Public international law of cyberspace

Law, Governance and Technology Series 32

Kriangsak Kittichaisaree

Public
International
Law of
Cyberspace


Law, Governance and Technology Series
Volume 32

Series editors
Pompeu Casanovas, Barcelona, Spain
Giovanni Sartor, Florence, Italy


The Law-Governance and Technology Series is intended to attract manuscripts
arising from an interdisciplinary approach in law, artificial intelligence and
information technologies. The idea is to bridge the gap between research in IT law
and IT applications for lawyers developing a unifying techno-legal perspective. The
series will welcome proposals that have a fairly specific focus on problems or
projects that will lead to innovative research charting the course for new
interdisciplinary developments in law, legal theory, and law and society research as
well as in computer technologies, artificial intelligence and cognitive sciences. In
broad strokes, manuscripts for this series may be mainly located in the fields of the
Internet law (data protection, intellectual property, Internet rights, etc.),
Computational models of the legal contents and legal reasoning, Legal Information
Retrieval, Electronic Data Discovery, CollaborativeTools (e.g. Online Dispute
Resolution platforms), Metadata and XML Technologies (for Semantic Web

Services), Technologies in Courtrooms and Judicial Offices (E-Court), Technologies
for Governments and Administrations (E-Government), Legal Multimedia, and
Legal Electronic Institutions (Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Societies).
More information about this series at />

Kriangsak Kittichaisaree

Public International Law
of Cyberspace


Kriangsak Kittichaisaree
Royal Thai Embassy
Moscow, Russia

ISSN 2352-1902    ISSN 2352-1910 (electronic)
Law, Governance and Technology Series
ISBN 978-3-319-54656-8    ISBN 978-3-319-54657-5 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-54657-5
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017933964
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book

are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland


Preface

After finishing my mandate as chairman of the United Nations International Law
Commission’s Open-Ended Working Group on the topic obligation to extradite or
prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare) in 2014, I was interested in taking up the topic
protection of personal data in transborder flow of information, which had been put
on the International Law Commission’s long-term programme of work since 2006.
However, I have eventually concluded that this latter topic is too narrow in its scope
to meet the pressing needs of the international community.
Cyberspace has become one of the domains for everyday human interaction in
almost all corners of the earth. Clandestine cyber surveillance, cyber crimes, and
cyber espionage are now common phenomenons. While cyber warfare resulting in
large-scale catastrophes and cyber terrorism may seem remote possibilities, in the
age of fast-developing cyber innovations there is no reason for complacency and
international law must be ready to meet any present and future challenge.
At international meetings both inside and outside of the United Nations system,
States have expressed their positions on cyber activities and sought international
legal bases to support their respective positions. Most international lawyers and
governments also agree that the relevant rules of existing international law regulate
cyberspace. Opinions diverge, though, on which rules are to be applied and how.

This book will endeavour to provide practical and objective answers to the cyber-­
related international legal issues considered to be of importance by States, international organizations, individuals, and corporations, as well as other actors.
Being one of the 19 members of the International Group of Experts of the NATO
Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence entrusted with writing The Tallinn
Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations, or Tallinn
Manual 2.0, has immensely enriched my knowledge about the international law
governing cyberspace. Although this book of mine is intended for different readers
and focuses on broader issues than the Tallinn Manual 2.0, I am beholden to all my
colleagues in the Group since our brainstorming sessions have clarified so many
aspects of the law.
I am grateful to the valuable comments of the two anonymous reviewers and to
the efficient editorial and production teams at Springer. The research for this book
v


vi

Preface

would not have been possible without the excellent facilities and support of the
United Nations Office at Geneva Library, especially its law librarians. I am also
appreciative of the assistance of Margaux V.  Roussel (JD candidate 2017, The
George Washington University Law School) and Francesca Dal Poggetto (Master in
International Law candidate 2017, Graduate Institute of International and
Development Studies, Geneva), who helped me with American and European case
references, respectively. The views in this book are my personal views and, unless
otherwise indicated, do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions to which I
belong or used to belong.
Royal Thai Embassy
Moscow, Russia

9 January 2017

Kriangsak Kittichaisaree


Contents

1Introduction: Perspectives of Various Stakeholders
and Challenges for International Law.....................................................1
1.1Perspectives of Stakeholders...............................................................1
1.2General Introduction to Public International Law..............................15
1.3Food for Thought................................................................................21
2Jurisdiction and Attribution of State Responsibility
in Cyberspace.............................................................................................23
2.1Jurisdiction..........................................................................................23
2.2Attribution of State Responsibility.....................................................32

