Computer Crimes fair? What do you have to say?

[imasoldier]

What do you guys think about the penaltys of computer crimes such as Piracy, hacking, and Internet Fraud? Do you think they are fair compared to the real world crimes?

[Mr JP Fugley]

What penalties are you speaking about. A couple of examples may be helpful.

[j2k4]

I'd personally really like to re-write some of the sentencing guidelines; I think, while they should be somewhat formulaic, circumstantial stipulations can be concocted to allow for real-world adjustments.

When comes time to sentence hacking, piracy and fraud offenders, a very simple formula based on the number of individuals victimized could be very useful.

In other words, if you commit a hack that affects 200 million people, you could be sentenced to 200 million minutes/seconds in gaol.

[scott_pd]

Its sort of hard to say, alot of people will say that fraud is bad and it should carry a enprisonment punishment because it is stealing from people who have done nothing to deserve it....but the same could be said about piracy, when millions download daily and billions are being lost cos of it and very few people see it as something bad.

[3RA1N1AC]

In other words, if you commit a hack that affects 200 million people, you could be sentenced to 200 million minutes/seconds in gaol.

BUT how would you punish the computer that acts as an accomplice in crimes against data? if computers must have rights, then computers must be held responsible for their own actions, as well.

[peat moss]

I think I get what you mean , hackers who affect so many companies and cost X amount of dollars are sentenced harder than say someone who kills someone while driving drunk or in the course of a robbery .


Good question tho I can't answer that .

[j2k4]

In other words, if you commit a hack that affects 200 million people, you could be sentenced to 200 million minutes/seconds in gaol.

BUT how would you punish the computer that acts as an accomplice in crimes against data? if computers must have rights, then computers must be held responsible for their own actions, as well.

Such computors should be sentenced to eternal service in aid of the Folding-at-Home effort, and powered by a generator utilizing the bodies of spammers as fuel.

Peat-

Crimes against money and property are currently given short shrift when comes time for sentencing.

I propose we correct this.

I see, for example (though it is not a "computor" crime as such), the Enron pair have been found guilty of crimes that carry between 60 and 120 years imprisonment as penalty.

Their machinations deprived many thousands of their retirement funding, life savings and other assets, and many more thousands of their livelihoods.

While it is certain these two will never again see the light of day as free men, I believe they would more properly be sentenced to a few hundred thousand years, and that such sentencing practice would stifle any tendency toward financial malfeasance exhibited by today's youth.

[Mr JP Fugley]

Where I come from sentencng is based on the seriousness of the offence. So for example the maximum for fraud may be 7 years. The judge will look at various factors when deciding on the actual sentence these will include how much was involved, whether the person pled guilty, previous convictions (bearing in mind these are not a factor when deciding on guilt) and other relevant factors. She will then sentence, based on these factors.

However a Judge must also consider sentences given previously by Judges of the same or higher standing. If there was a very similar case and a higher judge gave a five year sentence then the Judge in this case would do likewise.

If there is more than 1 charge then the Judge will sentence on all of them. However the sentences will run concurrently (at the same time). So if someone is sentenced to 6 years on 1 charge and 4 on another he will actually only serve (in theory) 6, as the 4 will be running at the same time.

Bearing in mind that a prisoner is eligible to apply for parole after half of the sentence has been served. In the normal course of events (depending on the crime) and with them behaving well in prison, they will normally expect to get it. So someone who commits a fairly major fraud, can reasonably expect to get sentenced to 4 years, be out after 2 and for the last several months they would probably be going home for the weekend.

[j2k4]

Where I come from sentencng is based on the seriousness of the offence. So for example the maximum for fraud may be 7 years. The judge will look at various factors when deciding on the actual sentence these will include how much was involved, whether the person pled guilty, previous convictions (bearing in mind these are not a factor when deciding on guilt) and other relevant factors. She will then sentence, based on these factors.

However a Judge must also consider sentences given previously by Judges of the same or higher standing. If there was a very similar case and a higher judge gave a five year sentence then the Judge in this case would do likewise.

If there is more than 1 charge then the Judge will sentence on all of them. However the sentences will run concurrently (at the same time). So if someone is sentenced to 6 years on 1 charge and 4 on another he will actually only serve (in theory) 6, as the 4 will be running at the same time.

Bearing in mind that a prisoner is eligible to apply for parole after half of the sentence has been served. In the normal course of events (depending on the crime) and with them behaving well in prison, they will normally expect to get it. So someone who commits a fairly major fraud, can reasonably expect to get sentenced to 4 years, be out after 2 and for the last several months they would probably be going home for the weekend.

The subject obviously doesn't spur in you any creative spark.

Or maybe I'm just compelled to enlighten you lot.

[Mr JP Fugley]

Nah, it's just a non subject.

I don't see why there would be any distinction.