Did you know that it's illegal to bypass IP bans on this website?

generosity

FuzzFerretTM wrote:
generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
and then take into consideration occam's razor to ascertain the truth
have fun!

You're right, Wikipedia isn't the best source.

However (most of the time) they list their sources, and from said source I found this out; "A ruling by Northern District of California Judge Breyer suggests that such activity constitutes ‘unauthorised access’ as enshrined in the CFAA, and leaves the perpetrator open to potential legal action.“

I was kinda confused by that, so I googled ”Legal Action“.

”A judicial proceeding brought by one party against another; one party prosecutes another for a wrong done or for protection of a right or for prevention of a wrong"

So, this implies that people could indeed be sentenced to jail and/or fined? Maybe, I'm not sure. I want to be 100% sure on this, and I'm about 90% at the moment lol.

You guys made me do research! What the heck! lol ^_^

okay so that's a california judge

Last edited by generosity (Aug. 23, 2013 22:41:07)

“Take a hard look at the dollar bill and ask yourself, is this really what people are dying for?” - Lil B

FuzzFerretTM

generosity wrote:
okay so that's a california judge

Implying that California judges have no idea what they're talking about? lol jk I don't blame you

Yeah, that's all I found that was useful on the subject. I believe this was the only US Court that the case went through atm though, so who knows what happens next.

It's not officially a law though, I want to make that clear. I was just chiming in with speculation.

jvvg

generosity wrote:
FuzzFerretTM wrote:
generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
and then take into consideration occam's razor to ascertain the truth
have fun!

You're right, Wikipedia isn't the best source.

However (most of the time) they list their sources, and from said source I found this out; "A ruling by Northern District of California Judge Breyer suggests that such activity constitutes ‘unauthorised access’ as enshrined in the CFAA, and leaves the perpetrator open to potential legal action.“

I was kinda confused by that, so I googled ”Legal Action“.

”A judicial proceeding brought by one party against another; one party prosecutes another for a wrong done or for protection of a right or for prevention of a wrong"

So, this implies that people could indeed be sentenced to jail and/or fined? Maybe, I'm not sure. I want to be 100% sure on this, and I'm about 90% at the moment lol.

You guys made me do research! What the heck! lol ^_^
okay so that's a california judge

Yes, it is a California judge. However, the ruling has established an interpretation on the law that should be used in any future similar cases.

Also, although Wikipedia isn't necessarily the best source, they're usually at least not lying. They did list their sources in this case, so I think that the article is reliable enough.

Last edited by jvvg (Aug. 23, 2013 23:07:18)

Professional web developer and lead engineer on the Scratch Wiki
Maybe the Scratch Team isn't so bad — Why the April Fools' Day forum didn't work last year

mitchboy

generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?

Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Capsicum annuum.

FuzzFerretTM

mitchboy wrote:
Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Oh man, I remember having to use that in elementary school instead of Wikipedia, it's so old lol.

Brb, gotta dust off the VCR player in the attic!

Last edited by FuzzFerretTM (Aug. 23, 2013 23:08:13)

jji7skyline

FuzzFerretTM wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Oh man, I remember having to use that in elementary school instead of Wikipedia, it's so old lol.

Brb, gotta dust off the VCR player in the attic!

I'll go wind up the hall clock while your at that.

Check out the NEW PROBEHEAD ALBUM!

mythbusteranimator

Holy wow.

I've been listening to…
Ogre Battle // Queen // Queen II // Heavy Metal, Hard Rock, Progressive Metal
Orion // Metallica // Master of Puppets // Heavy Metal, Thrash Metal, Instrumental
Damage Inc. // Metallica// Master of Puppets // Thrash Metal, Heavy Metal
Snow (Hey Oh) // Red Hot Chilli Peppers // Snow (Hey Oh) // Soft Rock, Acoustic
Who Wants To Live Forever // Queen // A Kind of Magic // Power Ballad, Soft Rock
I suggest you listen to…
For a influential playlist: Damage Inc and Orion. Both of these songs are part of the album that revolutionized heavy and thrash metal forever.

FuzzFerretTM

jji7skyline wrote:
FuzzFerretTM wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Oh man, I remember having to use that in elementary school instead of Wikipedia, it's so old lol.

Brb, gotta dust off the VCR player in the attic!
I'll go wind up the hall clock while your at that.

