Constitution

• 1st Amendment Searches and seizures involving First Amendment issues receive extra protection.
• 4th Amendment Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• 4th Amendment
• 5th Amendment Due process.
• 5th Amendment

 

Cases

• Boucher v. Sch. Bd. Of The Sch. Dist. Of Greenfield (7th Cir., January 9, 1998). Boucher does not contend that the article was intended merely as some sort of parody of anarchist high school hackers--a defense that might have been more promising than the ones offered. Instead, spiced with warnings, emphasizing stealth, the article's agenda is palpably transgressive.
• Burden v. State Of Texas No 1698-99 (Tex. Crim. App. September 20, 2001) Where the defendant fails to show a reasonable degree of community acceptance of purportedly obscene internet images, the trial court does not err in excluding proffered evidence and testimony that the images are easily accessible.
• Chen v. State Of Texas No. 656-00 (Tex. Crim. App. April 11, 2001) A 47 year old male undercover officer posing as a 13 year old female on the Internet established sufficient evidence, as a matter of law, to support a conviction for the offense of attempted sexual performance on a child under Texas Penal Code section 43.25(b).
• Fraser v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. 135 F. Supp. 2d 623 (ED Pa. 2001) Federal and state wiretapping acts, the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act do not cover retrieval of a person's e-mail from post-transmission storage, because the laws protect only communication in the course of transmission.
• Guest v. Leis Nos. 99-4115, 99-4176 (6th Cir. July 2, 2001) Government officials have Eleventh Amendment immunity from liability for seizure of materials commingled on a criminal suspect's computer with allegedly criminal evidence despite the Privacy Protection Act, 42 USC 2000aa(a), and third-party standing under the Fourth Amendment.
• Jacobson v. U.S. 503 U.S. 540 (1992) Prosecution failed, as a matter of law, to adduce evidence to support the jury verdict that Jacobson was predisposed, independent of the Government's acts and beyond a reasonable doubt, to violate the law by receiving child pornography through the mails.
• Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton 413 U.S. 49 (1973) States have a legitimate interest in regulating commerce in obscene material and its exhibition in places of public accommodation, including "adult" theaters.
• People v. Kurey 88 Cal.App.4th 840 (2001) Testimony that actors in downloaded computer clip "appeared" to be minors is admissible to establish that the actors in the clip were actually minors to support a child pornography conviction.
• Reno v. ACLU (96-511, 26 June 1997) Communications Decency Act declared unconstitutional.
• State Of Washington v. Townsend No. 19304-7-III (Wash. Ct. App. April 5, 2001) Law enforcement officers do not violate the Washington Privacy Act, RCW 9.73.030(1) a), by storing or printing email messages and ICQ discussions for use as evidence, because the nature of email demands storage on a hard drive and because the ICQ privacy policy warns users not to use the software if they do not want to risk exposure of the communication.
• State v. Glas No. 19111-7-III (Wash.App. Div. 3 Jul 05, 2001) Washington's voyeurism statute, RCW 9A.44.115, prohibiting photography without consent, is neither vague nor overbroad when applied to taking pictures up women's skirts at a public shopping mall without the women's knowledge.
• State v. Munguia No. 17721-1-III, 2001 WL 812130 (Wash.App. Div. 3 July 19, 2001) Evidence that victim visited homosexual Internet sites is not admissible to establish, in support of self-defense theory, that victim had attempted a sexual assault on 14-year- old boy and had attacked defendant when defendant allegedly intervened.
• Steve Jackson Games v. U.S. Secret Serv. (5th Cir. 1994) seizure of computer used to operate electronic bulletin board system and containing private electronic mail did not constitute unlawful intercept under the Federal Wiretap Act.
• Steve Jackson Games v. U.S. Secret Serv. (W.D. Texas, 1993) Awarding damages and attorney fees for Secret Service raid on BBS that violated Privacy Protection and Stored Wire Acts.
• U.S. v. Aguilar 515 U.S. 593 (1995) Affirming a defendant United States District Judge's conviction for illegally disclosing a wiretap.
• U.S. v. Czubinski (1st Cir. February 21, 1997) Unauthorized browsing of taxpayer files, although certainly inappropriate conduct, cannot, without more, sustain this federal felony conviction under the wire and computer fraud statutes.
• U.S. v. Jake Baker, 890 F. Supp. 1375 (E.D. Mich. 1995) The government's enthusiastic beginning petered out to a salvage effort once it recognized that the communication which so much alarmed the University of Michigan officials was only a rather savage and tasteless piece of fiction.
• U.S. v. Sablan (9th Cir., August 7, 1996). Sablan must have had a wrongful intent in accessing the computer in order to be convicted under the statute. . . . Therefore, we hold that the computer fraud statute's mens rea requirement is sufficient to meet constitutional standards.
