US Govt Pursue UK hacker

[Rodion Romanovich]

Of course I took it serious - however you are missing the point the admission of guilt alreadly takes presedence over all other evidence.

I was discussing what laws should exist for such cases more than the specific case.

The scenerio you are attempting to paint would still find the individual facing the consequences of his own acts. Hacking into secure systems - even those with a paper door security - is still an illegal activity.

Only when the communication can be clearly distinguished from normal usage or accidents. And when we're discussing how laws should be, we need to find a clear definition on exactly where the line is drawn. Given that it appeared that several drew their line were vaguely, I pointed out the inner workings of computer networks and the legal necessity of clearly drawn lines. Not until a technical description of something that showed the difference was provided, was anything really found that could differentiate the two cases from both a legal and computer engineering point of view.

In bold is what several posters have stated. The evidence warrants futher review and possible trail - which is what the English Judge in essence stated.

Yes, and that's why I find it quite funny that they, unlike you, responded to my posts with flaming instead of answering my question Quite strange, considering their opinion was almost the same as mine, but they tried as hard as they could to interpret it differently and ignored most of what I wrote.

[Redleg]

I was discussing what laws should exist for such cases more than the specific case.

The prosecution could not proceed without laws alreadly having been established.

Only when the communication can be clearly distinguished from normal usage or accidents. And when we're discussing how laws should be, we need to find a clear definition on exactly where the line is drawn. Given that it appeared that several drew their line were vaguely, I pointed out the inner workings of computer networks and the legal necessity of clearly drawn lines. Not until a technical description of something that showed the difference was provided, was anything really found that could differentiate the two cases from both a legal and computer engineering point of view.

That is what the legal process is for, the process seems to be working correctly in this individuals case. An allegation of wrong doing has occured, the legal process has been started, and now it will go to trail to determine if there was a clear crossing of the legal boundries. I would find more credence with your argument if he was not being charged under existing statues (SP)

Yes, and that's why I find it quite funny that they, unlike you, responded to my posts with flaming instead of answering my question Quite strange, considering their opinion was almost the same as mine, but they tried as hard as they could to interpret it differently and ignored most of what I wrote.

Happens more then we like..

[Rodion Romanovich]

The prosecution could not proceed without laws alreadly having been established.

That is true, but only half the truth. In computer related and other fast changing businesses there are seldom specially designed laws to fully cover up the fast changes, so then they often have to stick to old laws in many situations. From the start of the discussion it seemed likely that there could have been such problems in this particular case, but given more facts it doesn't seem to apply. Still, an important point to remember: that in some cases no longer modern laws can end up having to be applied. In some cases of unmodern laws the old laws are even ignored or considered invalid, did you for example know that in some countries there are still laws from the Medieval period about nobles, swords, horse theft and so on? Not many people take those laws seriously these days