If you drop a private letter on a public street, I doubt there is a law to protect you from a newspaper publishing your private letter.
There's copyright law. There's also trespass to chattel, if the newspaper picks the letter up and opens it. There could be trade secret laws, depending on the content of the letter.
BUT, my computer, no that is illegal access. A public web site without proper "doors" and "stay out" signs, no that is not illegal access, that is negligence on the part of the site owner. I personally have a real problem with people just walking into my house, even if they don't take anything.
But how can you identify whether the computer is meant to be public (like a store) or private (like a house) without accessing it?
It could work to criminalize doing something legal with illegal intent, but it's a dangerous road to go down.
Not really. We have laws against "entering a building or other premises with the intent to commit theft." It's called burglary. We also have laws against "illegal entrance into premises with criminal intent." It's called "breaking and entering."
If I have a house and leave all the doors open, it should be obvious that that is private property, and I don't expect anyone to welcome themselves inside. However, if I have a retail store I expect people to come in.
Sure, but you presented two very easy to identify scenarios. Now what if instead you own 20 acres of wooded land? If someone enters, should they be charged with a crime. In most states, they can be charged civilly for any actual damages, but unless you have posted "no tresspassing" signs every so many feet or explicitly told them to leave, they can't be charged criminally.
The same should apply to cyberspace. It is unauthorized if it is not obvious that the unwashed masses are expected in.
In most states, that's not the law. Rather, it is authorized if it is not obvious that the unwashed masses are not allowed in.
Slashdot Mirror
I know.
If you drop a private letter on a public street, I doubt there is a law to protect you from a newspaper publishing your private letter.
There's copyright law. There's also trespass to chattel, if the newspaper picks the letter up and opens it. There could be trade secret laws, depending on the content of the letter.
BUT, my computer, no that is illegal access. A public web site without proper "doors" and "stay out" signs, no that is not illegal access, that is negligence on the part of the site owner. I personally have a real problem with people just walking into my house, even if they don't take anything.
But how can you identify whether the computer is meant to be public (like a store) or private (like a house) without accessing it?
Does this mean that if my doormat says "welcome" Then anyone is free to break down my door and take all my stuff?
Of course not. Destruction of property and theft are still illegal.
This would have no force on spam that uses the correct identification in the headers.
Of course, all we'd then have to do is require email to have a "This is not spam" header :).
It could work to criminalize doing something legal with illegal intent, but it's a dangerous road to go down.
Not really. We have laws against "entering a building or other premises with the intent to commit theft." It's called burglary. We also have laws against "illegal entrance into premises with criminal intent." It's called "breaking and entering."
If I have a house and leave all the doors open, it should be obvious that that is private property, and I don't expect anyone to welcome themselves inside. However, if I have a retail store I expect people to come in.
Sure, but you presented two very easy to identify scenarios. Now what if instead you own 20 acres of wooded land? If someone enters, should they be charged with a crime. In most states, they can be charged civilly for any actual damages, but unless you have posted "no tresspassing" signs every so many feet or explicitly told them to leave, they can't be charged criminally.
The same should apply to cyberspace. It is unauthorized if it is not obvious that the unwashed masses are expected in.
In most states, that's not the law. Rather, it is authorized if it is not obvious that the unwashed masses are not allowed in.
When it comes down to it, once the code is compiled, it's the same.
If you're compiling, shouldn't you use a language which wasn't designed to be interpreted?