Imagine that you wake up one morning, turn on your computer, and open an e-mail message with a catchy phrase in the subject line. Immediately after opening the e-mail’s attachment, your personal computer is severely damaged. Obviously having a bad day, you head to your job as an attorney for a multinational corporation. By the time you arrive at work, there has been damage to company computers across the globe. The monetary costs of the damage, coupled with the downtime, are astronomical. The CEO of your company is furious. You hope to diffuse the situation by informing your boss that the person who released the virus has been apprehended. Unfortunately, soon after explaining the good news of the perpetrator’s capture, you learn that the individual, who admits involvement with the e-mail virus, will not be prosecuted in his home state because that state had no laws on the books outlawing his behavior at the time of the incident. In fact, none of the states where damage occurred will be able to prosecute because of lack of jurisdiction. The damage is done and the perpetrator is free.
In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty,
Rich. J.L. & Tech
Available at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol9/iss1/5