Online fraud laws to get an update

10 years behind bars for phishing without a licence....

By Dan Ilett, 27 May 2005 17:35

NEWS

The UK government is proposing changes to a fraud law that would mean scammers behind phishing attacks could face up to 10 years in jail.

The Home Office has published the government's Fraud Bill in which it suggests a new offence of fraud to close loop holes in the current law.

Home Office minister Fiona Mactaggart said: "The introduction of a general fraud offence will improve the criminal law in a number of respects. It will simplify the law, making it clearer to juries and the general public as well as making the prosecution process more effective by providing a clear definition of fraud. Our aim is to encompass all forms of fraudulent conduct, with a law that is flexible enough to deal with developing technology, allowing us to bring more offenders to justice."

Under the proposal, the offence could be committed in three ways: by false representation, such as phishing scams; by failing to disclose information for financial gain; or by abuse of position. The Home Office is also planning to criminalise obtaining services dishonestly, possessing articles for use in fraud and participating in fraudulent business.

The Home Office said it was aiming to clarify the definition of current offences, which were allowing some defendants to escape prosecution through ambiguity of wording.

But some security experts are not convinced that the proposals will work. Paul Wood, a chief analyst at security company MessageLabs, said the government needed to focus on technology problems around fraud: "Any measure taken to update the law to address this form of criminal activity is to be welcomed. However, while legislative measures will act as a deterrent, it does not remove the need for technology solutions."

The Fraud Bill was introduced into the House of Lords on Thursday.

Comments

There is 1 comment. Join the discussion

  1. 1. Richard

    What happened to "Common Law"?

    For centuries Britain was ruled mostly by "Common Law" which was continuously adapted and interpreted by the judiciary. This worked well.

    The more recent *fashion* for ever more complex "Statute Laws" has brought us a mass of poorly drafted, ill-considered legislation which needs continual revision.

    Rapidly evolving situations like the Internet cannot be regulated effectively by inflexible "Statute Laws."

Post your comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

Log in or create your silicon.com account below

Will not be displayed with your comment

By signing up for this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understood our Privacy Policy.

Questions about membership? Find the answers in the Membership FAQ