Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!jarthur!uunet!world!eff!mnemonic
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Is information property ? (was: Re: EFF amicus brief in U.S. v. Riggs)
Message-ID: <1991May28.120333.16841@eff.org>
Date: 28 May 91 12:03:33 GMT
References: <1991May27.065841.6280@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <1991May27.131121.3589@eff.org> <1991May28.025025.27818@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Lines: 24

In article <1991May28.025025.27818@ddsw1.MCS.COM> learn@ddsw1.MCS.COM (William Vajk) writes:
>
>Strange, isn't it, that wire fraud wasn't one of the charges as of
>August 1990 (for which see special edition TELECOM DIGEST dated
>11 August 1990.) The charges quite specifically, unless they are
>misquoted, two counts of "traffic in information through which
>a computer may be accessed without authorization and three counts
>of interstate transfer of goods valued in excess of $ 5000.

I think it's fair to say that the reason the superseding indictment
included wire fraud is that the prosecutors realized they couldn't
establish the elements of ITSP if no tangible property had been
stolen.


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,        |         To see a world in a grain of sand
mnemonic@eff.org    |         And heaven in a wild flower
(617) 864-0665      |         Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
EFF, Cambridge, MA  |         And eternity in an hour