Cybercrime

JURI 5584  ·  Spring 2023

Wed/Fri 2:30–3:45 pm  ·  Room K

Office Hours: Wed 10:30–11:30 am

Technological innovation alters the commission, definition, and conception of crime. In some cases, computers, social media, and the internet have made existing criminal activity harder to detect or easier to commit. In other cases, they’ve created new forms of criminal activity that challenge longstanding views about the permissibility and punishment of human behavior. This course will address topics such as digital privacy, free speech, terrorism, cybersecurity, image-based sexual abuse, stalking, harassment, doxing, and identity theft. It will examine questions of constitutional law, federal and state laws regulating online activity, and proposed legislation that would criminalize different forms of digital abuse.

____________________

Your legal education should be as affordable as possible, so I haven’t assigned a physical casebook. Instead, I’ve posted some materials for free below, and the remaining readings are from James Grimmelmann’s Internet Law: Cases & Problems (12th ed.). Although Professor Grimmelmann’s digital materials are accessible for free, he and the publisher suggest that students pay $30 to download the PDF, based on the idea that it’s fair to ask you to pay about $1 per class session for which the materials are used. The money also helps to keep these materials affordable for other students in the future. We’ll be using content from these materials for roughly 25 class hours, so please consider paying at least $25.

Readings from Professor Grimmelmann are marked by the acronym “GIL” and the page range. For online materials (i.e., materials on the internet, not in the casebook), please review the entire piece unless I parenthetically note a specific page range. On certain class days, I’ve offered optional materials. They’re truly optional, but they provide some perspective or background that I find interesting or helpful.

Given that this course focuses extensively on abuse and violence, I caution that some of these materials might disturb at least some of you. Professor Grimmelmann includes warnings before some distressing readings, but this seminar will constantly challenge us to confront painful topics in ways that I can’t always predict in advance. I want you to be in the right headspace when engaging with them. I’d encourage you to take breaks and walks during and after your class prep, and some of you might also wish to take advantage of UGA’s Health & Wellness resources occasionally throughout the semester. Please take care of yourselves and let me know if there’s anything I can ever do to help.

____________________

We won’t meet for our regularly scheduled class sessions on January 18, January 20, February 10, March 1, March 3, March 24, April 12, April 14, and April 21. Instead of those seven sessions, you’ll respond to a series of Cybercrime Scenarios and watch two documentaries and three recorded lectures over the course of the semester.

1. The Internet’s Own Boy

No class. Watch the documentary and review the materials before class on January 11.

2. Situating Cybercrime

January 11

3. Cyberspace as a “Place”

January 13

  • John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace (1996) (GIL 57–59)

  • Orin S. Kerr, The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law, Georgetown Law Journal (2003) (GIL 60–62)

  • David R. Johnson & David Post, Law and Borders: The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, Stanford Law Review (1996) (GIL 62–64)

  • Mary Anne Franks, Unwilling Avatars: Idealism and Discrimination in Cyberspace, Columbia Journal of Gender & Law (2011) (GIL 65–68)

  • State v. Decker (Minn. 2018) (GIL 68–70)

  • Robles v. Domino’s Pizza (9th Cir. 2019) (GIL 71–73)

Optional

No class on January 18 or 20

4. Jurisdiction

No class. Review the materials, watch the recorded lecture, and respond to the scenarios before class on January 25.

  • U.S. Department of Justice, Prosecuting Computer Crimes (2010) (113–20)

  • United States v. Auernheimer (3rd Cir. 2014) (GIL 108–13)

  • GA Code § 16-11-39.1

  • United States v. Yücel (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (GIL 113–15)

  • In re Facebook Biometric Information Privacy Litigation (N.D. Cal. 2016 & 2018) (GIL 115–17) (skim)

  • Recorded lecture on Jurisdiction

  • Snapchat Scenario

  • Sextortion Scenario

5. Digital “Speech”

January 25

  • U.S. Constitution, First Amendment (GIL 123–24)

  • Packingham v. North Carolina (2017) (GIL 124–31)

  • Texas v. Johnson (1989) (GIL 131)

  • Bland v. Roberts (E.D. Va. 2012) (GIL 131–32)

  • Bland v. Roberts (4th Cir. 2013) (GIL 133–34)

  • Elizabeth Kirley & Marilyn McMahon, How the Law Responds When Emoji Are the Weapon of Choice, The Conversation (2017)

  • Sarah Jeong, The Internet of Garbage (2015) (32–34)

Optional

6. Threats & Extortion

January 27

Optional

7. Incitement & Lies

February 1

8. Voyeurism & Impersonation

February 3

Optional

9. Harassment & Stalking

February 8

Optional

No class on February 10

10. Cybercrime Scenarios #1

No class. Respond to the scenarios before class on February 15.

