Lawyers Telling Judges What to Think?!
No, not really.
So, there’s obviously been quite a furor about this new law here in Texas that apparently requires anyone doing any kind of computer forensic work to get a Private Investigator’s License. Now, one of my favorite computer security bloggers, Security Monkey (aka The Chief) of A Day in the Life of an Information Security Investigator, has a blog entry about this. His sources in Texas have a different, more relaxed, take on this law. They seem to think that it’s only going to effect professionals doing investigative work for a third party. I think they’re wrong.
As at least one other commenter on A Day in the Life of a Computer Security Investigator pointed out, no matter what the lawyers think and say, only a judge sitting on a case can really interpret the law. And, only after that precedent is set can anyone say what the law covers and doesn’t.
Based on the Slashdot story about someone getting charged with a felony for using a fake name to sign up to MySpace, it seems like this is going to be an important step in the process. I mean, until that all important precedent is set, there’s no telling how people will try to use this new law.
As I wrote here the other day about this far-reaching law, I think it’s just another example of the sad state of our legal system. Laws like this have effects that are much, much further reaching than the bill’s author intended, and it’s ripe for abuse by our overly litigious society.
Advice from your Uncle Jim:
"A bone to the dog is not charity. Charity is bone to the dog, when you are just as hungry as the dog."
--Jack London
