violations of a website's ToS or of a workplace's computer policies. The law is being changed to make the crime a felony rather than a misdemeanor, which led some to worry about the potential for its abuse. However, Senators Franken and Grassley added an amendment (PDF) to exempt violations of ToS and employer policies from the lists of felony activity. w00t for common sense."
A misdemeanor is still a crime, just a less serious crime. The amendment exempts ToS violations from being felonies, but does not stop them from being misdemeanors, then they are still crimes.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Franken worked to exempt TOS violations from being a felony...
....However, Senators Franken and Grassley added an amendment (PDF) to exempt violations of ToS and employer policies from the lists of felony activity. w00t for common sense.
Excellent. This really made me blink and re-read many times to ensure the post and all of the articles referenced were actually what I thought I read.
Hopefully this will prevent scare-suit tactics from large companies that aren't "making enough money this quarter". :)
I'm referencing activities from the past, not trollin'.
I use the "Modify Headers" FF extension to add the following to all my browser requests:
X-Terms-Of-Service: By responding to this request, you agree to place no restrictions on the requesting user's use of the data you send, and that no subsequent terms of service may modify this provision.
Franken might be against the whole damned thing, but in favor of putting in the amendment because he thinks the entire bill will likely pass and he wants to make it suck less.
And the whole point of the amendment is that TOS violations won't be a felony.
I am officially gone from
The law that mad it a misdemeanor was already on the books. Did Franken vote for it? I rather doubt it, he hasn't been in office all that long, and the act is rather old. When you get elected to a senatorial post you don't get to review all the old laws on the books and call for a revote.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
No, they changed the definition of the crime itself to exclude violations of TOSes and similar. Read the amendment, it's like a whole paragraph of reading.. Or, ya know, just scream and cry that your rights are being violated reflexively.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
You think that's a joke, but it's been tried. The "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act" has been around since the 80s, and strengthened several times. It is bad law.
In one case, a company set up a website whose terms of use prohibited visiting the website. When their competitor visited, they sued. In another case, someone put a fake profile picture on MySpace and was charged with a crime. You can be sued for checking personal email at work or visiting Facebook.This is law made by people who don't understand computers very well. It also applies to any computer, so if you don't follow the terms of service for a microwave, you can be sued.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
No, they changed the definition of the crime itself to exclude violations of TOSes and similar. Read the amendment, it's like a whole paragraph of reading.. Or, ya know, just scream and cry that your rights are being violated reflexively.
I see nothing in the amendment that completely nixes violation of ToS from any and all lists of criminal activity found in the bill, only from the list of felony activities. Nor did I scream and cry like you believe I did; I posed a question, and expected a reasoned response. There is no legal version of justfinggoogleit.
Or, ya know, just reflexively scream and cry that others just scream and cry about their rights being violated.
I can't stand Organic Laws. They always cost more and have little seeds sticking out of them.
That's ok I have a "Terms of Service" too. By accepting this my cash for purchase or license of your goods and services, you waive your rights to your apply customary Terms of Service agreement. This is clearly posted on my website.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Sounds like a plan. Revoke all laws 10-20 years after they are passed, unless they can pass again.
Give the congresscritters something to do, so they can feel useful.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
This submission and/or the story is a troll. The referenced act only applies to a restricted set of systems. Roughly speaking it applies to non-public government systems and financial/bank computers. It does not apply to typical websites, nor does it apply to typical workplaces. But don't take my word for it, read the law http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html