Part 1: Factual background
Part 2: Glenn Beck's arguments and the merits of each
Part 3: The domain owner's response.
We hold that a person uses a computer 'without authorization'... when the person has not received permission to use the computer for any purpose (such as when a hacker accesses someone’s computer without any permission), or when the employer has rescinded permission to access the computer and the defendant uses the computer anyway.Whew! Glad we got that one squared away!
No person, in any manner and by any means, including, but not limited to, computer hacking, shall knowingly gain access to, attempt to gain access to, or cause access to be gained to any computer, . . . without the consent of, or beyond the scope of the express or implied consent of, the owner of the computer, . . . or other person authorized to give consent.
Darknets have been on the increase for some time, but as they get ever simpler to use and deploy, they could make it more difficult for content industry investigators to gather data for use in court cases or for "graduated response" schemes with ISPs. Massive darknets can be infiltrated, but networks of 10 friends? 20 friends? An extended family? It will be nearly impossible to know what's being transferred there.I've been hearing about darknets since around 2005 and never thought of them as a threat to creative folks. They're far more analogous to how people used to share and explore music before file sharing - a group of people with common interests share what they have. As I've discussed plenty before, my friends and I will often burn CDs for one another whenever we get a new album. And no, the recipient of the burned disc oftentimes doesn't go out and buy that same record again. However, if they like the music, they will most certainly buy the next album. They will also spread the word to others, who will buy the album.