Comment by Aurornis

11 hours ago

Note that CNN isn’t in trouble for reporting this, the person who exfiltrated the footage is.

Stealing security camera footage and giving (or possibly selling) it is a problem. This article tries to make a case that the law applied wasn’t correct on somewhat pedantic terms, but I don’t know enough about the law to know if they have a point or not.

I do know, however, that if you take private data from your employer and leak it (or sell it) you’re not going to be on the right side of the law. I have a hard time buying this article’s point that it was just “violating company policy”

"the law" is the fulcrum this turns on.

if you wrong your employer, for example by failing to do your job well, you are not a criminal to be prosecuted by the state. you may well deserve to lose that job though.

here, wronging your employer is considered a criminal act.

  • > if you wrong your employer, for example by failing to do your job well, you are not a criminal to be prosecuted by the state

    This is going out of one’s way to abuse the employer’s trust. Moreover, it’s stealing their stuff. If I take cash out of a till, my employer should have the option of pressing charges.

    Where I agree with you is that this isn’t computer fraud and abuse. It’s closer to theft. The law used to prosecute should be more banal.

    • Different but comparable example. Some jobs, if you mess up you just get fired. Other jobs you could end up in prison, for doing the same/similar thing.

      A prison officer has a sexual relationship with a prisoner, should they simply be fired or also have a jury heard criminal court process then a record?

      .. Not that it should be relevant, but now factor in the prison officer is female, newly qualified and the training college wrote to the prison to warn that the prison officer is not suitable to be a prison officer because they are not robust enough. The prisoner is also highly manipulative and has a documented history of romance with vulnerable females.

  • And it seems like that law requires malicious intent. I wonder how that would be proven here?

    • Section A of 18.2-152.4 reads:

      “A. It is unlawful for any person, with malicious intent, or through intentionally deceptive means and without authority, to:”

      And Mr. Mbengue plead no contest to this charge, so he did not admit guilt but agreed to be punished as if he was guilty. He had an attorney with prosecutorial experience retained for his criminal proceeding so we can assume he entered that plea upon receiving qualified legal advice. Under terms of his plea, if he keeps his nose clean for a year, he can apply to have the charge expunged from his record.

      So, this looks like a plea bargain. But since he plead no contest, the prosecution doesn’t have to prove anything.

      1 reply →

[flagged]

  • Be kind. Don't be snarky. Edit out swipes.

    Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

    Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

    Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

    https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> I do know, however, that if you take private data from your employer and leak it (or sell it) you’re not going to be on the right side of the law. I have a hard time buying this article’s point that it was just “violating company policy”

If I were to copy the files on my work device and distribute them, I would be in violation of NDAs which could be pursued as civil offenses. If I didn’t have those NDAs, my employer could try and pursue something in court, along with firing me, but it wouldn’t be a straightforward suit.

None of these are (or at least, should be) criminal situations.

  • As a DLP professional: please don’t tell people this. You can absolutely be arrested and prosecuted for this.

    • What's the charge for the arrest? I thought legally intellectual property wasn't "real property." If it actually was a trade secret, it might make more sense.

      7 replies →

  • I mean in the first case you're literally stealing from your employer. If that doesn't make you a criminal for theft I don't know what does

    • But the footage isn't "real property" as I understand it. The only thing the theft does is deprive the company from the opportunity to sell the footage themselves, and it's not exactly like selling security camera footage is the business model of many/any(?) company.

      If the harm is that the company couldn't sell the footage itself, the remedy should be giving the company the money from the sale.

      4 replies →