[1]See Stan Miastkowski, Is Your PC Open to Hack Attacks?, PC WORLD (Oct. 12, 1999) <http://www.pcworld.com/ontheweb/article/0,1978,13232,00.html>.
[2]"Businesses fear that the Infobahn could suddenly veer into the highway to Hell. Insincere and downright devious transactions by malefactors may cause a firm to unwittingly disclose its prime information commodities. Bad Guys could enter a firm's computer through the Internet connection and steal or compromise a firm's informational crown jewels." See Michael Rustad and Lori E. Eisenschmidt, The Commercial Law of Internet Security, 10 HIGH TECH L.J. 213, 215-16 (1995).
[3]See Computer Security Threats Climb: Cybercrooks did more than $100 million of damage last year, and it's going to get worse, PC WORLD (Mar. 5, 1999), <http://www.pcworld.com/pcwtoday/article/0,1510,10004,00.html>.
[4]See id.
[5] U.S.C.A. § 18 (West 1998).
[6]See Stevan D. Mitchell and Elizabeth A. Banker, Private Intrusion Response, 11 HARV. J.L. & TECH. 699 (1998).
[7]See id.
[8]Although 18 U.S.C. § 1030 provides that "[a]ny person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of this section may maintain a civil action against the violator to obtain compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief," actual suits against hackers have been few and far between. The paucity of suits against hackers will be discussed infra.
[9]See David L. Gripman, The Doors are Locked but the Thieves and Vandals are Still Getting In: A Proposal in Tort to Alleviate Corporate America's Cyber-Crime Problem, 16 J. MARSHALL J. COMPUTER & INFO. L. 167 (1997).
[10]See David J. Loundy, Computer Information Systems Law and System Operator Liability, 21 SEATTLE UNIV. L.R. 1075 (1998).
[11]See Cheryl S. Massingale and A. Faye Borthick, Risk Allocation for Computer System Security Breaches: Potential Liability for Providers of Computer Services, 12 W. NEW ENG. L. REV 167 (1990).
[12]See, e.g., Gripman, supra note 9.
[13]See Computer Security Threats Climb: Cybercrooks did more than $100 million of damage last year, and it's going to get worse, PC WORLD (Mar. 5, 1999) <http://www.pcworld.com/pcwtoday/article/0,1510,10004,00.html>.
[14]Harold S. Reeves, Property in Cyberspace, 63 U. CHI. L. REV. 761, 786 (1996).
[15]See Thrifty-Tel, Inc. v. Bezenek, 54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 468 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
[16]W. Page Keeton, et al., PROSSER & KEETON ON THE LAW OF TORTS § 14, 85-86 (5th ed. 1984).
[17]Mark D. Robins, Electronic Trespass: An Old Theory in a New Context, 15 No. 7 COMPUTER LAW 1, *6 (1998).
[18]See In re Brandl, 179 B.R. 620, 622 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1995).
[19]See id.
[20]Id. at 628.
[21]See Werner, Zaroff, Slotnick, Stern, & Askenazy v. Lewis, 588 N.Y.S.2d 960, 962 (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 1992).
[22]Id.
[23]"Computers are intricate machines, and their software programs are often complexly designed, and written in mathematical language. Most people who use computers do not have the expertise to remedy problems that arise with computers and computer software. Thus, members of the general public are often captives of those who have developed the expertise needed to understand computers and computer programs, and must rely upon those experts to act with good faith. . . the imposition of punitive damages against Defendant should send a message to others who would consider committing similar acts in the future, and even to some who may eradicate their already planted, as yet silent viruses which are presently waiting to awaken and wreak their havoc." See id.
[24]
"One justification for a system of private property is found in the need
to encourage users of scarce resources to internalize the external costs
of their activity. Giving individuals rights of ownership in particular
resources is one way to force them to internalize such costs: each owner
has incentives to use her resources efficiently and ensure that others
do the same." See Reeves, supra note 14, at 776. Likewise,
when a party has efficient means to a solution of hacking, it becomes unnecessary
for governmental entities to carry the cost of such endeavors.