|
In United States v. John, 597 F.3d 263 (2010) United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit interpreted the term “exceeds authorized access” in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. §1030(e)(6) 〔( Computer Fraud and Abuse Act )〕 and concluded that ''access to a computer may be exceeded if the purposes for which access has been given are exceeded''. In particular, the court ruled that an employee would exceed authorized access to a protected computer if he or she used that access to obtain or steal information as part of criminal scheme.〔 This case addresses the issue of the distinction between authorized access to information and subsequent use of information obtained through an authorized access for the purposes of CFAA. == Background== Dimetriace Eva Lavon John was employed as an account manager at Citigroup for approximately three years. She was authorized to access Citigroup’s internal computer system, which contained customer account information, in the course of her official duties.〔 In September 2005, John provided Leland Riley, her half-brother, with customer account information pertaining to at least seventy-six corporate customer accounts of Citigroup customers. She collected the information from the internal computer system of Citigroup and provided it to Riley in the form of either scanned images of checks written by the account holders or printouts of computer screens, which contained detailed account information.〔 Riley and his co-conspirators used customer account information provided by John to incur fraudulent charges on four different customer accounts. The total amount of actually incurred fraudulent charges was $78,750.〔 John was found guilty by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas of: * conspiracy to commit access device fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; * fraud in connection with an access device and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1029 (a)(5) and (2); * exceeding authorized access to a protected computer in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)(A) and (C).〔 John appealed the indictment to the Fifth Circuit. She argued that she was authorized to use Citigroup’s internal computer system as an employee. John contended that Computer Fraud and Abuse Act does not prohibit unlawful use of material that she was allowed to access through authorized use of a computer.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「United States v. John (2010)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|