Cyber Criminal

As reported by Reid Epstein in Newsday, a New York teenager has sued Facebook. Of course there will be a lot of furor over whether Facebook is liable for its content in this case. But, I want to focus on two related areas that I think are more important in the long run than any merits in this specific cyber bullying lawsuit.

The first area that I think is more important in the long run is the ongoing effort to make new laws in response to new crimes, especially using new technology. The natural way that we make new laws begins when some people commit acts not specifically covered under the old laws that have terrible consequences. We respond by specifically labeling those new actions as crimes, and attach what we feel are appropriate criminal penalties. Then we see, by trial-and-error, where to draw better lines. The legal system is inevitably slow, inefficient and never perfect.

Given the increasing number of lives ruined by cyber bullying, emotional harassment and abuse, especially in schools, and the number of suicides stimulated by cyber bullying, I think that our society will make laws specifically stating that false and malicious statements and postings, in addition to pornography, are illegal. I don’t think we’ll hold carriers like Facebook, MySpace, etc. liable for their postings. But I think we’ll hold them liable for ignoring complaints about specific chat groups and postings that they continue to carry.

Many states and school districts, including Kansas, Oregon and California are considering such laws to protect children and teenagers from cyber bullying.

One stumbling block in making such laws is where to draw the lines and the hidden assumption that cyberbullying laws can and should be made “just right” for all situations - never too lax, never too harsh. But the letter of the laws can never cover all situations with “just right” justice. We always depend on human wisdom in the law’s application to specific situations. That’s just the way it is - for better or for worse.

And I think that in this area, safety should triumph over cyber freedom.

The second area that I think is more important in the long run is parenting for the specific situations involving our kids and teenagers. Our job is to monitor our children:

1. Do they look like they’re having a hard time (maybe being attacked by cyberbullies)? How can we help them stop bullying on their own or do we need to intervene?

2. Are they witnessing cyber bullying and are they struggling to know whether or how to intervene?

3. Are they cyber bullies? How do we stop them and help them develop the character to make amends and do better next time?

4. Should they even be on MySpace or Facebook or any social networking sites? What else would be a better use of their time and energy?

And of course there are no easy answers. No one is really dumb enough to think there are easy solutions.

There are no safe environments. Schools and the real world have never been safe. Schools and social networks are testing grounds for the real world. And the real world is not and should not be safe. Facing risks and danger helps us develop good sense, good character and the qualities necessary to survive. Imagine growing up on a farm, in a wilderness village or in the middle ages. Not safe. I grew up in New York City. Not safe. Millennia ago we had to learn what a saber-toothed tiger’s foot prints looked like and how long ago they were left. The world still requires survival skills, even if different ones.

Our job as parents is to teach our children the skills and grit to survive in whichever jungle or battleground they live, and to protect them when they’re over-matched.

In a highly unusual use of a federal law in which legal experts describe as “creative” and “aggressive,” a St. Louis, Missouri woman has been indicted in what may be the country’s first case of cyber-bullying. Federal prosecutors say Lori Drew, 49, and others created an account on the social networking site MySpace pretending to be a 16-year-old boy to fool her neighbor, 13-year-old Megan Meier.

According to prosecutors, Drew used the MySpace account to establish a relationship with Meier, acting for weeks to be a boy interested in forming a romantic relationship her. A short time later, Drew suddenly ended the relationship, taunting Meier and telling her the world would be better off without her. Consequently, a distraught Meier committed suicide by hanging herself.

Drew is Arrested and Charged with a Crime

The federal indictment, which was delivered in Los Angeles after state prosecutors in Missouri declined to bring charges, is unprecedented, and legal commentators believe it may seriously stretch the federal statute on which it was based. The indictment charged that in violation of MySpace terms of service, “Drew and co-conspirators knowingly and agreed with each other to intentionally access a computer … to further a tortious act, namely, intentional infliction of emotion distress.” According to the prosecution, Drew violated MySpace’s terms by using a fictitious name, among other things, and thus had no authority to access the MySpace service.

“This adult woman allegedly used the Internet to target a young teenage girl, with horrendous ramifications,” said United States Attorney Thomas O’Brien. “Any adult who uses the Internet or a social-gathering website to harass or bully another person, particularly a young girl, must realize their actions can have serious consequences.”

