Slashdot Mirror
European Law Could Give Hackers Mimimum Two-Year Sentence
judgecorp writes "A proposed European law would apply a minimum two-year prison sentence for hacking across the region. This is a step up for nations including Britain, whose Computer Misuse Act currently has a two-year maximum sentence."
Judges hate minimum sentences. Legislators should stop making them.
Does "Hacking" include typing the URL wrong?
The proposal also targets tools used to commit offences: the production or sale of devices such as computer programs designed for cyber-attacks, or which find a computer password by which an information system can be accessed, would constitute criminal offences.
So, what would the scope of such a prohibition be? Would pen testing tools commonly used by security professionals be prohibited in Europe? Would you need a license to possess or use such tools? This sounds like an overreaching law. And since when did the European parliament get the authority to impose mandatory minimum prison sentences in its member nations?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Should be illegal for the government.
Just watch and wait: it'll be the kid who takes apart his iPod to replace the broken battery who gets charged.
I am John Hurt.
These ideas are all traps put in place by corrupt lawmakers and special interest groups that benefit from for profit prisons. Don't get it twisted.
These minimum sentences should not exist. It's bad enough that peoples lives can easily be ruined by hacking in general but it's even worse if they lose 2 years of their life. This would kill them professionally as they'd have no way to explain their gap in resume.
It's only a matter of time before hackers are treated like sex offenders, just wait and see.
Part 2 is; Hacking is defined as anything we don't want you inspecting too closely. We'll be using the first million prisoners to build the prisons for the next million and so on and so on. Once society is imprisoned, people will be much more easily controlled.
Governments everywhere, rejoice!
I have a suspicion that they will count jailbreaking/bypassing DRM as hacking too. It's just a small step from outlawing IP spoofing.
How about sentencing hackers based on the damage they have done instead of another witchhunt against technology?
Only demonstrating a vulnerability: no sentence or a few month of community service; destroying data or sabotaging systems: monetary fine based on the losses that occurred if the guy can't pay then prison; stealing and selling or making public user data: long long years of prison.
The article from the first link says that the law in question would require member states adapt a maximum penalty of at least two years. This doesn't sound like what we would normally call a "minimum sentence".
"If hacks are outlawed, then only criminals will have hacks." --- I'll guess we'll have to rely upon Microsoft to investigate and fix any holes in the software. (In other words like calling the police on 911; no defense at all.)
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
when i was 16 while learning how to program i created a cheating engine for an online game which i was then arrested and charged for at 18 under the computer misuse act. as it stood i was given a £300 fine and some community service, considrring i was unaware of the fact breaking TOS was illegal (i was a kid, and cheats have always been in games, or things like gameshark that injected into games so i consider
ed it akin to that) hoeever this new law would have seen me goto prison for two years.
this is just a stupidly thought out blanket law in my opinion. hopefully it doesnt go through or thrre will be a big spree of teenagers in jail for petty things like that.
When did the UE gain authority on criminal offences? I thought this was a member states prerogative. This un-democratic monster is getting uglier every day.
I lost a boot drive for a workstation recently, and with it the activation for some very expensive professional software products.
More than one vendor subsequently refused to let me reactivate the software (the same legitimate copy of the same software on the same machine except with a fresh OS installation on a new drive) because they had records showing that my software key was registered to someone else, sometimes not even in the same country. Eventually, after multi-week hassle and in some cases literally sending photos of the boxed package with serial numbers etc. and the original sales invoice, everything was working again.
It's not as if they even apologised for messing me around entirely because of their own over-zealous copy protection and poor record keeping/registration checking, and certainly no form of compensation was offered for the downtime. And yet, the disruption and direct loss income from that downtime because I work from home was surely at least as bad as having someone break into the workstation and install some sort of malware, which I could at least have fixed within a day by nuking and reinstalling everything, but which would have been a criminal offence on their part.
I want the people who were directly responsible for authorising and operating those copy protection schemes to be personally and criminally liable, the same way they would be if they had cracked my network and remotely wiped the software. I understand why companies want to copy protect their code, but there's no way a mini-company like mine can afford to sue a global corporation to recover a week's lost income, so there needs to be some other form of deterrent. Locking up the guy who types my serial number into the remote-deactivation script would be a good start, I think, and a hell of a lot more justifiable than any nebulous law that covers obviously inadvertent access, "hacking" tools with legitimate uses for sysadmins/software developers, etc.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Europe doesn't have a constitution, it's not even a nation or anything like that. There was an attempt at a European constitution, but it was voted down in referendums in several countries in the EU.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
That's nothing, in Alabama you'd be burned at the stake for witchcraft and electrickery.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
It is as if we reward programmers by how many lines of code they write.
A JUDGE is supposed to JUDGE something. We put all these extra detailed rules on everything to employ more lawyers while removing as much actual decision making as possible.
When we take out the common sense of a HUMAN who can put situations into context and deal with specifics of each situation while a GENERIC blanket statement of law is just a brain dead policy. It is literally brain dead and if we keep defining more detail it will not be impossible to train some new IBM machine to replace judges too.
Law is NOT a bill of some kind of payment. We have to stop this MBA mindset being applied to every aspect of life. It hasn't been helping our economy in modern times that well either; but it surely is out of place everywhere else. The purpose of a law is to get compliance of some sort - not to make you "pay a debt to society" with prison time. Where did that idiotic phrase come from anyhow? Rules sometimes need breaking-- we allow self defense as an exception and it is coded into the rules but all exceptions are not thought of nor are they equally applied simply because more details are added.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news