who gains unauthorized access to the data, in violation of the law. Then imprisonment or a monetary penalty of not threaten. It is, however, on whether the data were backed up.By Heribert Prantl Heribert Prantl
Prof. Dr. Heribert Prantl is a member of the editorial Board of the süddeutsche Zeitung, he has led for 25 years, the Department of the interior policy and is now the head of the departments opinion. He teaches as an honorary Professor for legal studies at the University of Bielefeld. He's right, history and philosophy studied, in parallel, a journalistic training, and in copyright and competition law a doctorate. Before he left in 1988 as political editor for the SZ, he was a Prosecutor and judge in Bavaria. He loves the music of the upper Palatinate, compatriot Christoph Willibald Gluck. When he hears the put by he novels, history books, the "pure legal doctrine", and even the Süddeutsche Zeitung.
Heribert Prantl has written the price of numerous political books and, for the first book, "Germany, flammable" he received the Geschwister-Scholl -. Among its other awards including the science award of the house of Thurn and Taxis, the Kurt-Tucholsky-prize of the rhetoric-the price of the University of Tübingen, Germany, Hildegard Hamm-Brücher-price, of the seven Pfeiffer award, the Wilhelm-Hoegner-price and the Brüder-Grimm-prize of the University of Marburg. For his editorials on the major Christian holidays of the faculty of theology of the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, he was awarded the Dr. h. C. theology. Recent book publications: "In the name of humanity. Save the refugees" (2015); "in Spite of all of this. Europe, you got to love" (2016) and "instructions for use of the populists" (2017).send an email
"spying on data" is the name of the relevant offence in clause 202 a of the penal code. The Hacker, called the "Orbit" or "God", and his accomplices, a monetary penalty or imprisonment of up to three years threatens. The penal provision is there for the Second act to combat economic crime from the year 1986. It reads as: "Whoever without authorization or other access to data not intended for him, Overcoming the access security provides, shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years or with a monetary penalty."
the right to informational self-determination is Protected in this way. And it will be punished even if the offender unauthorized access to the data; it is not necessary that he gives the data that he and calls. Will be punished, so also the mere Hacking, so the Crack of a computer system without the spying out of data.
Any kind of Hacking will be punished
The mere Hacking without the Skimming of data was originally not sanctioned, as it was called, to avoid a Überkriminalisierung. This was, however, soon seen as a mistake, the courts interpreted the "gain-of-data", so that many cases were punished by the Hacking, contrary to the actual intention of the legislator. The legislators are moved, guided by an EU framework decision on attacks against information systems: For 11. August 2007 will be punished any Hacking. Since then, it is said in the law, that "is liable to provide data," but the "access-gain". The criminality is so dropped.
The data must, however, proceedings against unauthorized access, especially secured by passwords, Hardware, Fuses, electronic Fingerprints or biometric access; in consideration also, traditional Backups will come, but, for example, containers Store in sealed. An "Overcoming" of the access security required by the law. Overcoming the circumvention of access protection is understood - so that, in practice, frequent cases (for example, artificially induced system overload) criminal law are recorded.
purpose, anti-competitive Use
And it must be data that are not intended for the offender. The improper Use of data intended for the user, does not comply with the facts: When a police officer car holder-retrieves data for private purposes, is not a "spying" after Clause 202 a of the penal code.
According to Clause 202 b is punished, the "Interception of data" - so if an offender gives under the application of technical means, data from an non-public transmission of data. Also, the mere Prepare for the Hacking, or Interception of data (for example, Passport wins legal ruling against Craigslist) is already punishable - with imprisonment of up to one year or with a monetary penalty.
The dissemination and publication of the unlawfully obtained data, shall be punished as a misdemeanor under the Federal privacy act. If the publication and dissemination of the intention of is done, to enrich or to harm another, is a criminal Offence - punishable with imprisonment of up to two years or with a monetary penalty. If an offender gives the data, the other spied on, or more widespread, can - in the case of Damage or for financial gain - also, data receiving is available under section 202 d; fine or prison up to three years.
In all of these offences are offences prosecuted on complaint. You will be so prosecuted only on complaint of the injured party. The spying and Interception of data, and the data receiving stolen property, the Prosecutor can be answered in the affirmative but there is a special public interest in law enforcement and criminal the request of the injured track.
Strange is, that the trial of all these offences will not be punished. The failed virtual break-in attempt, therefore, remains unpunished, even if it is practiced EN masse. The legal classification is not correct because the front and rear, because the "Preparing the Spying and interception of data" (for example, the already mentioned password Klaus) subject to clause 202 c is even ex-officio. Alone: In the case of passwords, and Tools that are kept abroad, helps to this clause nothing - the German criminal law generally applies only to offences committed in Germany.