Fighting Computer Crime

You can talk about anything here

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
rufio_eht
Honorary Member
Honorary Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:03 pm

Fighting Computer Crime

Post by rufio_eht »

I was reading in one of my textbooks that so far, the most effective way of deterring internet crime is to prosecute offenders. Most companies don't usually do this because the cost is not worth the benefit in most cases. However, I bet many companies who face serious threats in computer crime would be willing to pay a little bit each as a collective group to prosecute specific offenders in order to deter others, perhaps a prosecution expense insurance so that if they pull the winning ticket, they won't have to incur as much expense in prosecuting. Thoughts?
"Rock and roll is the hamburger that ate the world." --Peter York
User avatar
Kaiser_von_Nuben
Honorary Member
Honorary Member
Posts: 2186
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:40 pm
Location: New York, NY USA

Re: Fighting Computer Crime

Post by Kaiser_von_Nuben »

I'm not sure what book your textbook writer read, but private citizen-victims (or private corporations in this case) incur no expense if the government decides to criminally prosecute someone who caused them harm. If prosecution is the best way to stop internet villains, then corporations can ask the FBI or State law enforcement agencies to arrest them. They don't have to pay the FBI or the local cops to take the case; that's up to the DA or U.S. Attorney.

I'm sure private companies would love to subject internet brigands to their own form of criminal law. But for better or worse, the power to investigate and punish criminals lies solely in the hands of government.

Maybe your textbook writer means "sue civilly" instead of "prosecute criminally." You don't need the government to sue someone in civil court; private property owners sue each other all the time with private lawyers to represent each side. Now, they wouldn't be suing to punish "crime." Rather, they would be suing to recover compensation for monetary harm inflicted by the naughty hackers. But that costs money and time. And when the potential returns are low (ie, the "bad guy" is some penniless 15-year-old who downloaded one free Metallica song too many) no corporation will pay 25 lawyers $500 an hour for 2 years trying to prove up the "theft." Lawyers apply a simple rule in cases like this: "No pay-out-ee, no take the case-ee."

So it goes in America. Injustice might happen every day, but if the offender has no cash-o-lah to pay a judgment, no lawyer will ever take the case. Or maybe you didn't hear that law practice is a "for-profit" enterprise, not a "for-justice" enterprise. "For-justice" lawyers go out of business faster than you can say "Rent Bill, please."
"The German Army will not stand for it!"

-Colonel Bockner, King Solomon's Mines (1985)
User avatar
rufio_eht
Honorary Member
Honorary Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:03 pm

Re: Fighting Computer Crime

Post by rufio_eht »

Apparently, most companies don't want to admit that they have been victims of computer crime for various reasons. As a result they don't usually press charges unless there are significant recoverable assets. If they belonged to an association, I am thinking that the association could represent their interests and even add a certain level of assurance to those doing business with members of that association. Is there currently any right of public or private businesses to maintain anonymity in filing charges?
"Rock and roll is the hamburger that ate the world." --Peter York
Post Reply