Aaron Swartz hit with 9 more felony charges in MIT hacking case

Re:Aaron Swartz hit with 9 more felony charges in MIT hackin... by tptacek on Wednesday September 19, 2012 @05:03PM (#4545576)

You're not failing at communicating so much as failing at understanding what "strict liability" is about. Strict liability pertains to intent, not to the magnitude of the offense.

Statutory rape is an example of a strict liability crime, because you can be convicted of it without even knowing you committed it (at the time).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Aaron Swartz hit with 9 more felony charges in MIT hackin... by Karunamon on Wednesday September 19, 2012 @05:10PM (#4545603)

I understand that much - holding onto underage porn is a strict liability crime for example

What I'm getting at here is that, the "harm" thing is not a good bar. The only difference between breaking a ToS in this condition and breaking a strict liability law is that it's a corporation instead of a prosecutor initiating the case.

*ed

Dropped "unwittingly", since you have to have been proven to know you're breaking the ToS.. still a broken law..

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Aaron Swartz hit with 9 more felony charges in MIT hackin... by tptacek on Wednesday September 19, 2012 @05:16PM (#4545631)

I don't understand what this comment is trying to say. The words following "the only difference" are not in fact the only difference between breaking a term of service and committing a crime under strict liability. In fact, the opposite is more true. You do not, for instance, simply need to know you're violating a term of service; you have to be doing so in bad faith, with intent to defraud.

I think you need to read the CFAA --- carefully, because clauses that occur early in the statute are refined and clarified later in the statute --- before wading into technical discussions about it.

It's not a particularly difficult law to understand.

[ Parent | on HN ]