<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Cybercrime Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org</link>
	<description>News and analysis on cybercrime, information security and information privacy legal and technological issues.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Down State&#8217;s Anti-Spam Law</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/09/12/virginia-supreme-court-strikes-down-states-anti-spam-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/09/12/virginia-supreme-court-strikes-down-states-anti-spam-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Email]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Law & Policy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/09/12/virginia-supreme-court-strikes-down-states-anti-spam-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This just in, from the Washington Post.
&#34;The Virginia Supreme Court today invalidated the state&#8217;s &#34;anti-spam&#34; law, designed to prevent the sending of masses of unwanted e-mail, by saying the law broadly violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, in particular anonymous speech.&#34;
The Virginia spam law makes it a misdemeanor to send unsolicited bulk [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/09/12/virginia-supreme-court-strikes-down-states-anti-spam-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Travelers&#8217; Laptops May Be Detained At Border</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/08/01/travelers-laptops-may-be-detained-at-border/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/08/01/travelers-laptops-may-be-detained-at-border/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/08/01/travelers-laptops-may-be-detained-at-border/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Washington Post:

Federal agents may take a traveler&#8217;s laptop or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed.
Also, officials may share copies of the laptop&#8217;s contents with other agencies and private [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/08/01/travelers-laptops-may-be-detained-at-border/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>File Sharing Data Breach</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/07/09/file-sharing-data-breach/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/07/09/file-sharing-data-breach/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Breaches]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/07/09/file-sharing-data-breach/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We have written in the past of the dangers of file sharing not so much from copyright prosecution point (although the dangers are real) but so much from having the file sharing software &#34;incidentally&#34; share files located on the networked computer.&#160;&#160; A high-profile data breach from the Washington, DC area confirms the dangers.&#160; The case [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/07/09/file-sharing-data-breach/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No download? Maybe no infringement in another Federal District Court</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/19/no-download-maybe-no-infringement-in-another-federal-district-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/19/no-download-maybe-no-infringement-in-another-federal-district-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 12:50:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>James Paulick</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/19/no-download-maybe-no-infringement-in-another-federal-district-court/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
This article is related to a prior post, found here:&#160;Courts split
&#160;
&#160;In another blow to the recording industry, a Federal District Court Judge in the District of Minnesota in Capitol Records, Inc. v. Jammie Thomas, has granted a new trial in a copyright infringement case stating that his jury instruction was in error when he stated [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/19/no-download-maybe-no-infringement-in-another-federal-district-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CAN-SPAM Rules Modified</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/13/can-spam-rules-modified/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/13/can-spam-rules-modified/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 12:48:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Email]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/13/can-spam-rules-modified/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, May 12th, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a new rule under the CAN-SPAM Act.&#160; The new rule seeks to clarify some of the requirements CAN-SPAM imposes on senders of bulk email.&#160;

First, an E-mail recipient cannot be required by the sender to pay a fee, supply any information other E-mail address and opt-out&#160; preference, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/05/13/can-spam-rules-modified/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CFAA Damages Calculation Includes Cost of Tracking Hacker</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/30/cfaa-lost-includes-tracking-of-hacker/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/30/cfaa-lost-includes-tracking-of-hacker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:36:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[1030]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Breaches]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Forensics]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[cfaa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/30/cfaa-lost-includes-tracking-of-hacker/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California held that the costs associated with the tracking and discovery of the identity of the person who stole proprietary information from a company does constitute &#34;loss&#34; for the purposes of calculation of damages under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).
The dispute [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/30/cfaa-lost-includes-tracking-of-hacker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Courts split on whether making a copyrighted song available for download violates copyright law.</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/27/courts-split-on-whether-making-a-copyrighted-song-available-for-download-violates-copyright-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/27/courts-split-on-whether-making-a-copyrighted-song-available-for-download-violates-copyright-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 16:22:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>James Paulick</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/27/courts-split-on-whether-making-a-copyrighted-song-available-for-download-violates-copyright-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;&#160;&#160; A recent pair of federal district court decisions  are split on whether making copyrighted songs available for download violates copyright laws even when there is no proof that the copyrighted works were ever downloaded under 17 U.S.C.A. Sec. 106.&#160; An original article on this news is here:&#160;&#160;&#160; http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/high_tech/1700//04-04-2008/20080404145001_26.html.&#160; The two cases are:&#160; Elektra [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/27/courts-split-on-whether-making-a-copyrighted-song-available-for-download-violates-copyright-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Respond to Data Breach</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/25/how-to-respond-to-data-breach/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/25/how-to-respond-to-data-breach/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 20:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Breaches]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Forensics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/25/how-to-respond-to-data-breach/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Data breaches happen every day and, unfortunately, we are getting so used to hearing news about the most recent breach that it no longer creates an interesting report.&#160; Most businesses of any significance will, soon or later, become a victim of some sort of breach.&#160; So the question becomes not whether you will suffer a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/25/how-to-respond-to-data-breach/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Border Agents Can Search Laptops</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/22/border-agents-can-search-laptops/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/22/border-agents-can-search-laptops/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Forensics]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Law & Policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/22/border-agents-can-search-laptops/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We have written in the past about the freedom of border agents to search laptops at the border crossing points.
A new opinion (PDF) in United States v. Arnold by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dated April 21, 2008, confirms this trend by holding that customs officers may examine electronic contents of a passenger&#8217;s laptop [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/22/border-agents-can-search-laptops/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is your return address?</title>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/03/27/what-is-your-return-address/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/03/27/what-is-your-return-address/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dm</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Breaches]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Email]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/03/27/what-is-your-return-address/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many emails happily reach their final and intended destination.&#160; But there are some emails which arrive where they are not intended to. There are two recent stories which suggest not only how people should be careful what the &#34;TO:&#34; field in their email says, but also use some common sense.&#160;
The first story is about the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/03/27/what-is-your-return-address/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
