Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Broadened the definition of "protected computer" in 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2) to the full extent of Congress's commerce power by including those computers used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication; and; Provided a mechanism for civil and criminal forfeiture of property used in or derived from section 1030 violations.
More specifically, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2)(A) covered, generically, computers belonging to the United States Government or financial institutions, or those used by such entities on a non-exclusive basis if the conduct constituting the offense affected the Government's operation or the financial institution's operation of such computer.
In United States v.John, 597 F.3d 263 (2010) [1] United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit interpreted the term "exceeds authorized access" in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. §1030(e)(6) [2] and concluded that access to a computer may be exceeded if the purposes for which access has been given are exceeded.
The indictment charged both Riggs and Neidorf with seven violations of federal statutes: counts 1 and 2 alleged violations of 18 USC § 1343 [6] , counts 3 and 4 alleged violations of 18 USC § 2314 [7] (interstate transportation of stolen property), and counts 5-7 alleged violations of 18 USC § 1030 [8] (computer fraud and abuse).
In 1989, Morris was indicted for violating United States Code Title 18 (18 U.S.C. § 1030), the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). [1] He was the first person to be indicted under this act. In December 1990, he was sentenced to three years of probation, 400 hours of community service, and a fine of $10,050 plus the costs of his supervision.
Title 18 of the United States Code is the main criminal code of the federal government of the United States. [1] The Title deals with federal crimes and criminal procedure.In its coverage, Title 18 is similar to most U.S. state criminal codes, typically referred to by names such as Penal Code, Criminal Code, or Crimes Code. [2]
Van Buren v. United States, 593 U.S. 374 (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and its definition of "exceeds authorized access" in relation to one intentionally accessing a computer system they have authorization to access.
Ultimately, the Court ruled that the government’s argument failed to sufficiently meet the “exceeding authorized access” requirement of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(4) and granted the Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. [1] [2] This case is noteworthy because it followed the precedent established by the Ninth Circuit’s decision in United ...