On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 03:40:58PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ snip ]
> (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....
there was a case here in new york about a person "borrowing" another
person's car at night, without the knowledge or consent of the
owner (no relationship between the two, BTW; literally strangers),
even putting gas in the car. (this was in the local paper only a couple
of weeks ago.)
the owner was confused at why the car seemed to be putting on excess
mileage with no explanation. the police staked out the car and caught
the "borrower". he _was_ charged with a crime (and will almost certainly
be convicted).
also, on the topic of 3rd-party liability, i think the lawS (plural)
are complex and multi-jurisdictional. even defining negligence/tort,
there's negligence, culpable/gross negligence, and, for the civil
arena, a construction known as "comparative negligence".
IANAL, but i've read about enough whacky decisions to believe that
it will be difficult or impossible (not to mention pointless) to
legally circumscribe net-connected behavior in this context.
--
Henry Yen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
netcom shell refugee '94. [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hicksville, New York
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
