Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

My impression is that the Pastebin'ed CC# example does not provide the charge, but evidence that helps prosecute the fraud through which they were acquired.



I'll walk back calling it a "textbook example" (because I suppose ultimately it's probably up to the quality of the lawyers involved), but the part of 18 USC 1343 that I think would be argued by the prosecution in the "pastebin cc numbers example" is:

"...or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice..."

I think the government would have a relatively easy time arguing that posting people's credit card information (specifically all the data necessary to make use of that person's funds) is a scheme for "obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses".

The defendant's attorney might argue that just posting the information isn't itself a scheme (in the same way that say, listing the home addresses of members of rival ethnic groups over the radio in Rwanda isn't an incitement to violence), but if I were that defendant, I wouldn't be sleeping easy.


OK, so how does it reach Weev again?


It doesn't. That wasn't the point.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: