3/10    Isn't posner supposed to be smart?
        http://csua.org/u/f7i (news.com.com)
        \- What is your point? also since he would have been hearing it
           at the appelate level, his comment may be on some narrow legal
           point. i imagine he approaches this in interms of his econ
           approach about what ruling produces "efficient outcomes".
        \_ this is so fcuked up.
        \_ The guy who wrote the http://news.com.com must have read a different
           opinion than the linked Posner one.  Reading the linked Posner
           decision, what the http://news.com.com article claims are "two
           remarkable leaps" are actually just direct application of the
           US Code ("damage" includes "any impairment to the integrity or
           *availability* of data" [emphasis added]) or a previous decision
              \_ I disagree.  That US Code is "unconstitutionaly vague".
                 Simply deleting the files constitutes "impairent" to the
                 "availability of data." If attempting to delete the files
                 was a violation, then fine.  But the fact that he happened
                 (unlike most people) to know how to *actually* delete the
                 files, is, im(ns)ho, irrelevant.
           ("violating the duty of loyalty, or failing to disclose adverse
           interests, voids the agency relationship" State v. DiBiulio).
        \_ The way I read the statute, IAC needs to show the following
           in order to state a claim under the statute:
                1. Citrin knowingly transmitted a program
                2. To a protected computer; AND
                3. Citirn intentionally used that program
                4. To cause damage to the data on the computer; AND
                5. Citrin was not authorized to cause that damage.
           Posner is hearing the case on appeal from a dismissal for
           failure to state a claim. Basically, at this point his
           job is to assume that Citrin actually did all the things
           IAC says he did and figure out if that would be enough
           for IAC to get relief.
           Added to this is the suggestion that some of the data
           that was deleted may have been incriminating evidence
           re a breach of contract or breach of the duty of loyalty
           claim.
           Given that it is so early in the game and the potential
           destruction of evidence Posner seems to think that it is
           probably a good idea to have Citrin tell the trial judge
           his side of the story before the case is dismissed.
           Re "damage" == "delete": To me, it seems clear that it is
           within Congress' power to reach unauthorized deletions of
           data from a protected computer under the Commerce Clause.
           If you access my computer w/o my authorization, intentionally
           install srm(1) and then srm /bsd, I think Congress has the
           power to hold you liable.
           I don't see the 5th amend vaguness argument, please explain.