Sorry about that last post (I'm kind of a, uh, n00b is it?). Go here http://thomas.loc.gov/ and do a word/phrase search for spyware if you want to see the bills.
Section 4 of this act seems to fit Ralsky's conduct precisely, but the section 2 definition of aggregate amount might be difficult, as the AG would have to prove that victims suffered financial losses. But look at section 7 - if enough financial losses were proved this guy could be looking at a felony...
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry about that last post (I'm kind of a, uh, n00b is it?). Go here http://thomas.loc.gov/ and do a word/phrase search for spyware if you want to see the bills.
Here's the actual bills (not sure which two the article refers to):m p/~c108vFrH4s:: m p/~c108vFrH4s:: m p/~c108vFrH4s:: m p/~c108vFrH4s::
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:1:./te
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:2:./te
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:3:./te
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:4:./te
BTW, these bills have been around for years. Senator John Edwards introduced one in 2000.
Or ask the Michigan attorney general to pursue criminal charges under Michigan's Computer Law, MCLA 752.791 et seq.
g e= getObject&objName=mcl-Act-53-of-1979
http://www.michiganlegislature.org/mileg.asp?pa
Section 4 of this act seems to fit Ralsky's conduct precisely, but the section 2 definition of aggregate amount might be difficult, as the AG would have to prove that victims suffered financial losses. But look at section 7 - if enough financial losses were proved this guy could be looking at a felony...
Oh yeah, IANAL (thank god)