From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 94 06:27:27 PDT
To: rishab@dxm.ernet.in
Subject: Re: Crime and punishment in cyberspace - 1 of 3
In-Reply-To: <gate.9PemNc1w165w@dxm.ernet.in>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9406080905.A23938-0100000@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Wed, 8 Jun 1994 rishab@dxm.ernet.in wrote:

> 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.
> 

I like to use the Common Law distiction between Malum in Se and Malum 
Prohibitum.  ("wrong because it is wrong" and "wrong because it is 
prohibited.")  There are lots of "legislative crimes" that are creatures 
of their time and place.  Cyberspace is a hard place to commit real 
wrongs in.  Those of us of a more libertarian bent think that the major 
benefit of cyberspace is that it makes certain crimes like "legislation" 
less effective.  Note that Common Law crimes were "discovered" by judges 
without legislatures.

DCF

"Was there ever anything so impolite as a group of guys sitting around 
ruling others?"