• U.S. v. Thomas (6th Cir. 1996) denial of appeal of convictions and sentences for violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 1462 and 1465 , federal obscenity laws, in connection with their operation of an electronic bulletin board.
• US v. Alkhabaz 104 F. 3d 1492 (6th Cir. 1997) The "Jake Baker" case.
• US v. Boudreau 250 F.3d 282 (5th Cir. April 26, 2001) Where defendant's conviction was for possession of magazines containing child pornography, and the possession of this material did not result from his use of a computer, under the narrow scope of § 2G2.4(a) 3), the term "offense" did not include relevant conduct and the district court may not enhance the sentence by two levels based upon his concurrent possession of the computer images.
• US v. Brown No. 99-1323 (6th Cir. January 16, 2001) U.S.S.G. 2G2.1(b) 3) is not limited in scope to those situations where a defendant uses a computer to specifically ask minors to engage in sexually-explicit conduct, but may be applied where defendant uses the computer to desensitize his victims to deviant sexual activity by showing them images of other children engaged in sexually explicit conduct.
• US v. Farner No. 00-20424 (5th Cir. May 14, 2001) Where defendant intended to entice a minor to engage in sexual acts, the fact that he was corresponding with an adult FBI agent posing as a minor does not make the crime legally impossible, but only factually impossible.
• US v. Grimes No. 00-40495 (5th Cir. March 7, 2001) A computer repair technician who discovers images of child pornography while conducting otherwise routine maintenance is not a government actor, so Fourth Amendment protections do not apply, and spouse's consent to delete files from the hard drive waives defendant's expectation of privacy.
• US v. Hay 231 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 2000) Evidence that defendant's Internet address was used to access electronic materials depicting child pornography via file transfer protocol is sufficient to support a search warrant for child pornography on defendant's computer.
• US v. Lyckman No. 99-40982 (5th Cir. November 7, 2000) Trading child pornography files over the Internet satisfies the definition of "distribution" within Sentencing Guidelines 2G2.2(b) 2), because "pecuniary gain" is not limited to money but is an elastic concept that may include barter.
• US v. Meienberg No. 00-1390 (10th Cir. August 27, 2001) Printouts of preexisting records that happened to be stored on a computer are not the result of a "process or system used to produce a result" such that Fed. R. Evid. 901(b) 9) requires demonstrating the accuracy of the information contained in the printouts.
• US v. Middleton 231 F.3d 1207 (9th Cir. 2000) 18 USC 1030(e)( 8)(A), which prohibits intentionally causing damage to "one or more individuals" who own a "protected computer," protects corporations as well as natural persons.
• US v. Pirello 255 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. June 20, 2001) A two-level sentence enhancement for using mass-marketing to commit wire fraud under USSG 2F1.1(b) 3) may apply to a defendant who uses Internet advertisements to commit the fraud.
• US v. Reaves No 00-8026 (10th Cir. June 15, 2001) USSG 2G2.1(b) 3), enhancement for the use of a computer to solicit child participation in sex and pornography, applies to use of a computer to lure or entice participation, not just use of a computer to solicit participation.
• US v. Saldolsky No. No. 98-00168 (6th Cir. December 11, 2000) District court can grant a two-level downward departure under USSG 5K2.13, following defendant's computer fraud conviction under 18 USC 1030(a) 4), based upon defendant's alleged gambling disorder.
• US v. Simmonds No 00-40496 (5th Cir. August 16, 2001) "Distribution" of child pornography over the Internet under Sentencing Guideline § 2G2.4(b)( 2) does not require a defendant to have received something of value, pecuniary or non-pecuniary, in exchange for the child pornography.
• US v. White No. 00-2318 (10th Cir. March 27, 2001) Under 18 USC 3553(a), a court may not impose, as a condition of supervised release, a restriction on possession of a computer with Internet access, where defendant was convicted of only one count of ordering child pornography over the Internet.
• US. v. Han No. 99-1759 (2d Cir. October 31, 2000) The defendant crossed state lines to meet with someone he believed to be under 18, in violation of 18 USC 2423(b).
• Voyeur Dorm, L.C. v. City Of Tampa, Florida No 00-16346 (11th Cir. September 21, 2001) Tampa City Code 27-523, which regulates adult businesses, applies only to locations or premises where adult entertainment is actually offered to the public, not where such entertainment can be viewed in other locations via the Internet.
• Watts v. U.S. 394 U.S. 705 (1969) Threats made against the President under 18 U.S.C. § 871(a) must be interpreted with the commands of the First Amendment clearly in mind. What is a threat must be distinguished from what is constitutionally protected speech.

