Computer Abuse is roughly defined as, “ Any incident associated with computer technology in which a victim suffered or could have suffered loss and a perpetrator by intention made or could have made gain.” (Parker 12) Although computers are a fairly recent development in regards to home use there has been a surge of them for entertainment in the last two decades. The growing awareness of the computer and the Internet has produced individuals with the knowledge to accomplish high tech computer crimes. Internet crime is

The acceleration of computer crimes in this rapid growth of computer technology has raised the question of what countermeasures may be taken. IBM who is the largest manufacturer of computers is currently partaking in internal checks within a system to ensure security regarding adequate identification procedures for individuals communicating with the computer by keyboard terminals. [6] Other possible solutions to computer fraud involve a pen that will examine the personal signature to verify the user. [7] With regards to the prevention of computer and Internet fraud there have been many theories on the approach that have come forth. There has been the theory that “Self-Regulation” would be the best method. It is stated by Post and Johnson in their article “Law and Boarders—The Rise of Law in Cyberspace” that users and system operators would be able to effectively govern their own world of Cyberspace. The system operators have effective enforcement tools such as banishment of the offender. The article states that “Cyberspace is anything but anarchic, its distinct rule sets are becoming more robust every day.” (Post and Johnson 1996) There is an agreement among cyberspace users that they abide by their own rules. These unwritten laws have been referred to as “Netiquette.” The opposition to this method has stated that they feel that one must analyze and regulate the Internet in terms of physical locations. One aspect of Internet fraud that is said to really benefit from Self-Regulation is that of gambling over the Internet. One online casino operator stated that there was no reason to cheat his customers because then he would loose his source of income. The downfall of this is that it will only apply to honest online casino operators. [8] Another theory that has been stated is that of “Central Regulation.” Some individuals feel that a coordinated international effort is necessary and there have been rumors that an international convention should convene to standardize statutes and facilitate enforcement. So far however no attempt has been made. Perhaps the best method when deciding between these two methods is not to try to invalidate one but to try to incorporate the two effectively. Another aspect of prevention of online fraud is Secure Access Management, otherwise known as “SAM.” What this does is that it ensures that no connection can be made with something such as a casino before a remote users access is verified. Another authority that is in place is called “Fraud Net.” The National Consumers League launched this and its sole purpose is to monitor and prevent online fraud. It was launched in 1996. With regards to statutes that are in place there is the Interstate Wire line Act of 1961. This was to make it illegal for providers to offer or take bets from gamblers over the phone lines or through other wired devices unless authorized by a particular state. The problems with this act is that the statute doesn’t specifically mention the Internet and it is unclear how well the law would apply to “Satellite – Based” transmissions which are not considered wired devices.[9] Another statute that is in place particularly in regards to gambling is that of the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997. It states the law placed on individuals who use Internet gambling. It basically states that any individual who is betting over the Internet in a region that does not permit gambling is to be fined up to $10 000 and possibly imprisoned up to 2 years. The problem with this is that some individuals state that the language of the statute is too broad and affects Internet Commerce on the whole. With regards to Indian Casino’s the legality of the Internet gets even more complicated. Indians contend that they are sovereign entities and thus independent of laws made by a state. The court battles are still occurring. There are many agencies that assist in the regulation of the Int

Some topics in this essay:
Post Johnson, Crime Net, Telecommunications Fraud, Computer Conference, IMPLICATIONS Society, CURRENT ENFORCEMENT, Net Cash, Protection Act, Computer Abuse, Fraudulent Debits, post johnson, net cash, crimes occur, internet gambling, type fraud, invisible boarders, internet fraud, net cash electronic, computer crimes, gambling internet, system operators, post johnson 1996,