<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Cybercrime Law</title>
	<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org</link>
	<description>News and analysis on cybercrime, information security and information privacy legal and technological issues.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:37:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>CFAA Damages Includes Cost of Tracking Hacker</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/30/cfaa-lost-includes-tracking-of-hacker/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Courts split on whether making a copyrighted song available for download violates copyright law.</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/27/courts-split-on-whether-making-a-copyrighted-song-available-for-download-violates-copyright-law/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>How to Respond to Data Breach</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/25/how-to-respond-to-data-breach/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Border Agents Can Search Laptops</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/04/22/border-agents-can-search-laptops/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>What is your return address?</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2008/03/27/what-is-your-return-address/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Proposed FRE 502 is good for electronic discovery, but it is not going to drastically reduce the cost of litigation as the authors are hoping.</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Proposed rule FRE 502&#8217;s goal is to limit the possible waiver of privileged attorney-client and attorney work-product material, but the underlying drive behind the amendment is to reduce the cost of electronic discovery.&#160;More specifically, the bill aims to reduce the costs of pouring over each document, file and email to determine whether that data contains [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2007/12/16/proposed-fre-502-is-good-for-electronic-discovery-but-it-is-not-going-to-drastically-reduce-the-cost-of-litigation-as-the-authors-are-hoping/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>British Authorities: Insult to Injury</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I resisted writing about the British Tax Authorities&#8217; blunder disclosed last week when they lost two CDs full of sensitive information (bank accounts and social benefits information) of 25 million UK families.&#160; The story received enough mainstream press attention and I was afraid that many of our readers are starting to suffer from &#34;breach fatigue&#34; [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2007/11/28/british-authorities-insult-to-injury/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Introduction to James Paulick</title>
		<description><![CDATA[James Paulick, currently pursuing a Juris Doctor decree at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, will be joining us in writing and contributing to this site.&#160; James received his Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from Wheeling Jesuit University and his interests include digital evidence reliability in cybercrimes and property rights in virtual words.&#160;
We are happy [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2007/11/27/introduction-to-james-paulick/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>TXJ Costs Continue Increasing</title>
		<description><![CDATA[We wrote in May, under the title &#34;Cost of Insecurity&#34; about TJX Companies&#8217; costs in connection with the security breach suffered in 2003/2004.&#160; In a footnote in its November 13 earnings announcement (Edgar report), TXJ increased its estimate of pre-tax charges for the credit card breach to $216 million (compare with the August estimate of [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2007/11/15/txj-costs-continue-increasing/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Proposed Amendments to Section 1030</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Many of our readers know that the principal cybercrime statute in the United States is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030.&#160; It has served well over the years since enaction but some prosecutors (and civil plaintiffs to which it also applies) have complained that it does not keep up with newer types [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.cybercrimelaw.org/2007/11/09/proposed-amendments-to-section-1030/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
