Paper Summary:

This paper explores e-fraud in its many forms, the online criminals who perpetuate these crimes, and the government efforts to stop them. The paper discusses spoof emails, phishing, and domain jacking. The U.S. government has various measures in place to guard against domestic online crime, the paper explains; one such measure is fraud detection, which seeks to identify and circumvent fraud as quickly as possible. The paper adds that another well-used government method is fraud prevention, or educating the public about how to protect itself from fraud. The paper states that it is critical that the private sector detect acts of e-fraud directed towards its customers and report these vile acts to government after measures have been taken to safeguard customers. The paper also iterates the need for a standard international law pertaining to e-fraud that is adhered to by all sovereign nations, including the U.S. All in all, the paper concludes, government preventative policy and measures are beneficial, but much work remains to make the existing laws more efficient and effective.

From the Paper:

"When trying to prosecute criminals internationally--that is criminals residing outside the U.S --the U.S. government faces an uphill task. The reason being is the potentiality of the U.S. governments' laws to conflict with the laws of another sovereign nation. For instance, the U.S. government "still has its sovereign powers, but it cannot use them regardless of the expected action of other governments...[therefore the] technically and economically global character of the internet increases the international potential for conflict"( Engel, 2006, p. 204). The U.S. government can however based on "international law ...apply their national law to international issues if the issue is linked closely enough to their affairs" (Engel, 2006, p.207). In fact, there have been some cases in which "in order to do substantial justice, courts are compelled to exercise jurisdiction over non-nationals in doing so they went beyond the sovereignty principle, exercising exorbitant jurisdiction over defendants that were not present or domiciled in the territory" (Pandey, 2009, p.46). These cases are for the most part rare and do not occur very often. (Pandey, 2009, p. 46) Therefore, the question of which country has jurisdiction comes into play when the U.S. is in pursuit of an international criminal who is wanted on a crime that is not linked to the U.S. governments affairs. According to U.S. law concerning jurisdiction, "in order for [a criminal] suit to go forward in the chosen state, the defendant must have some connection with the state" (Wang, 2008, p.237). Even though some progress has made, "the world still is yet to conceive a proper law and set of rules regulating the transactions, the civil wrongs, and crimes committed in the virtual world of cyberspace"(Pandey, 2009, p. 56)."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Balsmeier, Phillip W., Bergiel, Blaise J., and Bergiel, Erich B. (2008) Internet Cross Border Crime: A Growing Problem. Journal of Website Promotion, 3:3/4, pp. 133-142
• Bolton, Richard J., and Hand, David J. (2002) Statistical Fraud Detection: A Review. Statistical Science, 17:3, pp. 235- 249
• Burstein, Aaron. (2003) A Survey Of Cybercrime In The United States. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 18:313, pp.313 - 338
• Camara, Sierra Jose M., and Mohator, Oscar D. (2007) New Directions in Online Fraud. Computation in Modern Science and Engineering, 2, pp. 973-976
• Chua, Huang Eng Ceceil., Daniel, Robey, Wareham, Jonathan. (2007) The Role Of Online Trading Communities in Managing Internet Auction Fraud. MIS Quarterly, 31:4, pp.759-781

Visitors who viewed this Research Paper also liked these:

• Analytical Essay # 1269 : "Islam and Government in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia"
• Analytical Essay # 140727 : "Economics and Government Policy"
• Analytical Essay # 123655 : "Economics and Government Policy"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: