Skip to main content
S 974 104th Congress Senate Crime and Law Enforcement Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues Computer crimes Computer networks Computer software Damages Data banks Destruction of property Electronic surveillance Evidence (Law) Forfeiture Fraud Jurisdiction Law Legal fees Money laundering Organized crime Punitive damages Right of privacy Science, Technology, Communications

Anti-Electronic Racketeering Act of 1995

Introduced: June 27, 1995 Introduced by: Grassley, Chuck Republican · Iowa See on congress.gov
 Everywhere this bill has been 3 steps
Introduced
In committee
Reported out
Passed House
Passed Senate
To President
Became law
Jun 27, 1995
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Jun 27, 1995
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9180)
Jun 27, 1995
Introduced in Senate
 Plain-English summary Congressional Research Service

Anti-Electronic Racketeering Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal criminal code to revise the definition of "racketeering" to include any act indictable as a crime which is related to wire and computer fraud. Adds to the definition of racketeering any act indictable as fraud and related activity in connection with computers, racketeering- related crimes involving computers, or other prohibited racketeering activities. Prohibits the use of a computer or computer network to further racketeering activity or to damage or threaten to damage electronically or digitally stored data.

Includes electronically or digitally stored data as property subject to criminal forfeiture. Allows any person injured by racketeering activities to sue in U.S. district court and recover threefold the damages sustained, the cost of the suit, and attorney's fees.

Allows the introduction of evidence of intercepted wire or oral communications if the authority in possession of the intercepted communication attempted in good faith to comply with the U.S. Code provisions pertaining to communications interceptions. Permits a Federal, State, or local government to introduce as evidence a communication intercepted by a non-governmental actor without the government's knowledge.

Authorizes the Attorney General, or another designated individual, to apply to a Federal judge for an order authorizing the designated Federal agency to use an electronic, oral, or wire interception where the interception may provide or has provided evidence of prohibited activities under the racketeering statute.

Provides that the application for the wire, oral, or electronic communications interception should provide as much detail as possible regarding the offense, the type of communications to be intercepted, and the identity of the person committing the offense.

Prohibits the use of computers or computer networks to transfer unlicensed computer software, to distribute computer software that encodes or encrypts electronic or digital communications which may be accessible to foreign nationals or foreign governments, to transmit a communication intended to conceal money or other assets derived from racketeering activities, and to operate a computer or computer network primarily to engage in racketeering or other activities banned by Federal or State law. Provides that it shall be an affirmative defense to prosecution if the software at issue used a universal decoding device provided to the Department of Justice prior to the distribution.

Declares that the United States has jurisdiction over any act committed while using any computer, computer facility, or computer network that is physically located within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Establishes venue in the jurisdiction where the computer, computer facility, or computer network was physically located at the time of the wrongful act. Declares that the transmission of deceptive information through a computer network or facility constitutes fraud.

Amends the Privacy Protection Act to allow the seizure of work product materials if there is reason to believe that it is necessary to prevent the destruction or alteration of the documents. Permits a government official to search for or seize electronically stored data if the seizure is incidental to an otherwise valid seizure and the government official was unaware that the material existed among the seized data and took reasonable steps to protect the privacy interests of the individual after the work products material discovery.

What's happening now June 27, 1995

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

 Committees of jurisdiction 1