 

Statutes

• 18 U.S.C. § 2314 Transportation, transmission or transfer of stolen goods, securities, moneys, fraudulent State tax stamps, or articles used in counterfeiting.
• 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) Interstate communications. (c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
• 18 USC § 2251-2258 Sexual exploitation and other abuse of children.
• 1994 Wiretap Statute (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)) 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2522 Prohibiting private wiretaps, providing criminal penalties and requiring telecom company cooperation with federal government wiretapping activities.
• Arms Export Control Act 22 U.S.C. § 2778 Control of arms exports and imports.
• Child Pornography Statute 18 U.S.C. § 2252 Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors.
• Communications Decency Act of 1996 (overturned)
• Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. § 1030 Fraud and related activity in connection with computers.
• Credit Card Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. § 1029 Fraud and related activity in connection with access devices.
• Economic Espionage and Protection of Trade Secrets Law Pub. L. No. 104-294, 110 Stat. 3488 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1831 et seq.) (1996).
• Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 U.S.C. §§2701-2711 Unlawful access to stored communications (a/k/a the "Stored Wire Act").
• Federal Wire Fraud Act 18 U.S.C. § 1343 Fraud by wire, radio, or television.
• Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 50 U.S.C. §§1801-1811 Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court.
• Mailing of Child Pornography See 18 U.S.C. § 1461, Mailing obscene or crime-inciting matter.
• Military Export Control 22 U.S.C., Chapter 39.
• National Stolen Property Act 18 U.S.C. §§ 2311-2322
• Notice of Certain Electronic Surveillance 18 U.S.C. § 2232(c) Criminalizing attempts to give notice of federal government wiretaps.
• Obscene or Harassing Telephone Calls 47 U.S.C. § 223 Includes domestic and international call that are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, indecent; anonymous calls with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass; causing the phone of another to repeatedly ring with intent to harass; repeated telephone calls, during which conversation ensues, and; persons who knowingly permit any telephone facility under their control to be used for any purpose prohibited by this section.
• Obscenity 18 U.S.C., Chapter 71
• Privacy Protection Act 42 U.S.C. §2000aa Unlawful acts - searches and seizures by government officers and employees in connection with investigation or prosecution of criminal offenses.
• Transportation of Obscene Matter for Sale or Distribution 18 U.S.C. § 1465
• Wire or Radio Communication 47 U.S.C., Chapter 5

Cases

• Guest v. Leis Nos. 99-4115, 99-4176 (6th Cir. July 2, 2001) Government officials have Eleventh Amendment immunity from liability for seizure of materials commingled on a criminal suspect's computer with allegedly criminal evidence despite the Privacy Protection Act, 42 USC 2000aa(a), and third-party standing under the Fourth Amendment.

• Intel Corp. v. Hamidi Opinions in case involving Intel Corporation's lawsuit against a former employee.
• Snowden v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc. 237 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 2001) Computer manufacturer failed to demonstrate a "pattern of racketeering" because even if it could prove that defendant stole computer chips intended for interstate commerce, ex post facto application of copyright laws is no more appropriate as a second predicate act than speculation about subsequent chip shortages or assumed use of the chips in defendant's personal computers.
• Southwestern Bell v. Brooks Fiber Communications No 99-5222 (10th Cir. December 13, 2000) Under 47 U.S.C. 251(b) 5) of the Telecommunications Act, telephone calls to an Internet Service Providers are local calls subject to reciprocal compensation from local exchange carriers.
• State v. Munguia No. 17721-1-III, 2001 WL 812130 (Wash.App. Div. 3 July 19, 2001) Evidence that victim visited homosexual Internet sites is not admissible to establish, in support of self-defense theory, that victim had attempted a sexual assault on 14-year- old boy and had attacked defendant when defendant allegedly intervened.
• Supreme Court Decisions Oral Arguments and Summaries Real Audio recordings of the oral arguments in key Supreme Court Decisions.
• U.S. v. Jake Baker From Cyberlaw. Case regarding transmission of threats via the internet.
• U.S. v. Lamacchia Wire fraud and copyright violation in connection with offering a site to download commercial software for free.
• Voyeur Dorm, L.C. v. City Of Tampa, Florida No 00-16346 (11th Cir. September 21, 2001) Tampa City Code 27-523, which regulates adult businesses, applies only to locations or premises where adult entertainment is actually offered to the public, not where such entertainment can be viewed in other locations via the Internet.
• Zepeda v. Zepeda 2001 SD 101 (S.D. August 1, 2001) Engaging in "cybersex" outside the presence of the child is not itself grounds for denying child custody.

 

Other Government Documents

• GAO REPORT Recent data suggest that the DOD may have experienced as many as 250,000 attacks last year. These attacks are often successful.
• Computer Hacker Information Available Computer security and hacker information available on the Internet.

Statutes

• Child Pornography Statute 18 USC §2252 et seq.
• Children's Internet Protection Act Pub. L. 106-554 Affecting application of the federal e-rate program, 47 USC §243.
• Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 USC §1030 Fraud and related activity in connection with computers.
• Credit Card Abuse 18 USC §1029 (1991).
• Economic Espionage and Protection of Trade Secrets Law Pub. L. No. 104-294 (codified at 18 USC §§1831 et seq.) (1996).
• Federal Wiretap Act 18 USC 1343.
• Telecommunications Act of 1996 Text of the law, regulations and related materials.
• Transportation of Obscene Matter for Sale or Distribution 18 USC §1465.