People are currently serving jail terms in the UK and the US because they infiltrated other people’s computers that they weren’t told to. Similarly in developing countries, some people’s liberty is currently being restricted because they use the computer to make phony deals online. In Microsoft vs. Alexander Pononsov, a Russian court passed a verdict of guilty on a rural school teacher that unknowingly used pirated Microsoft operating systems. The common denominator in the above scenarios is that the law took over, reduced all the computing technicalities into the desiccated vernacular of its trade and made prosecutions.
The computer law in mostly in developing countries is way underdeveloped and hence do not meet with the contemporary requirements of the modern information and technology age. We lack the technical resources, expertise as well as the legal framework to tackle cyber crimes and computer crimes at large. The business environment in any country is greatly strengthened by the security environment: therefore, serious Techno-legal ICT training is required for judges, lawyers, law students, law professors and corporate executives.
Surprisingly, the issue of laws regarding computer crimes have not had adequate attention even in developed world. This is as a result of different interpretation of what constitutes a computer device and computer crimes at large. For instance the newly elected state law in West Virginia regarding computer crimes states that :
Any person who, knowingly and willfully, directly or indirectly
accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer services
or computer network for the purpose of (1) executing any scheme or artifice
to defraud or (2) obtaining money, property or services by means of
fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises shall be guilty of a
felony, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than ten
thousand dollars or imprisoned in the penitentiary for not more than
ten years or both.
In the Alabama Computer Crime Act, the same issue has a different punishment and interpretation. Also, issues’ regarding definitions as regards to what is a data, computer network, computer programs etc have been interpreted in different ways under different State Laws in the US. This variance stress from Texas Statutes and Codes Annotated,, the State of Wisconsin Statutes, Washington Criminal Code in the revised code of Washington Annotated, and the Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated under Organized Crime and Fraud and so on.
this is caption of an article wrote for a weekly magazine in my country
the internet as you know is a fragile ecosystem, in this regard, what do you think about computer laws in your country and the concept of e-courts in the cyberspace