The stages of cybercrime investigations: Bridging the gap between technology examination and law enforcement investigation

Cybercrime investigation can be argued as still in its infancy. The technical investigation practices and procedures of global law enforcement are also still evolving in response to the growing threat of the cybercriminal. This has led to considerable debate surrounding the adequacy of current technical investigation models, examination tools and the subsequent capability of law enforcement to tackle cybercrime. To bridge the gap between low-level technology recovery and digital forensic examination, and to overcome the many technical challenges now faced by law enforcement; this paper presents an extended cybercrime investigation model capable of guiding the investigative practices of the broader law enforcement community. The Stages of Cybercrime Investigations discussed throughout this paper, demonstrate the logical steps and primary considerations vital to investigating cyber related crime and criminality. The model is intended to provide both technical and non-technical investigative resources, covering mainstream law enforcement, partner agencies and specialist technical services, with a formal and common structure when investigating the complex technical nature of cybercrime. Finally, the model is further aimed at providing cybercrime investigators with a means to consolidate understanding, share knowledge and communicate the resulting outcomes as an investigation moves through each relevant stage.     

知识产权恶意诉讼的程序法应对

为了应对越来越多的知识产权恶意诉讼,运用理论分析和文献研究的方法,结合司法实践,对知识产权恶意诉讼的认定和成因进行论证和分析,认为在我国现有立法和司法现状下,应树立合理的应对知识产权恶意诉讼的立法理念,并从程序法方面提出解决思路。     

Trust in the world of cybercrime

For cybercriminals, the anonymity of the Internet offers not only opportunities but also challenges. Where one does not truly know whom one is doing business with, it makes it difficult to assess trustworthiness or to retaliate should dealings go sour and agreements need to be enforced. This creates a large deficit of trust, beyond even that common among conventional criminals, and makes cybercriminal transactions very unstable. As a result, it might be expected that cybercriminals would often act alone. But, in reality, cybercriminals collaborate quite widely. This is the puzzle that this article addresses. In order to overcome the major challenges of online anonymity, and to capitalise on its benefits, cybercriminals have developed a range of mechanisms that buttress trust. These include mechanisms relating to (1) establishing cybercriminal identities; (2) assessing cybercriminal attributes; and (3) extra-legal governance.     

The implementation of Directive 2001/20/EC into Belgian law and the specific provisions on pediatric research

The European Clinical Trial Directive (2001/20/EC) was implemented into the Belgian legal system by the Law of 7 May 2004 concerning experiments on the human person (LEH). Apart from implementing the European Directive, this law also broadens the scope of the Directive from interventional clinical trials to all medical experiments involving human persons. This article offers an overview of the requirements for involving minors in medical experiments that are captured in the LEH, illustrates the process of protocol review by an ethics committee, and discusses the dissimilarities between the LEH and the European Directive.     

欧盟金融法律制度及其对中国的影响

欧盟单一金融市场的建立,必将对中国产生深远影响,有助于中国制定对欧盟的金融战略.中国经济要融入欧盟金融市场,必须采用机智的措施,既尊重欧盟的金融法律制度,又能够灵活、有效地开拓市场,从而最大限度地从欧盟金融市场一体化及全球经济一体化趋势中获益.     

Safe harbor provisions of Chinese law: How clear are search engines from liability?

It seemed well-settled that Chinese law provided owners of search engines with safe harbor against unreasonable interference from copyright holders. But the judgment of IFPI v. Yahoo! shook this belief. This controversial judgment is related to the rather convoluted applicable legal rules, with joint infringement rules interweaved with the safe harbor provisions. To fully expose the scope of search engine provider's liability and the legal issues of the Yahoo! China ruling in particular, this paper examines the Chinese provisions for joint infringement and liability for search engines, discusses all the Chinese “safe harbor” provisions, those in the Regulation RCIN, the Judiciary Interpretation for Digital Copyright and the Administrative Measures for Digital Copyright. Following this discussion, suggested errors in legal application in the Yahoo! China case are analyzed and a suggested right approach is argued.     

关于程序正义的若干思考

一、程序的哲学意蕴 研究和设定程序需要有哲学观的指导.哲学观不同,所建构的程序以及所追求的程序正义的目标,也必然有所区别.从最广泛的意义上看,程序是指一定的运动过程及其构成运动的单子或因素之间的内在关联的总和.从这个概念看,任何物质或现象在时间和空间中的延续和伸展,皆是程序.     

Procedural justice perceptions,legitimacy beliefs,and compliance with the law: a meta-analysis

Journal of Experimental Criminology - The purpose of this study was to compare procedural justice and legitimacy as correlates and predictors of compliance with the law. A literature review...     

再论司法鉴定基本问题 —兼评《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》有关条款

最高法民事证据规定对于完善我国证据体系具有重要意义.此次证据规定,对作为证据体系重要一环的鉴定意见,从实体和程序方面都做了全面规定,对于缓解司法鉴定在民事诉讼中的诸多困境具有重要作用.但其中部分条款也可能对司法鉴定制度产生一定影响.为此,本文对司法鉴定可能会受到一定冲击的鉴定人负责制、鉴定意见撤销等基本内容,再次予以阐...     

刑事被指控人程序性权利研究

刑事被指控人的程序性权利,作为与实体性权利相对的概念,尚未受到刑诉学界的充分重视.程序性权利可以归结为人们以自己的行为享有和获取某种实体利益的正当性,以及享有作为道德主体、捍卫其人格尊严权利的正当性.它与实体性权利绝非简单的落实和保障之关系.程序公正和程序人道构成了其价值基础.刑事被迫诉人的程序性权利包涵了程序启动权、程序参与权、程序选择权、程序救济权、程序抵抗权、受告知权等多种权利类型.落实实体性权利,实现程序价值,提高刑事裁判和决定的可接受性,限制决定者的恣意、规制权力的运作,推动和落实善治是其功能所在.     

程序公正是刑事诉讼立法的基准价值论

传统的刑事诉讼理论将刑事诉讼法作为刑法的附属法,刑事诉讼法的价值一直被视为一元化的工具价值。现代社会是价值多元的社会,刑事诉讼法已被视为多元价值的结合体。但是,在价值多元的立法需求条件下,刑事诉讼制度设计采取多点定位的思维方式必然导致价值冲突调整失序,刑事诉讼法内在价值的和谐性和制度设计的逻辑统一性无法完美的实现。因而,确立程序公正为刑事诉讼立法的基准价值,既赋予刑事诉讼法以独立的法治价值地位,有助于推进刑事法治,又为解决刑事诉讼立法技术方面的困难,提供了明确的指导原则和程序设计考量标准。     

欧盟合同法律适用制度的演进

欧共体于1980年通过的<合同之债的法律适用公约>(以下称<罗马公约>或<公约>),统一了各成员国的合同法律适用规则,在一定程度上减少了由当李人作法院选择的几率.但是,经过20多年的实践,<公约>本身的立法形式及一些具体条款已表现出诸多不足.本文拟根据欧盟委员会公布的<关于将1980年＜合同之债的法律适用公约＞转换为共同体立法及其现代化的绿皮书>(以下称<绿皮书>)和<合同之债的法律适用条例议案>(以下称<罗马条例I议案>)这两个重要文件,对<公约>各条款的不适应性进行分析,并介绍其解决这些问题的思路.