Slashdot Mirror


French Power Company Fined For Hacking Greenpeace

judgecorp writes "Electricite de France (EDF) which uses nuclear reactors to generate the majority of France's electricity, has been found guilty of hacking into Greenpeace computers in 2006. EDF has been fined fined €1.5 million and ordered to pay Greenpeace a further half a million euros, for what the judge described as an act of 'industrial scale espionage.'"

26 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. Um, OK. by Millennium · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As long as this rule applies both ways -i.e. if Greenpeace were to hack into the computers if some other company, they would be fined a more or less equal amount- then I can't say I see any problem with it.

    1. Re:Um, OK. by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So far from my observation if a private individual hacks, the private individual risks going to prison.

      Whereas if a corporation does it there's no prison time involved for any of the people involved.

      I think prison time would discourage both private individuals and individuals acting on behalf of corporations.

      --
    2. Re:Um, OK. by Millennium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you describe is an unfair system: different parties play by different rules based on a factor of no relevance to the matter at hand.

      In a fair system, everyone plays by the same rules, and that's the type of system I'm talking about here.

    3. Re:Um, OK. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if corporations 'are people' then they should GO TO JAIL like people when caught breaking the law.

      it would be fun as hell to design what it means to be a corp 'in prison'. wouldn't it be fun?? imagine how we could stick it, back, to all the fucked up corps who have gotton away with bloody murder (or nearly so) over the years.

      the thing is, justice is owned by the state and the state is now owned by corps. don't expect ANY justice toward corps. not until after some revolution (...) comes, anyway.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:Um, OK. by data2 · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be fair, this incident resulted in several people getting prison time.

    5. Re:Um, OK. by trum4n · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But it's not fair to fine a citizen the same as a corporation. You could empty my bank accounts, and the corp wouldn't even notice that amount of money. So you can ruin a persons life, or fine a company effectively nothing, with the same dollar value. Fine me 10,000$, you better fine Exxon 25+ billion.

    6. Re:Um, OK. by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Informative

      So far from my observation if a private individual hacks, the private individual risks going to prison.

      Whereas if a corporation does it there's no prison time involved for any of the people involved.

      I think prison time would discourage both private individuals and individuals acting on behalf of corporations.

      Under US law, corporations shield the owners from financial loss, not criminal behavior. A person commits a crime and goes to jail regardless of whether they acted on behalf of a corporation. The executives at Enron were all charged with fraud, for example. This case is under French law, tho.

    7. Re:Um, OK. by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Informative

      "This way, the rich have the same incentive as the poor to abide by the laws."

      German and Swiss law do this, the fines are expressed in "earned per day" (Tagessätze) amounts between 1€ and 30,000€ per day depending on your income.

    8. Re:Um, OK. by kiwimate · · Score: 5, Informative

      I usually feel obliged to defend France (I think they get a raw deal, especially from Americans who can't see past the last 80 years of history and forget how the French contributed during the American revolution), but in this particular context I'm cynical. I grew up in New Zealand, and was living in Auckland the night the Rainbow Warrior was bombed. The two official French secret agents were sentenced to 10 years, served two, and most of that was in a tropical resort. They've since received medals and accolades from the government, both been promoted, written books...basically made out like heroes from this.

      I won't claim to speak for all my fellow kiwis, but this is about the only incident that I hold a grudge over and think was never handled fairly.

    9. Re:Um, OK. by Swanktastic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know this is Slashdot, but the French contributing to the success of the American Revolution was 100% done out of self-interest. The Bourbons loved democracy in the same way Americans loved radical Islam when we gave Afghanistan freedom fighters Stingers to shoot down Russian helicopters. And it came back and bit them in the tail in a much more dramatic and bloody way.

    10. Re:Um, OK. by oobayly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Likewise, the US had no interest in becoming involved in WWII until Pearl Harbour (or at least until Hitler declared war on the USA four days later) - over 2 years since the start of the war in Europe. Don't get me wrong, I can see why, after the loss of 110,000 soldiers in WWI.

      It's common for some Americans to go on about how we'd all be speaking German if it wasn't for them, so I think it's only fair for them to be reminded that it's quite possible they'd still be speaking the Queen's English and drinking warm beer if it weren't for the French.

      Like Britain petitioning the USA to enter WWII, Benjamin Franklin actively petitioned for support in France in 1776 - the only difference was that the French covertly entered the American War of Independence before formally recognising the USA two years later - causing Britain to declare war on France.

  2. And yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the situation were reversed... Greenpeace would be declared terrorists and alot of people would be tossed in jail for a long long time.

    Once again the lesson is.. If you wanna be a criminal. Start a company first.

    1. Re:And yet... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      quite OT but slightly humorous: if you are an adult and pay to have sex with an adult, that's a crime.

