(a) I seem to recall that a few years back, someplace in North
America actually passed this, or something like it, as explicit
legislation. It's not too far-fetched that a court could think the
same way.
[Note also that we're veering back and forth here across the line
between criminal culpability and civil liability -- two different
sets of rules that don't always align perfectly.]
(b) There was a recent (~6 months) decision in Georgia, specifically
about port-scanning/network probing, which could be interpreted
(reversing the analogy) as saying that if someone "borrows" your car,
and puts it back before you want to use it, then *they* have
committed no crime....
David Gillett
On 11 Jun 2001, at 13:01, Webmaster wrote:
> Ken,
> To clarify, you say that if I leave my keys in the car and the
> door unlocked and someone steals the car and kills someone with it,
> I'm partially liable? That's stretching it a bit...I think the
> burden should fall squarely on the shoulders of the person that
> stole the car. Please don't think that this means that *every*
> situation like this is the same. But I don't think we need to
> start putting the folks that can't remember to tie their shoes in
> jail...
> Michael Sorbera
> Webmaster
> Randolph-Brooks Federal Credit Union
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Claussen, Ken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Zachary Uram'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Young, Beth A.'"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 11:30 AM
> Subject: RE: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document
>
>
> > ***Disclaimer I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV****
> > First I agree with the author's perspective, people should be held
> > accountable for their actions, or inaction. My understanding of the
> article
> > was if you had the club on the car then you upheld the "reasonable
> > expectation" of personal protection and therefore would not be "Held
> > liable"(read negligent) in this case should a crime be committed. A better
> > analogy would be to say if you left the keys in the ignition and the door
> > unlocked and someone then used your vehicle to commit a "Hit and Run" that
> > there is a far greater likelihood your actions would be found negligent
> and
> > you could be held accountable. In other words if you provided easy access
> > to the "Weapon" for a third party, then you are as much as fault as the
> > person who committed the crime. Hence the potential to be charged as an
> > "accomplice" to a murder. Same applies to computers, if you enable "File
> and
> > Print sharing" and do not take measures to protect yourself, IE a Virus
> > scanner and/or (IMO both should be required) personal firewall then
> > essentially you have left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked.
> > Anyone for a joyride?
> >
> > Ken Claussen MCSE CCNA CCA
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "The Mind is a Terrible thing to Waste!"
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Zachary Uram
> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 10:59 AM
> > To: Young, Beth A.
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document
> >
> >
> > this is silly position but understandable considering we live in
> > most litigitous country in the world.
> > this is analogous to saying if you don't have "The Club" on your
> > car you are liable if someone steals it and commits a crime.
> >
> >
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have faith." - John 20:29
> >
> > -
> > [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
> > -
> > [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
