INTROdUCTION The new millennium brings new crimes. Witness two of the most talked-about crimes of the year, the ILove You computer worm(in terms of economic damage, perhaps the most devastating crime in history, causing more than $11 billion in losses )and the denial of service attacks on Yahoo eBay, ETrade and other sites(which caused $1.2 billion in damage ). These events suggest that a new breed of crime has emerged over the past decade: Cybercrime. This umbrella term covers all sorts of crimes committed with computers-from viruses to trojan horses; from hacking into private email to undermining defense and intelligence systems; from electronic thefts of bank accounts to disrupting web sites. Law has not necessarily caught up with these crimes, as the recent dismissal of charges against he author of the ILove You worm demonstrates. How should the law think about computer crime? Some academics see cyberspace as a new area where first principles of law need to be rethought. David Johnson and David Post, for example, contend that existing legal rules are not suitable for the digital age, and that governments should not necessarily impose legal order on the Internet. 3 Others, by contrast, believe that a computer is merely an instrument and that crime in cyberspace e virus Signs Marketing and Sales Contract, BUSINESS WIRE, Aug 1, 2000(totaling damage from ILove You virus at $ll billion ); Russ Banham, Computer Viruses, CFO Magazine, Aug. 1, 2000(describing Yankee Group Consulting Firm study of February's denial of service attacks and its damage calculation of $1. 2 billion) PhilippinesDropsChargesinlloVeYouVirusCaseathttp://www.cnn.com/2000/tech /computing/08/21/computers. philippines reut/index. html(Aug 21, 2000)(reporting that Phillippines dropped charges because the only law against hacking was passed after the crimes took place) dAvid R Johnson David G Post, And How Shall the Net Be Governed? A Meditation on the Relative Virtues of Decentralized Emergent Law, in CooRDINATING THE INTERNET 62(Brian Kahin James H. Keller eds. 1997); David R. Johnson David Post, Law and Borders-The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48 STAN. L REV. 1367, 1372-75(1996) see also Benjamin Wittes, Is Law Enforcement Ready for Cyber Crime LEGAL TIMES, October 10, 1994 at 17 (describing how "some describe the Internet as'qualitatively different from other platforms for crime"and how others, such as Stewart Baker, former general counsel at the National Security Agency, believe that such descriptions are"broadly speaking-wrong")1 eVirus Signs Marketing and Sales Contract, BUSINESS WIRE, Aug. 1, 2000 (totaling damage from ILoveYou virus at $11 billion); Russ Banham, Computer Viruses, CFO Magazine, Aug. 1, 2000 (describing Yankee Group Consulting Firm study of February’s denial of service attacks and its damage calculation of $1.2 billion). 2Philippines Drops Charges in ILoveYou Virus Case, at http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH /computing/08/21/computers.philippines.reut/index.html(Aug 21, 2000) (reporting that Phillippines dropped charges because the only law against hacking was passed after the crimes took place). 3David R. Johnson & David G. Post, And How Shall the Net Be Governed? A Meditation on the Relative Virtues of Decentralized Emergent Law, in COORDINATING THE INTERNET 62 (Brian Kahin & James H. Keller eds. 1997); David R. Johnson & David Post, Law and Borders–The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48 STAN. L. REV. 1367, 1372-75 (1996); see also Benjamin Wittes, Is Law Enforcement Ready for Cyber Crime?, LEGAL TIMES, October 10, 1994 at 17 (describing how “some describe the Internet as ‘qualitatively different’ from other platforms for crime” and how others, such as Stewart Baker, former general counsel at the National Security Agency, believe that such descriptions are “broadly speaking–wrong”). INTRODUCTION The new millennium brings new crimes. Witness two of the most talked-about crimes of the year, the ILoveYou computer worm (in terms of economic damage, perhaps the most devastating crime in history, causing more than $11 billion in losses) and the denial of service attacks on Yahoo, eBay, ETrade and other sites (which caused $1.2 billion in damage).1 These events suggest that a new breed of crime has emerged over the past decade: Cybercrime. This umbrella term covers all sorts of crimes committed with computers–from viruses to trojan horses; from hacking into private email to undermining defense and intelligence systems; from electronic thefts of bank accounts to disrupting web sites. Law has not necessarily caught up with these crimes, as the recent dismissal of charges against the author of the ILoveYou worm demonstrates.2 How should the law think about computer crime? Some academics see cyberspace as a new area where first principles of law need to be rethought. David Johnson and David Post, for example, contend that existing legal rules are not suitable for the digital age, and that governments should not necessarily impose legal order on the Internet.3 Others, by contrast, believe that a computer is merely an instrument and that crime in cyberspace