2.2.1ILC’s Draft Articles on State Responsibility...........................36

2.2.2Standard(s) of Proof................................................................40

2.2.3 Attribution and International Organizations,
Such As NATO........................................................................43
3Regulation of Cyberspace and Human Rights........................................45

3.1General Background...........................................................................45

3.2Human Rights in Cyberspace.............................................................53

3.2.1Privacy and Related Rights.....................................................54

3.2.2Right to the Freedom of Expression.......................................84

3.2.3Anonymity and the Right to Be Forgotten..............................87
3.3Exceptions...........................................................................................94

3.3.1European Practice...................................................................101

3.3.2US Practice..............................................................................111

3.3.3Some Examples of Practice in Other
Global Regions........................................................................128
3.4Territorial Scope of Human Rights Protection
and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regarding Search
Warrants and Other Law Enforcement Measures...............................132

3.5Food for Thought................................................................................150

vii


viii

Contents

4Cyber Warfare............................................................................................153
4.1Cyberattack........................................................................................153
4.2Cyber Warfare....................................................................................158
4.3Cyber Weapons..................................................................................160
4.4Use of Force Under International Law..............................................161

4.5Armed Attack and the Right of Self-Defence...................................166

4.6Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors............................................175

4.7Countermeasures...............................................................................191

4.8Necessity...........................................................................................192

4.9Reprisals............................................................................................193

4.10Retorsion...........................................................................................194

4.11Neutrality in Cyberspace...................................................................195

4.12Cyber Disarmament...........................................................................196
5Application of the Law of Armed Conflict, Including
International Humanitarian Law, In Cyberspace..................................201
5.1The Law of Armed Conflict/International Humanitarian Law..........202
5.2International Armed Conflict.............................................................208
5.3Non-international Armed Conflict.....................................................224
5.4War Crime of Terrorism....................................................................228
5.5Food for Thought...............................................................................229
6Cyber Espionage........................................................................................233
6.1Modus Operandi................................................................................234
6.2Targets...............................................................................................236
6.3International Law on Espionage........................................................241
6.4Food for Thought...............................................................................260
7Cyber Crimes.............................................................................................263
7.1Cyber Crimes: The Challenges..........................................................263

7.2Budapest Convention: Model for Universal Suppression
of Cyber Crimes................................................................................270

7.3Beyond the Budapest Convention.....................................................292
8Cyber Terrorism.........................................................................................295
8.1 Acts of Terrorism Against Civil Aviation..........................................299
8.2Acts of Terrorism Against Potential Victims.....................................308
8.3Acts of Terrorism at Sea....................................................................310
8.4Acts of Terrorism Relating to Dangerous Materials.........................313
8.5Terrorist Financing............................................................................318
8.6Developments Beyond the Sectoral Conventions..............................322

8.7National Laws....................................................................................324


Contents

ix

9Future Prospects of Public International Law of Cyberspace...............335
9.1Stocktaking........................................................................................335
9.2Cybersecurity....................................................................................343
9.3Cyber Deterrence...............................................................................343
9.4Cyberspace Governance....................................................................347
9.5Cyber Sovereignty.............................................................................352
Glossary............................................................................................................357
Bibliography.....................................................................................................359


Abbreviations

AALCO
AP I

Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949,
and relating to the Protection of Victims of International
Armed Conflicts 1977
AP II
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949,
and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-­
International Armed Conflicts 1977
APEC
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
ARF
ASEAN Regional Forum
ASEAN
Association of Southeast Asian Nations
AU
African Union
Budapest Convention Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime 2001
CERT
Computer Emergency Response Team
CIRT
Computer Incident Response Team
CNA
Computer network attack
CNE
Computer network exploitation
CSIRT

Computer Security Incident Response Team
DKIM
DomainKeys Identified Mail
ECHR
Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950
ECJ
European Court of Justice
ECOWAS
Economic Community of West African States
ECtHR
European Court of Human Rights
EEA
European Economic Area
EU
European Union
EU Directive 95/46
EU Directive 95/46 of 24 Oct. 1995 on the protection of
individuals with regard to the processing of personal data
and on the free movement of such data
FAA
2008 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act
(50 USC §1881a)
FBI
(US) Federal Bureau of Investigation
xi


xii

FISA
GATS
GC I
GC II
GC III
GC IV
GCHQ
GDPR
GGEs
IAC
ICCPR
ICJ
ICRC
ICT
ICTY
IHL
ILC
IP
ISIL
ISP
ITU
NATO
NIAC
NSA
OAS
OSCE
PATRIOT Act
PCIJ
RIPA
TRIPS

