Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, or FERA, Pub. L. 111–21 (text), S. 386, 123 Stat. 1617, enacted May 20, 2009, is a public law in the United States enacted in 2009. The law enhanced criminal enforcement of federal fraud laws, especially regarding financial institutions, mortgage fraud, and securities fraud or commodities fraud.
Both of those sections were inserted by section 1(1) of the Theft (Amendment) Act 1996. Section 15A was repealed on 15 January 2007 [1] by sections 14(1) and (3) and 15(1) of, and paragraph 1(a)(ii) of Schedule 1 to, and Schedule 3 to, the Fraud Act 2006, subject to transitional provisions and savings in paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 to that Act.
This offence replaced the offence of obtaining credit by fraud, contrary to section 13(1) of the Debtors Act 1869. [4] The elements of the actus reus are similar to the offence of obtaining property by deception: There must be a deception. This has the same meaning as for section 15 (according to section 16(3) of the Theft Act 1968).
In United States of America v.Aaron Swartz, Aaron Swartz, an American computer programmer, writer, political organizer and Internet activist, was prosecuted for multiple violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA), after downloading academic journal articles through the MIT computer network from a source for which he had an account as a Harvard research fellow.
(a) Whoever— (1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or any restricted data ...
A pension manager in Maynard, Mass., faces felony theft charges for the second time in just months. On Tuesday, Timothy McDaid (pictured, left) was charged with stealing $521,000 from
In 1996 the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act was amended again to clarify the intent problems that made up the majority of U.S. v. Morris. The adverbs "knowingly" and "intentionally" were inserted in more places in the statute, in an attempt to make litigation with the law simpler in the future. [12]
[14] [15] Federal prosecutors, led by Carmen Ortiz, later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, [16] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release. [17]