[Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Yahwe, have a read of this. : http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/200...al-rights.html
Would this, like some people are saying on there, be a violation of the computer misuse act?
specifically :
"3.-(1) A person is guilty of an offence if-
he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and
at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing-
to impair the operation of any computer;
to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or
to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

(3) The intent need not be directed at-
any particular computer;
any particular program or data or a program or data of any particular kind; or
any particular modification or a modification of any particular kind.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite knowledge is knowledge that any modification he intends to cause is unauthorised.
(5) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether an unauthorised modification or any intended effect of it of a kind mentioned in subsection (2) above is, or is intended to be, permanent or merely temporary.
"
and if so, does one have to be 'infected' in order to report them to the police?

Rootkits by the way are designed to be installed and make themselves invisible by directly intercepting windows function calls and editing them, so that they cannot be directly seen.
Removing this one causes damage to the system as well

(anyone else who knows feel free to post)
regardless of the legality, does anyone else feel like reconsider buying cds from sony anymore?

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

it's completely illegal. they're installing software on your PC without notifying you, and it's not even good software. it's poorly made, entirely abusable, and impossible to remove.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

I doubt Yahwe knows much about computer law given that he was in the final year of his degree before he'd even learned how to turn one on.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

I agree , rather like Blizzards Warden program for WoW , but without specific wording in the EULA , this is a blatant invasion of your computer by the company.

Lawsuits ahoy. Yahwe, defend the company , or destroy them! The choice is yours.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

I believe there should be a 'fair labeling law' that should apply to programs. A computer is the property of an indvidual. That person should have a right to know all processes and programs operating on that computer at anyone time. I think they should have a uniformed place somewhere on the computer that let's people know what programs are installed, what they do, what company made it, what their contact information is, etc.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

I don't think they qualify under 3(2).

I've read the act for you and I would stress that this is an act designed to criminalise hackers: it would seem to cover things like spyware.

nod's quite right in that i didn't really follow all the computer speak (i went cross eyed).

I certainly think it's an interesting question. just my initial conclusions are:
a) I don't think this sort of modification has the requisite intent necessary for s.3(2)
b) to prosecute under s3 you are trying to convict some person of a criminal offense. so you'd need to find that individual.
c) you might be better off going to the computer industry ombudsman or regulator and getting sony fined rather than trying to put one of it's worker's in prison
d) you'd have to be bloody lucky to find a policeman who's head didn't explode before you finished explaining the details to him.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Yahwe, you're such a nerd.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

It's not all Judge John Deed you know skiddy.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

I think we can safely say that the police will never investigate this and the CPS would never prosecute a case like this.

The moral of this story is not to buy awful music.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that companies are treated as "individuals" under the law, so that you could then sue Sony in a civil case?

With my limited knowledge on computer law, as above, I would say you'd be better off bring a civil case against them.

Further more I agree with Phil^ that Sony are contravening the computer misuse act by installing and modifying software on a computer without the owners consent.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Yes, it's much better to go trolling for songs on the P2P networks where spyware and other harmful malicious software is nonexistent.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Well the statute itself creates specific criminal offences: you can't sue for criminal offences themselves in the civil courts. what you need to look for is a corresponding civil action.

so for instance if someone punches you in the face the criminal sanction is assault but the victim also has a corresponding civil action in the form of tresspass against the person.
If someone knocks you down with their car the criminal sanction might be careless driving and the corresponding civil action would be negligence.

now the legal system isn't designed in such a way that all crimes have corresponding civil actions. for instance the crime of possessing heroin wouldn't give rise to a corresponding civil law right to sue that person.

I don't think there is a corresponding civil action for the criminal offences created uder this Act. The Act clearly states that this type of technological infringement is not to be considered 'damaging' the computer: so civil actions such as tresspass or negligence just wouldn't work.

even if you could find an actionable case in civil law, perhaps arguing breach of contract. you wouldn't get anything (if you were to win) other than nominal damages - basicly a pound or so, because the law says that no damage has been caused there's nothing to compensate by way of awarding damages.

that's perfectly fine. I just happen to disagree. :)

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Why would you need to use the P2P networks to download music?

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

This is most strange. I noticed that Yahwe has posted in this thread several times, and not once has he come across as a dick head.

Whats going on?

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

not everyone is as you expect them to be, all of the time.
Yahwe has been most helpful in this thread

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Typical. That's exactly what I expected you to say.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

Why do you think that "Removing this one causes damage to the system as well"? There are a few cases when rootkits or other "hostile" software actually cant be removed without causing harm to a system, but it doesnt seem so in this case. If you refer to the "missing CD-Drive", that was Mark's mistake - not Sonys.

Regarding the legal side it may be interesting to see what a case of severe data loss due to the race-condition of Aries.sys would result in (in a german court probably just resulting in a heated discussion about "stand der technology" and no punishment at all). Another aspect could be the costs due to localising and removing a unknown "rootkit" in (high) security environments where this unsuspectedly got installed.

Re: [Yahwe] Computer Misuse Act 1990
 

But at least there you agree to take the risk of spyware and malicious software and take the necessary precautions. You don't expect a legally bought CD to crap your system up completely.

Somewhat similar, in terms of effect, would be the Starforce 3 protection, however at least that lets you know it's going to be/has been installed and can removed (reasonably) safely.

(For those that didn't know, Starforce 3 will give any program that tries to use it administrator level access and a basically direct route to any part of your system, irregardless of your user level. This requires an admin account to install, but after that any account can acquire heaploads of malicious software through this, it's like making your system into a high-security building with a single entrance with 26 locks, then leaving copies of the keys lying in your garden in a wooden box marked 'spare keys')