Complete Internet bans are too extreme

“Hackers” – the 1995 film featuring the fresh young faces of Jonny Lee Miller and Angelina… “Hackers” – the 1995 film featuring the fresh young faces of Jonny Lee Miller and Angelina Jolie – told the story of Zero Cool, a child prodigy turned computer villain who causes the largest computer crash in history and does hard juvenile time in return. As part of his punishment, the young hacking poster boy is stricken from computers for several years, which he likens to cruel and unusual punishment.

For a computer nerd, losing the Internet is akin to losing life itself.

If the film’s testimony isn’t convincing enough, just ask Kevin Mitnick, a once-infamous hacker the authorities have referred to as “the most wanted computer criminal in U.S. history.” Mitnick served five years for hacking into major corporations and stealing software. After his release from prison in January 2000, Mitnick still had to endure one particularly painful aspect of his probation – he was barred from the Internet for two years. His sentence ended yesterday, and now Mitnick is back on the Web.

There is no solid court precedent stating whether or not it is legitimate to bar computer criminals from using the Internet. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit – which presides over Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas – has ruled in favor of Internet bans. New York’s Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, on the other hand, has argued that the Internet has become necessary for everyday life, and that complete bans are too broad.

But while the debate bounces back and forth in the court system, Mitnick is at home stretching his fingers for a fresh and spirited march through the carpal tunnel. While Mitnick may revel in the new developments seen by the computer world during his absence – pop-up ads, for instance – it is likely that the authorities will keep a watchful eye on his surfing, and it is doubtful that he will present much of a threat in the future.

Mitnick’s two-year probation is evidence that it is possible to survive without the Net. But even so, complete bans go beyond what is necessary to reform a computer criminal. Temporary bans are reasonable, but at some point, these individuals must be allowed to get back to life on the outside.

When a teen-ager makes a prank call, he or she is not banned from the phone for life. Rehabilitated hackers may go on to be productive in the computer industry, or in the case of Zero Cool, save a bunch of lives and make out with Angelina Jolie. But first, they must be allowed to get back in their element.