There have been a number of computer related legal cases (usually involving hackers) where the final sentence includes some provision preventing them from using computers for a specified period of time. I had always been surprised that not too many people protested this - as it seems to me that computers have become so essential to many peoples' lives and jobs that it would be too much of a burden to say they couldn't use computers at all. Now, a federal appeals court has overturned a ruling against a convicted child pornographer which had said he couldn't use a computer. The court said that it's an "unfair encroachment on his liberties" and points out that even though people use telephones to commit crimes, courts don't ban the use of telephones as punishment.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians
- Judge In No Fly Case Explains To DOJ That It Can't Claim Publicly Released Info Is Secret
- German Court Says CEO Of Open Source Company Liable For 'Illegal' Functions Submitted By Community
- More Schools Reconsidering Zero Tolerance Policies And On-Campus Law Enforcement
- Case Over No-Fly List Takes Bizarre Turn As Gov't Puts Witness On List, Then Denies Having Done So