Make sure to grab your walkman from the table over there as well! I found a few cassettes up here!

generosity

jvvg wrote:
generosity wrote:
FuzzFerretTM wrote:
generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
and then take into consideration occam's razor to ascertain the truth
have fun!

You're right, Wikipedia isn't the best source.

However (most of the time) they list their sources, and from said source I found this out; "A ruling by Northern District of California Judge Breyer suggests that such activity constitutes ‘unauthorised access’ as enshrined in the CFAA, and leaves the perpetrator open to potential legal action.“

I was kinda confused by that, so I googled ”Legal Action“.

”A judicial proceeding brought by one party against another; one party prosecutes another for a wrong done or for protection of a right or for prevention of a wrong"

So, this implies that people could indeed be sentenced to jail and/or fined? Maybe, I'm not sure. I want to be 100% sure on this, and I'm about 90% at the moment lol.

You guys made me do research! What the heck! lol ^_^
okay so that's a california judge
Yes, it is a California judge. However, the ruling has established an interpretation on the law that should be used in any future similar cases.

Also, although Wikipedia isn't necessarily the best source, they're usually at least not lying. They did list their sources in this case, so I think that the article is reliable enough.

should but probably won't

mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

NO.

“Take a hard look at the dollar bill and ask yourself, is this really what people are dying for?” - Lil B

jvvg

generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
generosity wrote:
FuzzFerretTM wrote:
generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.
this is untrue
And you would know this how…?
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
and then take into consideration occam's razor to ascertain the truth
have fun!

You're right, Wikipedia isn't the best source.

However (most of the time) they list their sources, and from said source I found this out; "A ruling by Northern District of California Judge Breyer suggests that such activity constitutes ‘unauthorised access’ as enshrined in the CFAA, and leaves the perpetrator open to potential legal action.“

I was kinda confused by that, so I googled ”Legal Action“.

”A judicial proceeding brought by one party against another; one party prosecutes another for a wrong done or for protection of a right or for prevention of a wrong"

So, this implies that people could indeed be sentenced to jail and/or fined? Maybe, I'm not sure. I want to be 100% sure on this, and I'm about 90% at the moment lol.

You guys made me do research! What the heck! lol ^_^
okay so that's a california judge
Yes, it is a California judge. However, the ruling has established an interpretation on the law that should be used in any future similar cases.

Also, although Wikipedia isn't necessarily the best source, they're usually at least not lying. They did list their sources in this case, so I think that the article is reliable enough.
should but probably won't

The court has established that bypassing IP bans is against the CFAA, so that is now the interpretation of the law that stands.

Professional web developer and lead engineer on the Scratch Wiki
Maybe the Scratch Team isn't so bad — Why the April Fools' Day forum didn't work last year

mitchboy

generosity wrote:
mitchboy wrote:
generosity wrote:
you have to ask yourself a question
1) is wikipedia a reliable source at all?
Actually, it's hardly less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica.
NO.

Actually, some people did a study on it and found that out.

Wikipedia gets all of its information from reliable sources (have you ever looked at the references section beneath all of Wikipedia pages?), so even though it is editable by anyone, it is still a reliable source. Plus, it's .org (considered reliable).

Capsicum annuum.

chocolatepenguin

TheCatAndTheBanana wrote:
NeilWest wrote:
Thank god for Britain.
Except GCHQ is worse with spying than the NSA, yet the media isn't allowed to go on about it, because they've been forced to destroy the computers [/cynicism]

Why?

magreen9

jvvg wrote:
I just read an article about changing IP addresses, and it is has been decided by a judge that changing your IP address to access a website you've been banned from is illegal under US law.

What does everyone think about that?

I live in Canada so it does not effect me! LOL

Come on, bring us season 2 of Stranger Things already. HYPE.

firefang16

jvvg wrote:
RedRocker227 wrote:
how illegal? as in, what sort of punishments would theoretically be handed out to people doing it?
I'm not sure. According to Wikipedia, it looks like it is a criminal offense, so probably a prison sentence or fine.

Oh, no, I dont wand kids getting arrested!

hi

Harakou

magreen9 wrote:
jvvg wrote:
I just read an article about changing IP addresses, and it is has been decided by a judge that changing your IP address to access a website you've been banned from is illegal under US law.

What does everyone think about that?
I live in Canada so it does not effect me! LOL

Please don't bump up old posts unless you have something constructive to add. This thread is over a year old and bumping it up simply to say it doesn't affect you doesn't add anything to make the thread useful or constructive after it has died. Thanks.

Discuss Scratch