SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for FatPhil
Good news out of the Ninth Circuit: the federal court of appeals heeded EFF's advice and rejected an attempt by Oracle to hold a company criminally liable for accessing Oracle's website in a manner it didn't like. The court ruled back in 2012 that merely violating a website's terms of use is not a crime under the federal computer crime statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. But some companies, like Oracle, turned to state computer crime statutes—in this case, California and Nevada—to enforce their computer use preferences.
This decision shores up the good precedent from 2012 and makes clear—if it wasn't clear already—that violating a corporate computer use policy is not a crime.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ninth Circuit Doubles Down: Violating a Website’s Terms of Service Is Not a Crime
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 46 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
You are a fluke of the universe; you have no right to be here.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:21PM (3 children)
If you take that tact, then contract law means nothing; if there is no contract law, then there is no society—there is just "Might makes Right".
Caveat Emptor is the foundation of Civilization.
I never hear you folks arguing against the common notion that "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse, Citizen!" The same applies here; law by contracts is just as important (if not more) than law by legislation.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Arik on Thursday January 11 2018, @10:07PM (2 children)
I disagree. It's the tact of pretending contracts can be unilaterally imposed like this that effectively means contract law means nothing.
It's very important. And it's based on consent. Not unilateral imposition.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @10:11PM (1 child)
We seem to disagree on whether there is imposition; I disagree that there is such a thing.
Anyway, there are a number of comments in here that more or less capture my position, so I'll simply refer the reader to the rest of the discussion.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @01:52AM
Ignorance of the LAW is no excuse. Ignorance of a contract, means there is no contract! Come a little closer, AC, so I can violently imposition you, sans contract! Ah Ha, me mateys! Run up the Skull and Cross-bones! There be booty hereabout!