Hello Barrett,

I'm pinging you today as a freelancer from Tech News Daily. I've been assigned a feature on the "gray area" surrounding the current case involving the prosecutions of Andrew "weev" Aurenheimer and Daniel "JacksonBrown" Spitler.

If you have a moment to answer a few questions, I'd truly appreciate it!

First, a good number of hackers see this as a case of the government moving to please a huge corporation - AT&T - which basically got embarrassed by a couple of hackers. If you consider the law under which they've been charged, the Computer Fraud Act of 1986, which has been called outdated (at best; one article on DailyTech lambastes it <http://www.dailytech.com/Interview+Goatse+Security+on+FBI+Charges+Following+ATT+iPad+Breach/article20693.htm>)  in a rapidly changing electronic world, can justice really be served?

Whether or not these guys should be on trial, isn't it time for better, more up-to-date legal framework in our criminal justice system for cyber-criminals? And--SHOULD these guys be on trial at all?

Some people don't think weev and JacksonBrown should have even been charged. Their actions ultimately resulted in a more secure network for AT&T and its clients. What do you think - is this a good case? and why?

Thank you very much for your time!

Best,
Joel Durham Jr
Professional Freelance Author, Writer and Editor
----------
1315 King Rd.
Lot 32
Clifton Springs, NY 14432
(585) 208-3238
----------
Find me on Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin!
Please check out my new novel here:
http://joeldurhamjr.com/Slip%20Away%20Preview.html
*Kindness = Intelligence*