Blackshades V. United States Case Study

Facts: In the Case of Blackshades v. the United States, defendant Alex Yucel, a citizen of Sweden, was charged with computer hacking using the malware, “RAT,” under his company called Blackshades. Since he is the founder of the Blackshades, “Rat” had sold the malicious software to 6,000 customers. Blackshades is a malware which includes a remote tool, called “RAT.” With the malware, it enables it to control the victims’ computers. According to the plaintiff, the federal government, Blackshades have stolen thousands of usernames and passwords using this malware. There is evidence presented by the plaintiff that Yucel send an email to a business partner admitting and informing him that he has stolen credit card numbers from this system. The
In the case of United States v. Nadirashvili, the term “vagueness” challenged the statute, but it did not threaten the First Amendment. However, it states that the defendant “cannot challenge its vagueness if the statute explicitly prohibits his conduct.” In the case of Yucel, this did not follow in his favor. A protected computer includes computers outside from the US, including its communication and Internet connections. The plaintiff has posed a statue from Trotter, 478 F. 3d at 921 stating “any computer connected to the Internet is within the realm of Congress’s Commerce Clause Power.” The damage that Yucel had committed was not seeking authorization from the victim's’ computer. Although Yucel argues the word “damage” is vague, his argument is invalid. The court reasoned that in the rational sense, no person can believe it was legal to install the malware on the victims’ computers. From the case of United States v. Ulbricht, consent and financial information were first needed to ask before any action could take place. Yucel cannot argue the flaws from the indictment. Since the internet protects the computers, Yucel demands to dismiss the void-for-vagueness terms