      EXCEPT when you are a corporation and are filming it. then its 100% perfectly legal.

      corps have more rights than people. they actually do.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:And yet... by Swanktastic · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2845/why-arent-porn-actors-charged-with-prostitution

      The key quote FTA:
      But in 1988 his conviction was overturned by the California Supreme Court, which cited precedent establishing that "for [an act] to constitute 'prostitution,' the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer must come in contact with some part of the body of the other for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of the customer or of the prostitute" [emphasis added]. The court found that the "payment of acting fees was the only payment involved in the instant case. . . . There is no evidence that [Freeman] paid the acting fees for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification, his own or the actors'." Thus, no prostitution.

  3. Re:Kinda low by itchythebear · · Score: 5, Informative
    Whoops, I jumped the gun

    FTFA:

    The judge sentenced Pierre-Paul François, who was EDF’s deputy head of nuclear production security in 2006 to three years imprisonment, with 30 months suspended. Meanwhile his boss, Pascal Durieux, who was EDF’s head of nuclear production security in 2006, was also sentenced to three years imprisonment, two years suspended, and a 10,000 euros (£8,500) fine for apparently commissioning the spying operation.

    and

    As a result of this, the French judge issued a guilty verdict in the case of Thierry Lorho, the head of Kargus Consultants. The former member of France’s secret services was sentenced to three years in jail, with two suspended and a €4,000 (£3,450) fine. EDF was also ordered to pay €50,000 (£42,800) to Jadot.

    --
    If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.
  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Re:a hefty bill? by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to think like that, but then I worked for a company that cost several hundred million to build. Millions of dollars came in and left through the place on a daily basis at times. They only got to keep pennies on the dollar and most of the money had to go towards the loans and other investors. There were times the company had tens of thousands on its books as usable, owned, cash.

    You can't judge cost to build as the standard for something like this. The investors and owners, probably could come up with that easily. The company itself if there are enough shield corporations between it and the owners? Hard to say.

    --
    by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
  6. Re:Kinda low by The+Askylist · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Kargus was also the firm involved in hacking the anti-doping lab which had caught out Floyd Landis for cheating in the Tour de France. Landis was given a 1 year suspended sentence, as was his coach.

    .

    The Kargus guy involved got 3 years, and the hacker himself 2, but with 18 months suspended.

    AFP report here

  7. Re:a hefty bill? by Gutboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    They made (net income) 1.249 billion last year.

  8. Re:a hefty bill? by MimeticLie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Green also doesn't tend to blow up and render large areas uninhabitable for decades...

    Cough. Also, which of these numbers is lowest, again? Hint: it's not hydro, wind, solar, or biomass.

  9. Re:Kinda low by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Incidentally, the French secret service of which the Kargus consulting creep was an alumnus was the same entity responsible for sinking one of Greenpeace's ships with limpet mines in order to avoid being inconvenienced by a protest they were going to lead... Keep it classy.

  10. Re:a hefty bill? by kiwimate · · Score: 4, Informative

    I will preface this by saying I have no idea of the comparative cash flows in different countries, or between different parts of the utility/electric industry. That said...

    In the U.S., if you are part of the power grid (critical infrastructure, also known as the Bulk Electric System, or BES) and are found in violation, NERC has the power to fine you one million dollars per violation, per day. This fine starts at the outset of the violation (not when it was actually discovered) and can continue until it is rectified. Example trade magazine discussion, second paragraph under NERC Basics.

  11. Re:Well by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really?
    Okay I am no fan of Geenpeace at all. I do not think their tactics and often their goals are correct.
    However...
    EDF is a heavily regulated utility company that is responsible for the running of nuclear facilites. They should without a doubt be held to an extremely high standard when it comes to following laws and regulations.
    Greenpeace is a bunch of hippies that think they are doing good. Just as their is no room for Police officers and the military to be allowed to commit institutional acts of civil disobedience there can be no room for EDF to do the same.
    Plus I am sure that Greenpeace members have spent the night in jail in the past and will again.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  12. Re:a hefty bill? by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There was nothing wrong with what he said. He didn't say they were borrowing from the government, he said that they could borrow (from private banks) at government rates.

    The reason that governments get much lower rates is that they are very unlikely to default on their loans so there is much less risk and cost involved in loaning them money. That means that the interest rate they charge can be very low. If you can get the government credit "blanket" extended over you, then the banks can consider your loan to be just as safe as a government one and give you the same deal.

    So he was right, a loan guarantee is NOT a subsidy, unless there is a bankruptcy. It makes it less expensive to build a reactor, but that money does not come from the government. I was also loaned money for my education that was a federal student loan. Since the government was on the hook for the money, I got a low interest rate, but the government did not pay one cent for my education loans.

  13. Re:fine a Citizen by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aren't the citizens getting fined more than Corps?

    So "Industrial Espionage" is only worth a penalty of a million or two but Anonymous hackers are Terrorists for Life?

    Remember that Corporations are People? How did Corps manage to NOT get on the Terrorist Lists?!

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  14. Re:Greenpeace takes in over $300M/year by inpher · · Score: 4, Informative