  • Ray-Ban Scenario

  • Metaverse Scenario

  • MeanBot Scenario

11. Minors & Bullying

February 15

  • State v. Bishop (N.C. 2016) (GIL 161–66)

  • Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021) (GIL 166–67)

  • Reno v. ACLU (1997) (GIL 167–70)

12. Sex & Nudity

February 17

Optional

13. Intermediary Liability

February 22

  • Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230 (GIL 171–73)

  • Zeran v. America Online (4th Cir. 1997) (GIL 173–79)

  • Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment Recordings (6th Cir. 2014) (GIL 179–89)

Optional

14. The Cleaners

No class. Watch the documentary and do the PBS quiz before class on February 24.

You may rent the documentary for $2.99 and watch it whenever suits you best, or you may attend a screening of the documentary at 12–1:30pm on February 24 in Room G.

15. Platform Rules

February 24

Optional

No class on March 1 or 3

Spring Break

16. Cybercrime Scenarios #2

No class. Respond to the scenarios before class on March 15.

  • Tattoo Scenario

  • GroupMe Scenario

17. Platform Design

March 15

  • Kimsey v. City of Sammamish (W.D. Wash. 2021) (GIL 599–604)

  • Cyber Promotions v. American Online (E.D. Pa. 1996) (GIL 604–08)

  • Twitter Scenario

  • Thomas Kadri, Networks of Empathy, Utah Law Review (2020) (1083–97)

18. Platform Rights

March 17

  • Zhang v. Baidu.com (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (GIL 608–15)

  • Marshall’s Locksmith Service v. Google (D.C. Cir. 2019) (GIL 615–18)

  • Song Fi v. Google (N.D. Cal. 2015) (GIL 618–21)

  • Song Fi v. Google (N.D. Cal. 2018) (GIL 622–23)

Optional

19. Reforming Section 230

March 22

  • Doe v. MySpace (W.D. Tex. 2007) (GIL 190–92)

  • Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) (GIL 193)

  • People’s Front of Judea Problem (GIL 194)

  • Section 230 Reform Problem (GIL 623–24)

Optional

20. Hacking

No class. Review the materials and watch the recorded lecture before class on March 29. Please also respond to the scenario by 2:30pm on March 24.

  • Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (GIL 350–52)

  • Orin S. Kerr, Cybercrime’s Scope: Interpreting “Access” and “Authorization” in Computer Misuse Statutes, NYU Law Review (2003) (GIL 353–54)

  • United States v. Morris (2d Cir. 1991) (GIL 354–56)

  • Dumbnet Scenario

  • Recorded lecture on Hacking

Optional

21. Hacking?

March 29

Optional

22. Corporate Espionage

March 31

23. Device Searches

April 5

Optional

24. Remote Searches

April 7

Optional

No class on April 12 or 14

25. Cybercrime Scenarios #3

No class. Respond to the scenarios before class on April 19.

  • FishLines Scenario

  • Nasal Scenario

  • Scraping Scenario

26. Cybercrime Scenarios #4

No class. Respond to the scenarios before class on April 19.

  • Filter Scenario

  • Polecam Scenario

  • Bank Robbery Problem (GIL 224–25)

27. Electronic Communications

April 19

  • Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq. (GIL 225–29)

  • O’Brien v. O’Brien (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 5th 2005) (GIL 229–31)

  • Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq. (GIL 231–35)

  • Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. (D.N.J. 2012) (GIL 235–39)

Optional

28. Anonymity & Encryption

No class. Review the materials and watch the recorded lecture.

Optional

For syllabus inspiration, I’d like to thank Kendra Albert, Hannah Bloch-Wehba, Evelyn Douek, Mary Anne Franks, James Grimmelmann, Orin Kerr, Ido Kilovaty, and Martha Minow, all of whose curricula helped me when shaping my own.

Previous
Previous

Assessment

Next
Next

Health