互联网自由与计算机滥用
2015-01-30洛塔尔泰勒曼杜明强
洛塔尔·泰勒曼(著) 杜明强(译)
互联网自由与计算机滥用
洛塔尔·泰勒曼(著) 杜明强(译)[1]
《计算机欺诈和滥用法》(以下简称CFAA)有一个坏名声。[2]Grant McCool,“Computer Fraud and Abuse Act:The 1980s-Era Hacking Law Out Of Step With Today’s Internet,Analysts Say”,REUTERS as published in the HUFFINGTON Post,(July 29,2012),参见http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/29/computer-fraud-and-abuse-act n_1716058.html.(CFAA旨在减少对计算机系统的非法侵入,解决与计算机相关的联邦犯罪问题。该法律由美国国会批准、总统签署,编纂于18 U.S.C.§1030。)这与宪法的挑战[3]United States v.Drew,259 F.R.D.449,455(C.D.Cal.2009);也可参见United States v.Nosal,642 F. 3d 781,783(9th Cir.2011)reh’g en banc granted,661 F.3d 1180(9th Cir.2011)和on reh'g en banc,676 F.3d 854(9th Cir.2012)。和社区的愤怒有关。[4]Meghan Kelly,“Advocacy Groups Call for‘Week of Action’to Change the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act”,VENTUREBEAT(Apr.8,2013),available at http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/08/cfaa-reformweek/.它在计算机程序员、互联网维权人士和CFAA的被告Aaron Swartz的悲剧性自杀中起着作用。[5]Connor Kirschbaum,“Swartz Indicted for JSTOR Theft”,THE TECH,(Jan.12,2013),available at http://tech.mit.edulV131/N30/swartz.html.它一直被谴责为滥用正义的基础;[6]Sarah Boyer,“Computer Fraud and Abuse Act:Abusing Federal Jurisdiction?”RUTGERS J.L.&PUB. POL’Y 661(2009).具有讽刺意味的是,赋予它权利又关注其惩罚滥用。它一直被称为科技领域中最为糟糕的法律和你从没听说过的最可恶的刑法。[1]Tim Wu,“Fixing the Worst Law in Technology”,THE NEW YORKER,(Mar.18,2013),available at http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/03/fixing-theworst-law-in-technology-aaronswartz-and-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act.html.人们厌恶和恐惧它,是因为它对互联网自由构成威胁。
特别值得关注的一个问题是,法律可能将大多数人因没有阅读和未认真对待诸如网站服务条款和雇主手册而对条款的违反而判定为违法。[2]“Cybersecurity:Protecting America’s New Frontier:Hearing Before the H.Judiciary Subcomm”.on Crime,Terrorism,and Homeland Sec.,112th Cong.(2011)(statement of Richard Downing,Deputy Section Chief),available at http://www.justice.gov/criminal/pr/speeches/2011/crm-speech-1111151.html [hereinafter“Cyber Security Hearings”].根据CFAA,任何人未经授权或超越授权而故意接入他人计算机获取信息应该受到罚款或监禁,或两者并用。[3]18 U.S.C.§1030(a)(2)(C)(2012).这样可以吗?违反网站服务条款就是违反联邦刑法吗?
美国联邦政府对这个问题的回答是肯定的。[4]Nosal,642 F.3d at 783.而学者[5]Amanda Harmon Cooley,“Guarding Against A Radical Redefinition of Liability for Internet Misrepresentation:The United States v.Drew Prosecution and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act”,14.8 J.INTERNET L.1,7(2011).、维权人士[6]Dave Maass,“Secret Service Reopens Aaron Swartz Freedom of Information Act Requests”,ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION,(Mar.21,2013),https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/computer-fraud-andabuse-act-reform.、媒体和今天聚集在加利福尼亚大学哈斯丁斯法学院“《计算机欺诈和滥用法》:悲剧后的改变”研讨会上的大多数人,却给出否定的回答。对违反服务条款实施刑事制裁,对互联网来说,是一个噩梦,甚至对自称是“自由国家”的国家来说,也是一个噩梦。[7]Tim Wu,“Fixing the Worst Law in Technology”,THE NEW YORKER,(Mar.18,2013),available at http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/03/fixing-theworst-law-in-technology-aaronswartz-and-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act.html.
让我们退一步来另眼审视自由、互联网、计算机以及滥用。……
