Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court Rules TOS Violations Aren't Criminal
Trepidity writes "In a decision today (PDF), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 'does not extend to violations of use restrictions,' and therefore violating terms of service and corporate use policies is not a federal crime. Law profesor Orin Kerr cheered the decision, but since three other Courts of Appeals have reached opposite decisions, it might be heading to the Supreme Court."
And therefor, violating a TOS can't automatically be seen as criminal activity. Kudos to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for having their head on straight.
If a corporation can unilaterally change a TOS agreement AFTER someone has signed up for the service (which they do all the time), how can anybody then claim that violating it is a criminal offense?
Lower courts have held that violating a (basically TOS) is a crime? Is there ever real world logic applied to these decisions or is it basically (let's rewrite every law when it applies to the internet). "What are you in for?" "Leaving food stuffs in the fridge after 5pm on friday, clearly against company policy".
I think it's hard to tell whether this is good for consumers (because we have the freedom to do what we want with our programs, etc), or bad for consumers (because it makes things less safe for companies). Either way, I'm happy for now, I guess.
It's not hard to tell at all: being able to throw consumers in jail for ToS violations is most definitely, unquestionably, bad for consumers.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
A court ruling out of line with three other rulings is certainly a sign that the court wants a higher court to look at this... 3-1 scores don't matter, just that the case got there.
Violating terms of use is not a criminal offense.
It's a civil matter known as breach of contract, the solution for which is getting sued.
Now if you were forging a mac address in an attempt to masquerade as another subscriber, or hacked the service to get free internet or evade a service termination, that would be different and probably *would* qualify as criminal.
Breaking TOS and having your service yoinked is like going shopping at a grocery store and getting thrown out by security for swearing, or like getting an eviction notice from your landlord because you didn't pay your rent or because you broke the door. It's not the same as shoplifting or burglary.
The only time a TOS violation should be criminal is if what you're doing amounts to trespassing.
Once again a terrible title and summary. This had nothing to do with a TOS. It was about trying to prosecute someone criminally for violating their workplace's authorized access policy.
So you're not in jail. Big deal. They can still take all your money via the civil courts. Then you're homeless. It's like jail except that the cell has poor climate control and the 3 hots and a cot are unreliable. Nothing will change until civil suits are reformed. For starters, guaranteed right to a jury trial with the possibility of nullification required to be informed to the jury from the bench (not the bench lying and saying that it doesn't exist). Also, reasonable doubt, not prepoderance. Also, no civil trial for the same matter already settled in criminal courts.
Wow, it might actually be a free country again if we could pull that off. Oh and look, I expressed it in one paragraph that everybody can understand. Just like back in the 1700s. Imagine that!
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
The direct action is obviously negative, the question is whether the indirect incentive more than outweighs that negative. One could argue, for example, that perhaps facebook wouldn't exist if they didn't think this was possible, and facebook is so awesome it outweighs the cost. I wouldn't argue that, but someone could.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
I was so looking forward to forcefully citizen's-arresting the next HR asshole to demand my Facebook login.
"Credit card companies are not authorized to have their mail access my (physical) mailbox, unless they enclose a cashier's check for $1,000 in my name."
Now go ahead send me another one of these credit card offers!
So, those employers that demand access to your social networking accounts, or, say, bank accounts, personal e-mail accounts, etc. They get a free pass at violating those sites' Terms of Use and can sign on with employees' access credentials ... NO PROBLEM?
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
One could argue, for example, that perhaps facebook wouldn't exist if they didn't think this was possible, and facebook is so awesome it outweighs the cost. I wouldn't argue that, but someone could.
You and I both.
Besides, yea, one could attempt to make that argument, but it's obvious bullshit; the Zuckerburgs of the world don't give two shits about being able to incarcerate their customers for ToS violations, so long as people keep signing up and the skrilla keeps flowing in.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
stuff on the level traffic tickets should not be a felony.
Now lot's of tos violation are on the level of some traffic tickets where most people don't follow the rules 100% and some of them are very technical when you get down to them.
Wrong on both points: 1) the decision covered ToS in general, not only employer/employee agreements; and 2) the Ninth Circuit has plenty of conservatives on it, with its Chief Judge, who wrote this opinion, being a libertarian-leaning Reagan appointee.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
If it was a Federal Crime, Basically what it would lead to, is private entities been able to send people to jail for breaking rules not set by the government (ie laws...). If this does start to happen, then the corporations have effectively directly taken over law making in this country, and could even possibly put in jail terms and penlites for breaking their tos's.
Yeah, you're right, my bad for not RTFO. Though the Ninth circuit, while it may have some conservatives, is still the most liberal circuit by a wide margin.
violating TOS can only be seen as breach-of-contract. That makes it a civil offense.
> or bad for consumers (because it makes things less safe for companies).
If Congress (or lobbyists acting through congress) really really wants to criminalize TOS violations, they can try to pass a bill that explicitly states that.
Or they could just try again with the fuzzy language and call it CISPA.