Monthly Archives: October 2008

Incidence of the divide public/private

A German court considered the IP address to be of the public domain. Parallel with “physical” world could support the decision: home address is public information unless one opts against it and forbid the name and address to appear in … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Investigations – some hope?

“University Gets Time To Notify Students Before Handing Over Info To The RIAA” (10 October 2008)

Posted in Offences - Piracy, Trial - Judges | Leave a comment

“How Soon Until We Start Hearing Stories Of Twitter Criminals?” (9 October 2008)My answer will be: not long. And the issue is exactly the same as usual with social networking sites: sharing of private information people don’t realise are a … Continue reading

Posted in General - Cybercrime patterns, Social networking | Leave a comment

Interception of communications and filtering

No link apparently between interception of communication in the US of phone calls and filtering in Australia with very little opt-out. Yet both methods are means to control the flow of information on the internet and give little chance on … Continue reading

Posted in Filtering, Investigation-2- Interception of communication | Leave a comment

Diversity of laws – a dilemna?

Apparently somebody in the US – Florida was sanctionned for obscenity after prosecutors went forum shopping for the most stringent laws on the matter. Diversity of laws is not a new issue; comparative law is highly aware of it. Internet … Continue reading

Posted in Jurisdiction, Offences - Obscenity | Leave a comment

Investigations are not spying on Web2

Sef-explanatory: “US Government Admits: Data Mining For Terrorists Doesn’t Work” (7 October 2008)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Free speech, privacy and ISPs

The two posts may not seem related but I think they are when looking at them via the issue of regulating the internet to best protect users and their human rights.Several posts pointed out the issue of ISPs acting like … Continue reading

Posted in censorship, Filtering, Privacy | Leave a comment

Responses to cybercrime – Debate at HL

Friday 10 October 2008, House of Lords will start the debate again, following their earlier reports. What is interesting is the proposal for software companies to be responsible for insecure code. If companies were responsible like Microsoft, they would be … Continue reading

Posted in General - Legal/non legal responses to cybercrime | Leave a comment

Damages by spamming

Harm is a key concept, although elusive concept, to justify crimininalisation of behaviours. Here the case seems to justify the policy to criminalise spamming “Spammers Ordered To Pay $236 Million” (8 October 2008)

Posted in Spamming | Leave a comment

Digital evidence on YouTube

A reassuring decision where the Scottish Court is not dazzled by the technological elements of the case. The basic principle for all evidence is to be adminissible and secure; doubts benefit the accused and strengthened human rights by forcing the … Continue reading

Posted in Investigation-5- Use of technology(ies), Social networking | Leave a comment