Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Computer Forensics Docket Sheet
Appellate Court Affirms
'Time Bomb' Computer Conviction
The defendant appealed from a conviction under a federal computer-fraud statute, arguing, inter alia, that the prosecution had tampered with the evidence leading to his conviction. An investigation of the defendant's former employer's network revealed that a string of computer commands, designated as a “Time Bomb,” had been programmed to automatically delete massive amounts of the company's data at a predetermined time. Kroll Ontrack, an e-discovery services provider with headquarters in Eden Prairie, MN, investigated hard drives damaged by the Time Bomb program. On appeal, the defendant argued that the government tampered with copies of the hard drives it received back from Kroll Ontrack because the drives were not the same as those provided by the Secret Service. Specifically, the defendant claimed that different amounts of “zeroes” were inserted onto the drives. The defendant also alleged that his expert fully recovered the lost data once the zeroes were removed. The defendant further argued that four files were added onto copies of the drives from Kroll Ontrack, one of which was deleted and no longer contained data, and three that consisted of resumes and correspondence documents. Rejecting the defendant's arguments, the court upheld the defendant's conviction and found that the defendant's failing to show the discrepancy among the copied drives was sufficient evidence to overcome the trial court's determination. Lloyd v. United States, 2005 WL 2009890 (D.N.J. Aug. 16, 2005). See also, United States v. Lloyd, 269 F.3d 228 (3rd Cir. 2001).
Appellate Court Affirms
'Time Bomb' Computer Conviction
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.