UDHR
UN
UNCLOS
UNGA

Abbreviations

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978
General Agreement on Trade in Services 1994
Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the
Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field 1949
Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the
Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces at Sea 1949
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
1949
Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War 1949
Government Communications Headquarters, which is the centre
of the UK Govt. Signal Intelligence (SIGNIT) activities
EU General Data Protection Regulation, in force on 25 May 2018
Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of
Information and Telecommunications in the Context of
International Security
International armed conflict; armed conflict of an international
character
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966
International Court of Justice
International Committee of the Red Cross
Information and communications technology
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

International humanitarian law
International Law Commission of the United Nations
Internet Protocol
Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (a.k.a. IS or Islamic State of
Iraq and al-Sham a.k.a. ISIS)
Internet service provider
International Telecommunication Union
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Non-international armed conflict; armed conflict of a non-­
international character; internal armed conflict
US National Security Agency
Organization of American States
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
See USA PATRIOT Act
Permanent Court of International Justice
UK Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights 1994
Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948
United Nations
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982
United Nations General Assembly


Abbreviations

UNODC
USA Freedom Act
USA PATRIOT Act
VCCR

VCDR
VCLT
WTO

xiii

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
2015 Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling
Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline over Monitoring
Act
2007 Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing
Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct
Terrorism Act of 2001
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969
World Trade Organization


Table of Cases

A. International Jurisprudence
1. PCIJ
Lotus (France v. Turkey), Judgment of 7 Sept. 1927, Series A No. 10.

2. ICJ
Corfu Channel Case (UK v. Albania), ICJ Rep. 1949, p. 4.
Certain Expenses of the United Nations, ICJ Rep. 1962, p. 168.
Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v Thailand) (Merits), ICJ
Rep. 1962, p. 6.

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Fed. Rep. Germany/Netherlands; Fed. Rep.
Germany/Denmark), ICJ Rep. 1969, p. 3.
Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran, ICJ Rep.
1980, p. 3.
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. the
United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Rep. 1986, p. 14.
Frontier Dispute Case (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), ICJ Rep. 1986, p. 554.
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, ICJ Rep. 1996, p. 226.
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), ICJ Rep. 1997, p. 7.
Case concerning Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana/Namibia), ICJ Rep. 1999,
p. 1405.
Oil Platform (Islamic Republic of Iran v. USA), ICJ Rep. 2003, p. 161.
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 2004, p. 136.
Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (DR Congo v.
Uganda), ICJ Rep. 2005, p. 168.
xv


xvi

Table of Cases

Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and
Montenegro), ICJ Rep. 2007, p. 43.
Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo),
ICJ Rep. 2010, p. 639.
Questions Relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data
(Timor-Leste v. Australia): Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures,

Order of 3 Mar. 2014, ICJ Rep. 2014, p. 147.
Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment of 3 Feb.
2015.

3. ECJ
Bodil Lindqvist, Case C-101/01, ECLI:EU:C:2003:596.
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural
Resources and Others and Kärntner Landesregierung and Others, Joined Cases
C-293/12 and C-594/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:238.
Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos
(AEPD) and Mario Costeja González, Case C-131/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:317.
Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner, Case C-362/14,
ECLI:EU:C:2015:650.
Productores de Música de España (Promusicae) v. Telefónica de España SAU, Case
C-275/06, ECLI:EU:C:2008:54.
Volker und Markus Schecke GbR and Hartmut Eifert v. Land Hessen, Joined Cases
C-92/09 and C-93/09, ECLI:EU:C:2010:662.

4. ECtHR
A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, ECHR 2009.
Ahmet Yıldırım v. Turkey, no. 3111/10, ECHR 2012.
Al-Jedda v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27021/08, ECHR 2011.
Al-Skeini and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 55721/07, ECHR 2011.
Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27798/95, ECHR 2000-II.
Association for European Integration and Human Rights and Ekimdzhiev v.
Bulgaria, no. 62540/00, 28 June 2007.
Banković and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, ECHR
2001-XII.
Behrami and Saramati v. France and Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway

(dec.) [GC], nos. 71421/01 and 78166/01, 2 May 2007.


