The United States Sentencing Commission issued its sentencing guidelines for punishing offenses under the CAN SPAM Act. The pdf of the regulations is available here. The relevant guidelines start on page 155. As you can see, the Commission did not adopt the recommendations of Cyberlaw Clinic clients the NACDL or EFF.
Stanford Center for Internet and Society
In the heart of the Silicon Valley, legal doctrine is emerging that will determine the course of civil rights and technological innovation for decades to come. The Center for Internet and Society (CIS), housed at Stanford Law School and a part of the Law, Science and Technology Program, is at the apex of this evolving area of law.
Federal Sentencing Guidelines Comments
The United States Sentencing Commission has requested public comment on how the Commission should respond to Section 225(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (the Cyber Security Enhancement Act of 2002), Pub. L. 107-296, which
directs the Commission to review and amend, if appropriate, the sentencing guidelines and policy statements applicable to persons convicted of an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1030. The clinic will be filing comments with the Commission on behalf of the National Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and The Sentencing Project.
Clinic Files Second Set of Comments
by Jennifer Granick, posted on March 17, 2003 - 3:13pm.
The Stanford Cyberlaw Clinic filed a second set of comments today on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Electronic Frontier Foundation and The Sentencing Project with the United States Sentencing Commission in response to the Commission’s second request for public comment. In summary, the commentators position is that computer crimes should be sentenced no differently than similar economic crimes.
Comments on Cybercrime Sentencing Filed
by Jennifer Granick, posted on February 19, 2003 - 4:36pm.
The Stanford Cyberlaw Clinic filed comments today with the United States Sentencing Commission in response to the Commission’s request for public
comment. In summary, the commentators position is that computer crimes are currently punished more harshly than similar economic crimes so no increase in sentences is warranted. Additionally, the commentators point out several serious problems with the way cybercrime sentencing is currently done, including the application of a special definition of loss that includes unforseeable damages. To read more, you can obtain the comments here.
Our Issues
cybercrime
Fair Use Project
free speech
infrastructure
intellectual property
privacy
anti-circumvention books copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons drm economics Fair Use FOIA Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform law school libel patent podcasting surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks web 2.0
anti-circumvention books copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons drm economics Fair Use FOIA Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform law school libel patent podcasting surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks web 2.0