Forgery And Document Offences
1. Overview of Computer and Internet Fraud
Computer and Internet Fraud refers to criminal acts involving computers or digital networks to deceive, cheat, or gain unauthorized access to data or money. This includes:
Hacking: Unauthorized access to computer systems.
Phishing: Fraudulent attempts to obtain sensitive information.
Identity Theft: Using someone’s personal information for illegal gain.
Online Banking/Financial Fraud: Unauthorized fund transfers.
Cyberstalking and Online Scams: Threats or deception using digital platforms.
Legal Frameworks:
Many countries have enacted laws to address computer and internet fraud:
USA: Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 1986.
India: Information Technology Act, 2000 (amended 2008) – Sections 66, 66C, 66D deal with hacking, identity theft, phishing.
UK: Computer Misuse Act, 1990.
International: Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, 2001.
Impact of Computer/Internet Fraud:
Financial losses to individuals and businesses.
Damage to reputation and privacy breaches.
Strain on legal and policing systems due to cross-border crimes.
2. Key Case Laws on Computer and Internet Fraud
Case 1: United States v. Morris (1991, USA)
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Facts: Robert Tappan Morris created the first widely known computer worm in 1988, which infected thousands of computers on the ARPANET.
Issue: Whether the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) applied to the spread of the worm.
Decision: Morris was convicted under the CFAA.
Reasoning: Unauthorized access and damage to federal computers violated the law.
Impact: Set a precedent for criminal liability for hacking and malware distribution.
Case 2: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Sunil Vasant (2006, India)
Court: Bombay High Court
Facts: Defendant created fake websites resembling banks to collect login credentials and siphon money from customers.
Issue: Whether online phishing and impersonation amounted to cyber fraud under IT Act.
Decision: Defendant found guilty under Sections 66C (identity theft) and 66D (cheating by impersonation) of IT Act, 2000.
Impact: Landmark case emphasizing liability for fraudulent websites and online impersonation.
Case 3: United States v. Kevin Mitnick (1999, USA)
Court: U.S. District Court, California
Facts: Kevin Mitnick, a notorious hacker, gained unauthorized access to dozens of corporate networks including Nokia, Motorola, and Sun Microsystems.
Issue: Violations of CFAA and wire fraud statutes.
Decision: Mitnick was sentenced to five years in prison and ordered to pay restitution.
Reasoning: Mitnick’s activities caused substantial economic and operational damage.
Impact: Raised awareness of corporate cybersecurity and led to stronger digital security laws.
Case 4: R v. A & B (2013, UK)
Court: Crown Court, UK
Facts: Defendants created fake online auction websites to trick users into transferring money for goods that were never delivered.
Issue: Violation of Computer Misuse Act and Fraud Act 2006.
Decision: Convicted of fraud by false representation and obtaining money through deception.
Impact: Clarified that online scams, including fake e-commerce platforms, fall under criminal fraud.
Case 5: Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015, India)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Facts: Challenge against Section 66A of IT Act for criminalizing offensive online speech.
Issue: Constitutionality of penalizing online speech and overreach affecting digital communication.
Decision: Section 66A struck down as unconstitutional; Sections dealing with fraud and hacking (66C, 66D) remained.
Impact: Reinforced the distinction between legitimate speech and fraudulent/illegal digital activities, protecting freedom of expression while maintaining anti-fraud provisions.
Case 6: Sony Pictures Entertainment Hack (2014, USA)
Court: Investigations and civil cases
Facts: North Korean-backed hackers infiltrated Sony’s network, leaked confidential data, and demanded ransom.
Issue: Cyber espionage, unauthorized access, and financial loss.
Outcome: While no criminal prosecution directly tied to North Korea, Sony pursued damages and implemented stronger cybersecurity measures.
Impact: Highlighted international cyber fraud and the need for corporate digital defense strategies.
Case 7: United States v. Aleynikov (2010, USA)
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals
Facts: Sergey Aleynikov, a Goldman Sachs programmer, copied proprietary trading software to use at a competitor.
Issue: Whether copying code without physical theft violated the Economic Espionage Act and CFAA.
Decision: Conviction for wire fraud and theft of trade secrets, later partially overturned.
Impact: Established legal scrutiny on digital property and corporate data theft.
3. Key Takeaways from Case Law
Unauthorized Access is Criminal: Both hacking and malware distribution are punishable under national laws.
Online Fraud is Expanding: Phishing, fake websites, and scams are increasingly prosecuted under identity theft statutes.
International Dimension: Cyber fraud often crosses borders, complicating enforcement.
Corporate Liability and Security: Companies are now expected to implement robust cybersecurity measures.
Legal Evolution: Courts are balancing digital rights, freedom of speech, and anti-fraud enforcement (Shreya Singhal).
RELATED Blog
comments