The Unprecedented Charges may Create a New Realm of Cases

The case presents a new wrinkle in the interpretation of federal law. Legal experts warned that such an interpretation could criminalize routine behavior on the internet. After all, people regularly create accounts or post information under aliases for many legitimate reasons, including avoiding spam and a desire to maintain their privacy online.

This new interpretation also gives a business contract the force of a law: violations of a web site’s terms of service could now lead to criminal sanctions, instead of just civil lawsuits or ejection from a site.

“I think the danger of applying a statute in this way is that it could have unintended consequences,” said John Palfrey, a Harvard law professor. “An application of a general statute like this might result in chilling a great deal of online speech and other freedom.” Drew is scheduled to be arraigned in St. Louis but the trial will be held in Los Angeles were MySpace is headquartered. If convicted of the charges, Drew faces up to 20 years in prison.

Litigation process in India is mainly based on the common law and it is largely based on the common English law due to the long period of British colonial influence in India. The litigation services India includes a single hierarchy of courts and much of the contemporary India law depicts substantial American and European influence. Each state in India has its own laws of litigation may it be property litigation India, civil matters India, intellectual property matters India or any other matters, but these laws have the same background and working process with a minor differences.

There are several professionals who can help you with litigation matters in India. These professional services can help you throughout the country regarding civil, corporate or criminal matters. These professions are well experienced in conducting huge and complex corporate litigation matters in the country. Regarding criminal matters India these professionals can handle all the criminal writs including writs to quash bail matters or FIR in the India high court. These professional can also handle civil matters India in which the services offered are recovery of suits, stay and injunction, property related matters, will, and several other matters. Additionally you can even avail intellectual property litigation India services where these professional would easily handle copyrights, piracy, raids, Anton pillar and seizure actions, civil injunctions and other related intellectual property matters India services. Therefore regarding any corporate litigation India matters you have make sure to consult the right professional who has probably worked in India Court litigation services so that you avail the right and legal services.

In a highly unusual use of a federal law in which legal experts describe as “creative” and “aggressive,” a St. Louis, Missouri woman has been indicted in what may be the country’s first case of cyber-bullying. Federal prosecutors say Lori Drew, 49, and others created an account on the social networking site MySpace pretending to be a 16-year-old boy to fool her neighbor, 13-year-old Megan Meier.

According to prosecutors, Drew used the MySpace account to establish a relationship with Meier, acting for weeks to be a boy interested in forming a romantic relationship her. A short time later, Drew suddenly ended the relationship, taunting Meier and telling her the world would be better off without her. Consequently, a distraught Meier committed suicide by hanging herself.

Drew is Arrested and Charged with a Crime

The federal indictment, which was delivered in Los Angeles after state prosecutors in Missouri declined to bring charges, is unprecedented, and legal commentators believe it may seriously stretch the federal statute on which it was based. The indictment charged that in violation of MySpace terms of service, “Drew and co-conspirators knowingly and agreed with each other to intentionally access a computer … to further a tortious act, namely, intentional infliction of emotion distress.” According to the prosecution, Drew violated MySpace’s terms by using a fictitious name, among other things, and thus had no authority to access the MySpace service.

“This adult woman allegedly used the Internet to target a young teenage girl, with horrendous ramifications,” said United States Attorney Thomas O’Brien. “Any adult who uses the Internet or a social-gathering website to harass or bully another person, particularly a young girl, must realize their actions can have serious consequences.”

The Unprecedented Charges may Create a New Realm of Cases

The case presents a new wrinkle in the interpretation of federal law. Legal experts warned that such an interpretation could criminalize routine behavior on the internet. After all, people regularly create accounts or post information under aliases for many legitimate reasons, including avoiding spam and a desire to maintain their privacy online.

This new interpretation also gives a business contract the force of a law: violations of a web site’s terms of service could now lead to criminal sanctions, instead of just civil lawsuits or ejection from a site.

“I think the danger of applying a statute in this way is that it could have unintended consequences,” said John Palfrey, a Harvard law professor. “An application of a general statute like this might result in chilling a great deal of online speech and other freedom.” Drew is scheduled to be arraigned in St. Louis but the trial will be held in Los Angeles were MySpace is headquartered. If convicted of the charges, Drew faces up to 20 years in prison.