What are the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 and how does it help prevent computer fraud?
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 1986 implies that the legal entity does not need specific permission to have access to private computers by using the Internet service provider as a source of personal information (Eastton & Taylor, 2011). This legislative innovation is critical for the safety of the virtual space for business and governmental operations. This approach prevents fraud by having access and monitoring the activity on the web of suspicious users.
We will write a custom Assessment on Cyber Law and Information Assurance specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Describe the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 and list the 2 exceptions that must be met for one to legally monitor phone calls
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 is meant to protect the rights of the individual users while transferring the particular information via different communication (Shyles, 2002). Despite the protection declared by the act, the expectations, which allow monitoring phone calls, tend to exist. One of them is related to consent and implies that both parties agree for the recording (Whitman & Mattord, 2011). Meanwhile, another aspect is a regular recording of the phone calls of the employees in the organization to monitor efficiency (Eastton & Taylor, 2011).
What is the Communications Decency Act of 1996 and what amendment was added and why? Which version is the current federal law?
The Communications Decency Act of 1996 was introduced to reduce and control the spread of pornography on the Internet while decreasing the popularization of this industry among children (Hill & Marion, 2016). In this case, the Exon Amendment was added to reduce the spread of irrelevant information in the networks (Murray, 2007). Currently, it is portrayed as controlling offensiveness and vulgarity in federal law.
What is the key focus of the No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 and what actions did this law create as criminal acts?
The No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 has a tendency to emphasize the necessity to prosecute the acts related to copyright violations (Eastton & Taylor, 2011). In this case, this regulation creates a well-established frame for the acts while punishing the individuals for using the materials without buying rights for the application from the owners by imposing a fine or incarceration (Eastton & Taylor, 2011). This approach classifies these aspects as a violation of the criminal law despite having no financial gain from the procedure.
What is the primary purpose of the Children’s Internet Protection Act?
The principal goal of the Children’s Internet Protection Act is to ensure the safety of Internet usage while controlling the accessibility of the particular types of content to children (Schwabach, 2014). The government uses the collaboration with schools to install blocking software and introduce filtering. This strategy decreases the influences on children, and it is important due to the vulnerability of children’s minds.
What must schools do to certify that they are in compliance with the Children’s Internet Protection Act?
Meanwhile, the schools have to identify that their actions comply and certify with the Children’s Internet Protection Act. In this case, the education institutions have to utilize filtering software actively while assuring that they limit the web sources with the harmful content (Schwabach, 2014). In turn, the organizations and schools have to organize meetings regularly to monitor the results and propose alternative measures to improve safety (Schwabach, 2014).
What do critics of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 claim are the deficiencies in the law and why?
Despite the initial positive intentions to eliminate the existence of spam, the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 was highly criticized in the society. In this case, one of the drawbacks of the Act is its lack of compliance with the previous laws while being a potential driver for the rise in the spam messages (Chen & Fadlalla, 2008). Meanwhile, companies and other business entities determined the possible ways to avoid its regulations by using different schemes for the message-sending (Chen & Fadlalla, 2008).
What is the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2008 and what does the text claim are its important provisions and aspects?
The Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2008 is aimed to decrease the frequency of identity thefts online (Eastton & Taylor, 2011). In this case, its provisions are redefining the term of cyber extortion and increasing the coverage of prosecution to domestic affairs (Eastton & Taylor, 2011). Meanwhile, both organizations and individuals could be viewed as the potential victims of this violation.
Chen, K., & Fadlalla, A. (2008). Online consumer protection: Theories of human relativism. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Eastton, C., & Taylor, J. (2011). Computer crime, investigation, and the law. Boston, MA: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Murray, A. (2007). The regulation of cyberspace: Control in the online environment. New York, NY: Routledge-Cavendish.
Schwabach, A. (2014). Internet and the law: Technology, society, and compromises. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Shyles, L. (2002). Deciphering cyberspace: Making the most of digital communication technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Whitman, M. E., & Mattord, H. (2011). Reading & cases in information security: Law & ethics. Boston, MA: South-Western Cengage Learning.