Dozier Internet Law Pursues Hackers

Hackers and Dozier Internet Law

Dozier Internet Law goes after hackers, their co- conspirators and those aiding and abetting the unauthorized access, the denial of service attack, and the interruption with your business. We also work with state and federal investigators to present information and arguments for criminal prosecution. A little background would perhaps be of assistance. A funny thing happened on the way to trying to curtail the actions of "hackers" or "crackers". Congress, and many state legislatures, passed laws defining hacking as "unauthorized access". A recent court decision has materially expanded the scope of the federal law, and it has opened up huge potential liability for just about every search engine and other company with employees who use the Web. For the typical business, this means that it is easier for your company to be sued for merely going to another company's website, and it is easier for your business to prevent others from visiting your site and easier for your business to pursue unauthorized visitors.

If your business has told a competitor or other entity not to access your website, it is unauthorized access to do so, both a Federal District and Circuit Court have decided. If someone is using a login and password of another party to access your site, or running a spider on your site, or otherwise using any method of access which your business has prohibited (even without logging in to a "private area"), it is unauthorized access, and is a violation of many state hacker laws, if the party accesses your site. Federal criminal and civil laws may also apply, depending upon the damages incurred, and the courts are being very expansive in terms of defining what "damages" might meet the Federal threshold of $5,000. Note, however, that most state laws have no such threshold requirement, so no damages are necessary to seek relief.

This decision amplifies the need for managing the online activities of your staff. And it further reinforces the rule of unintended consequences. Civil and criminal exposure for unauthorized access to a website must be managed proactively.

Dozier Internet Law Protects Businesses

Doesn't it strike you that many of these situations turn upon the definition of "unauthorized access"? Of course. Consider the fact that the question of authorization in the online world usually involves the interpretation of the content and enforceability of the user agreement. Now consider that many user agreements on the web are often unenforceable based upon FTC regulations and some court decisions. Also consider that the content can be changed at any time, and the registered users are often not told about the changes. It is not hard to envision an explosion of "unauthorized access" claims between competitors. This is very much an evolving area of law, and when you are faced with an unauthorized access matter, Dozier Internet Law knows exactly what questions to ask. While we have handled many civil and criminal "hacking" cases, most get resolved to everyone's satisfaction prior to formal legal proceedings because at Dozier Internet Law we take a pro-active approach.

Here are some of John Dozier's recent comments about the evolving law of hacking:

"There are criminal laws against hacking, and there is both statutory and common law (trespass to chattels) authority for bringing a civil action against a hacker, but the real problem I have is the failure to distinguish between a serious hacker attempting to do damage and a passive unauthorized access by wandering eyes. So, for instance, the guy who breaks into a hospital's records by finding a hole in its system, and then runs a password program once he is past the initial line of protection, all so he can get in, take confidential medical information about his enemies and publish it on the web, and while he is in the system he intentionally corrupts the database...well, that guy is a real problem, a real criminal, and he deserves what is coming."

"On the other hand, someone who visits his competitor's website weekly to check on information available to members, on which there is a user agreement provision prohibiting competitors from visiting, is likely just as guilty, criminally and civilly, under many state laws. I tried a hacking case last year in which my client, a CTO of a Fortune 500 company, was indicted on felony charges because he got his estranged wife's email address from one of his kids and went into his wife's password protected online email account. Luckily the prosecutor made a misstep in the middle of trial and my motion to dismiss was granted. But, it was a ridiculous waste of time, and considering my client's job as Chief Technology Officer, any hacking conviction would have ended his career. That result would obviously have been punishment disproportionate to the misconduct. There is unauthorized access (similar to trespass) and then there is hacking (similar to assault and battery!). We need to get the legislators to understand the difference between the two, and pass some laws that are reflective of reality. Those that access a competing website by borrowing a roommate's password (like just about all college kids do) to see information thousands of others can see is likely trespassing, but he is not a hacker. Not by a long shot."

"It is not difficult to see the line, and when the intent of the trespasser is to damage or steal and he actually causes damages above an appropriate threshold, I can appreciate that criminal prosecution is justifiable. Otherwise, let the parties deal with it in civil court."

If your business has been the subject of a hack, or unauthorized access, you can call Dozier Internet Law for a free consultation. Just visit the Dozier Internet Law main website at www.cybertriallawyer.com for more information!

CV, BV and AV are registered certification marks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. The information on this site is not intended to constitute legal advice and communication via email, telephone, or in writing with an attorney does not constitute the creation of an attorney-client relationship until a formal, written legal retainer agreement is signed. We rarely set forth case results on this site because of lawyer ethics considerations. Sometimes we will link to a decision involving our law firm. Whatever the reference to legal results in a particular matter, please understand that case and matter results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each such case or matter, and prior case or matter results do not predict or guarantee a similar result in future cases or matters. John W. Dozier, Jr. is the responsible attorney for this website, which is Attorney Advertising. You may see on the site specific or general examples of cases or factual and legal situations. A legal ethics requirement is that we state the following: CASE RESULTS DEPEND ON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE, AND PRIOR CASE RESULTS DO NOT PREDICT OR GUARANTEE A SIMILAR RESULT IN FUTURE CASES. Our refund policy is to refund all remaining fee deposits at the end of the month of a file closing.

Remember, you can visit the main Dozier Internet Law website for more information on our firm and our services, and to access a library of information including podcasts, videos and articles on the law of the Internet.

(c) Copyright 2001-2011. All Rights Reserved. Dozier Internet Law, P.C.