I have appended
the bill summary
of Title III
of HR 46
(the part that deals with Internet Security
) below. This is from thomas.loc.gov
, the best source for current legislative information
on the Web
I do note, however, that Sec. 304 of the bill (which governs the forfeiture issue) says quite clearly that:
(h)(1) The court, in imposing sentence on any person convicted of a violation of this section, shall order, in addition to any other sentence imposed and irrespective of any provision of State law, that such person forfeit to the United States-- (A) the interest of such person in any personal property that was used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of such violation; and (B) any property, whether real or personal, constituting or derived from any proceeds that such person obtained, whether directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation.
...so we can assume that forfeiture is part of a sentence, and not simply based on suspicions of law enforcement. However, I understand that this issue is at the heart of a lot of lawsuits of people who have been arrested and acquitted of drug charges, but whose property has been seized. We shall see.
(Sorry for the cut and paste job--downvote me if you feel like it.)
Internet Security Act of 2000 - Amends the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (the Act) to
set forth penalties for unlawfully accessing to commit fraud, and damaging, a protected computer
where that conduct: (1) causes a loss aggregating at least $5,000 in value during a one-year period to
one or more individuals; (2) modifies or impairs the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or
care of one or more individuals; (3) causes physical injury to any person; or (4) threatens public
health or safety. Includes attempted offenses within the scope of the Act.
Provides for the forfeiture to the United States of the offender's interest in any: (1) personal property
used to commit or facilitate the offense; and (2) real or personal property that constitutes or is
derived from proceeds traceable to a violation.
Limits "losses" (currently, "damages for violations involving damage") to economic damages. Defines
"loss" to include: (1) the reasonable costs to any victim of responding to the offense, conducting a
damage assessment, and restoring the system and data; and (2) any lost revenue or costs incurred by
the victim as a result of interruption of service.
Specifies that property subject to forfeiture, any seizure and disposition of property, and any
administrative or judicial proceeding in relation thereto shall be governed by the Comprehensive Drug
Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970.
(Sec. 3) Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) acts that damage computers used in the delivery
of critical infrastructure services pose a serious threat to public health and safety and have the
potential to cause losses to victims; and (2) the Government should have jurisdiction to investigate
acts affecting protected computers, even if the effects of such acts occur wholly outside the United
(Sec. 4) Directs the United States Sentencing Commission to amend the Federal sentencing
guidelines to ensure that any individual convicted of a violation of the Act regarding the accessing of a
protected computer under specified unlawful circumstances can be subjected to appropriate
penalties, without regard to any mandatory minimum term of imprisonment.
(Sec. 5) Directs the court, with respect to any person convicted of trafficking in counterfeit computer
labels, program documentation, or packaging, to order the forfeiture and destruction or other
disposition of anything used to copy or produce the computer program or other item to which the
counterfeit label was affixed.
(Sec. 7) Rewrites Federal criminal code provisions regarding pen registers and trap and trace
devices to authorize the court, with respect to requests from an attorney for the Government or a
State law enforcement or investigative officer, to enter an order authorizing the installation and use of
such a device if the court finds that the information likely to be obtained is relevant to an ongoing
criminal investigation. Requires that the use of the device be conducted in such a way as to minimize
the recording or decoding of any electronic or other impulses that are not related to the dialing and
signaling information utilized in processing by the service provider upon whom the order is served.
(Sec. 8) Revises the definition of "pen register" to: (1) mean a device or process that records or
decodes electronic or other impulses that identify the telephone numbers or electronic addresses
dialed or otherwise transmitted by an instrument or facility from which a wire or electronic
communication is transmitted and used for purposes of identifying the destination or termination of
such communication by the service provider upon which the order is served; and (2) exclude any
device or process used by a provider or customer of a wire or electronic communication service for
billing or recording as an incident to billing for communications services or for cost accounting or
other like purposes in the ordinary course of its business.
(Sec. 9) Requires that the Attorney General's annual report to Congress regarding pen register and
trap and trace devices include information concerning: (1) the period of interceptions authorized by
the order and the number and duration of any extensions of the order; (2) the offense specified in the
order, application, or extension; (3) the number of investigations involved; (4) the number and nature
of the facilities affected; and (5) the identity of the applying investigative or law enforcement agency
making the application and the person authorizing the order.
(Sec. 10) Rewrites code provisions regarding the interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or
electronic communications to permit a person acting under color of law to intercept: (1) a wire, oral,
or electronic communication if such person is a party to the communication or if one of the parties to
the communication has given prior consent to such interception; and (2) a wire or electronic
communication if the transmission is causing harmful interference to a lawfully operating computer
system, if any person who is not a provider of service to the public and who is authorized to use the
facility from which the wire or electronic communication is to be intercepted has given prior consent
to the interception, and if the interception is conducted only to the extent necessary to identify the
source of the harmful interference.
(Sec. 11) Requires the Attorney General's annual reports to the Administrative Office of the United
States Courts to include the number of orders in which encryption was encountered and whether
such encryption prevented law enforcement from obtaining the plain text of communications
(Sec. 12) Directs the Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice's Office of Justice
Programs to make a grant to each State to: (1) assist State and local law enforcement in enforcing
State and local criminal laws relating to computer crime and in educating the public to prevent and
identify computer crime; (2) assist in educating and training State and local law enforcement officers
and prosecutors to conduct investigations and forensic analyses of evidence and prosecutions of
computer crime; (3) assist State and local law enforcement officers and prosecutors in acquiring
computer and other equipment to conduct investigations and forensic analysis of evidence of
computer crimes; and (4) facilitate and promote the sharing of Federal law enforcement expertise and
information about the investigation, analysis, and prosecution of computer crimes with State and local
law enforcement officers and prosecutors, including the use of multi-jurisdictional task forces.
Sets forth provisions regarding use of grant amounts, required State assurances to be eligible to
receive a grant, and matching funds. Authorizes appropriations. Authorizes the Attorney General to
use amounts made available herein to make grants to Indian tribes.