1994-06-08 - Crime and punishment in cyberspace - 1 of 3

Header Data

From: rishab@dxm.ernet.in
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1b47483734c540d7d06ef803b307b82f68b0c20eaefafb239a521ac73ef80615
Message ID: <gate.9PemNc1w165w@dxm.ernet.in>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-06-08 13:07:08 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Jun 94 06:07:08 PDT

Raw message

From: rishab@dxm.ernet.in
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 94 06:07:08 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Crime and punishment in cyberspace - 1 of 3
Message-ID: <gate.9PemNc1w165w@dxm.ernet.in>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Uhh. When I started this thread with "Cyberspace is by nature crime-free," I
meant crime as what at least _I_ perceive as morally wrong enough to justify
the intervention of society as a whole, usually represented by functionaries
of the state - police, judiciary, etc.; and NOT what may or not be wrong in 
the eyes of existing law, which as we all know, is an ass.

Unless we want a totally "everyone for him/herself" society (which is 
contradictory - society is a framework or protocol by which individuals 
interact with each other), and become like Rwanda, say, we need the 
intervention of [police/state/society/collective] to ensure that basic social
agreements are kept - thou shalt not rape, for instance. Even anarchist Tim May
has in previous posts conceded the possible need for a police force to 
investigate murders.

Now to cyberspace...

I greatly believe in the Internet as a model for society. While there are 
incompatibilities between a society on cyberspace and one on the streets, what
is needed is an adaption of cybersociety to the "real world" NOT vice versa.

Out of all 'crimes' listed in previous posts by Matthew Gream and others, the
only one I accept as possibly requiring society intervention in the information
age is that of intellectual property. The extent of such intervention is 
debatable. 

I will summarize my attitude to the other points with this: saying that 
cracking an ordinary Unix system is fraud is like saying that walking into 
a field protected perhaps by a tattered hedge is 'breaking in.'

Unless you want a nanny state, you have to protect yourself, and your rights.
Unless you want a jungle, you have to accept intervention by agents of the 
society you live in, when protection is far to difficult for an individual.

You expect police help to catch a murderer. You don't expect police help to
catch someone who stole money that fell out of your torn pocket. (_I_ don't.)

Continued...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rishab Aiyer Ghosh                                    They came for the Jews,
                                    and I was silent because I was not a Jew;
rishab@dxm.ernet.in                        They came for the Trade Unionists,
                                     and I did not protest, because I did not
Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410                        belong to a trade union;
Voicemail +91 11 3760335      They came for the Catholics, and I said nothing
                                                because I was not a Catholic;
H 34C Saket                                        And then they came for me.
New Delhi                            There was no one left to say anything...
INDIA                                                   ----Father Niemoeller





Thread