Attack on my software forum - reason PFF was closed for a while (Page 16/19) atleastitruns FEB 11, 10:50 PM http://www.rechtspraak.nl/I...+English/default.htm Info on the Dutch Judiciary System. From what I've read, it's a HUGE web of intersecting laws and other fun stuff. European law takes precedence over national laws, and treaties do too. All in all, I think a lawyer would be the best bet. They know their stuff! Janell Unsafe At Any Speed FEB 11, 11:07 PM quote Originally posted by atleastitruns: http://www.rechtspraak.nl/I...+English/default.htm Info on the Dutch Judiciary System. From what I've read, it's a HUGE web of intersecting laws and other fun stuff. European law takes precedence over national laws, and treaties do too. All in all, I think a lawyer would be the best bet. They know their stuff! Janell Regardless, there's no way Cliff would be able to make Aaron or anyone else appear in court in the Netherlands over this. That's all I was saying. Pursuit of it here is the only possibility that I see. topcat FEB 12, 04:45 AM quote Originally posted by Unsafe At Any Speed: Regardless, there's no way Cliff would be able to make Aaron or anyone else appear in court in the Netherlands over this. That's all I was saying. Pursuit of it here is the only possibility that I see. You are right in that Cliff can not make them appear, but the law might require them to appear... but all of this is speculation and a lawyer will be able to answer all of the questions. My offer to pitch in to help with legal fees is still there. tjm4fun FEB 12, 06:38 PM Just a sidenote, alot of people have said these kids have no assets, so you can;t get anything. wrong. they have parents. under 21, their parents are still legally and finacially liable for the actions of their children. so if you were to sue them and win in civil court, their assests and those of their parents can be siezed or held in escrow for payment. That is the sad state of legality now in th US. for example, those that have their kids get their own car insurance so if they have an accident the parents won't be liable are not gaining anything. if they kid gets sued due to an accident, after the insurance max is reached, they will go after the parent's assets and win. Explain that to your kids. As for a first approach, all the isp's must be notified wiht the info, you don;t need a lawyer for that. The isp will create an incident/case file, and Cliff should be advised of what their findings are and any actions taken. that will be required to persue this further as that will now bring an outside "witness" into the case and provide a level of proof for Cliff so that it doesn;t turn into a he said/they said thing. Unsafe At Any Speed FEB 13, 01:25 AM I was thinking about this whole deal in my Administrative Law class today. Unless Cliff can prove that he was injured (i.e.- lost money, etc) the court probably won't do anything civily because the case would lack standing. From what he's said, that hasn't neccesarily happened yet. This is not to say, that criminal charges would not be able to be brought though. At that point, it would be out of Cliff's hands. I don't know though, just some thoughts.\ But since I have a red bar and offered a possibly discouraging thought, I'll probably get negged. Ravant FEB 14, 05:54 AM I know I'm new here, so I really don't have much pull, but for what its worth, I can hope to add my $0.02 and maybe help out as much as possible. Using the term 'hacking' is a very touchy subject in the world of computer science and systems security. Not all 'hackers' are also 'crackers'. For example, I am applying to take my Ethical Hacker Certification before the end of this year. Most 'hackers' are hired by large companies to find exploits, holes in security, and potential misuses of software such as we've seen on Cliff's other set of forums. The malicious misuse of the software would be correctly coined as 'cracking', and would therefore be a crime in at least 17 states in the US. There are more anti-cracking and internet-libel laws appearing across the country. Because the attack consisted of a drawn-out, thought-out process that will have taken at least a couple of hours to accomplish, the intent for malicious misuse of the software becomes self-evident. And because there is evidence of the intent of malicious use, a criminal 'cracking' case can be made. Combine this with the libel-wrought message that was spammed as a result of the alleged attackers' use of the private message system, and you have both criminal and civil suits available. In fact, my System Security class I took (I'm a computer science major, intending on grad school to follow through with Artificial Intelligence design.), provided a scenario eerily similar to the one presented to Mr. Pennock. Let me use the question right out of the hand-out given by my professor. "A small business, 'Home Design Solutions', emerges in your area. They are a business specializing in home automation networks. They set up both a server for connections to home security systems and optional exterior home surveillance, and a webserver. Their website has a few different pages, as well as a web forum for technical support. A malicious user, known as a 'misfeasor', gains a legitimate account on the server, and uses his newfound account priveledges to send a libelous message to every customer on the accounts list, claiming 'Home Design Solutions' uses the surveillance cameras contained in their optional package to look into customers' private rooms in the home. The result is a 40% decrease in sales, and the loss of 15% of the customer-base. This misfeasor is punishable by: " And there are four answers given in multiple choice format: A) Civil lawsuit only B) Criminal case only C) Both A and B D) None of the above. According to my professor, the answer was C. While the above seems to probably have trivialized the whole situation, and I apologize for how it is coming across, I'm trying to bring out a point. The point being: Mr. Pennock's situation is not unique in how he has been attacked. If it was common enough to have been given on a quiz in a small college's computer securities course, it's probably happened in the past to other companies. And if it has happened to other companies, and they have decided to persue the case, there is probably going to be precidents on file with the court systems. Also, judging by how widespread of a problem 'crackers' actually are, there are probably court precidents surrounding this situation worldwide. That is a huge generalization for me to be making, I understand that. And I probably shouldn't. But again, it is to bring out the point. The kids that pulled this stunt give the term 'hacker' a bad name, and as a result, give anyone under the age of 25 who know a thing or two about programming a bad name as well. Cliff, I sincerely hope you can make examples of these punks. Again - I may not have been around here for very long, but leave me a PM with the paypal account, and I will gladly donate to the legal fees to see that they get what's coming to them. wkayl FEB 14, 08:45 AM quote Originally posted by Ravant: I know I'm new here, so I really don't have much pull, but for what its worth, I can hope to add my $0.02 and maybe help out as much as possible. . New guy or not, you make sense. Unsafe At Any Speed FEB 14, 12:38 PM quote Originally posted by Ravant: The result is a 40% decrease in sales, and the loss of 15% of the customer-base. That's the important part. Without actual proof of a “distinct and palpable injury” that is “fairly traceable,” the case lacks standing. Ravant FEB 14, 05:23 PM That's just it though, while he may not have suffered a huge loss, (And I really hope he didn't.), there was intent. Malicious intent. They don't arrest people on attempted murder unless there is intent. That's why we have the difference between assault and attempted murder. In this case, we have just 'cracking' and then there's the intent to cause serious damage, the libel. Weather or not it did cause damage, the false information spread about Cliff's software is libellous either way. There is still a civil suit that stands, even if the criminal does not. However, in 17 states across the US, misusing software as has been done, for malicious purposes, is considered a crime regardless of the outcome. So the criminal case can still stand, depending on where the attack originated from. Unsafe At Any Speed FEB 14, 06:36 PM Intent is only for criminal courts. I wasn't talking about that. As far as libel goes, it still only applies if there is an actual injury incurred. Otherwise, it could apply to anything. For example, I could say on here that you like dogs...alittle too much (no offence, just an example) and then you could sue me. Or I could call somebody here I know a douchebag and they could sue me for slander. But it doesn't work that way.