Table of Cases

xvii

Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom (communicated case), no.
58170/13, 7 January 2014.
Bingöl v. Turkey, no. 36141/04, 22 June 2010.
Catan and Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia [GC], nos. 43370/04,
8252/05 and 18454/06, ECHR 2012 (extracts).
Copland v. the United Kingdom, no. 62617/00, ECHR 2007-I.
Erbakan v. Turkey, no. 59405/00, 6 July 2006.
Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05, ECHR 2007-I.
Féret v. Belgium, no. 15615/07, 16 July 2009.
Gajić v. Germany (dec.), no. 31446/02, 28 August 2007.
Gül and Others v. Turkey, no. 4870/02, 8 June 2010.
Hassan v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29750/09, ECHR 2014.
Hogefeld v. Germany (dec.), no. 35402/97, 20 January 2000.
Jaloud v. Netherlands [GC], no. 47708/08, ECHR 2014.
Kasumaj v. Greece (dec.), no. 6974/05, 5 July 2007.
Kennedy v. the United Kingdom, no. 26839/05, 18 May 2010.
Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28.
Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, Series A no. 176-A.
Leander v. Sweden, 26 March 1987, Series A no. 116.
Leroy v. France, no. 36109/03, 2 October 2008.
Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, 1 July 2008.
Loizidou v. Turkey (merits), 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions
1996-VI.

Malone v. the United Kingdom, 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82.
M.M. v. the United Kingdom, no. 24029/07, 13 November 2012.
Norwood v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 23131/03, ECHR 2004-XI.
Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, ECHR 2015.
Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, ECHR 2000-V.
S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, ECHR
2008.
Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden, no. 62332/00, ECHR 2006-VII.
Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, ECHR 1999-IV.
Sürek v. Turkey (no. 3) [GC], no. 24735/94, 8 July 1999.
Times Newspapers Ltd. v. the United Kingdom (nos. 1 and 2), nos. 3002/03 and
23676/03, ECHR 2009.
Uzun v. Germany, no. 35623/05, ECHR 2010 (extracts).
Vajnai v. Hungary, no. 33629/06, ECHR 2008.
Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, ECHR 2006-XI.
Wieser and Bicos Beteiligungen GmbH v. Austria, no. 74336/01, ECHR 2007-IV.
Z v. Finland, 25 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I.
Zana v. Turkey, 25 November 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions
1997-VII.


xviii

Table of Cases

5. ICTY
Prosecutor v. Duško Tadic, Case No. IT-94-1-A, App. Ch. Decision on the Defence
Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (2 Oct. 1995).
Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A, App. Ch. Judgment (15 Jul. 1999).
Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreskic and Others, Case No. IT-95-16-T, ICTY T. Ch. II

Judgment (14 Jan. 2000).
Prosecutor v. Kunarac et al., Case No. IT-96-23 and 23/1 (2002), App. Ch. Judgment
(12 Jun. 2002).
Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić, Case No. IT-98-29-T, T.  Ch. I Judgment (5 Dec.
2003).
Prosecutor v. Limaj, Case No. IT-03-66-T, T. Ch. II Judgment (30 Nov. 2005).
Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galić , Case No. IT-98-29-A, App. Ch. Judgment (30 Nov.
2006).
Prosecutor v. Haradinaj, Case No. IT-04-84-T, T. Ch. I Judgment (3 Apr. 2008).
Prosecutor v. Boškoski & Tarčulovski, Case No. IT-04-82-T, T. Ch. II Judgment (10
Jul. 2008).
Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, Case No. IT-01-41-A, App. Ch. Judgment (17 Jul.
2008).
Prosecutor v. Dragomir Milošević, Case No. IT-98-29/1-A, App. Ch. Judgment (12
Nov. 2009).

6. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda 
Prosecutor v. Nahimana et  al. (the Media case), ICTR Case No. ICTR-99-52-A,
App. Ch. Judgment (28 Nov. 2007).

7. Special Court for Sierra Leone
Prosecutor v Sesay, Kallon and Gbao, Case No. SCSL-04-15-T, T. Ch. I, Judgment
(2 Mar. 2009)

8. International Criminal Court
Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06, T.  Ch. I,
Judgment (14 Mar. 2012).


Table of Cases

xix

9. Special Tribunal for Lebanon
Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law: Terrorism, Conspiracy, Homicide,
Perpetration, Cumulative Charging, Case No. STL-11-01/I, App. Ch. (16 Feb.
2011).

10. US Military Tribunal at Nuremberg
In re Ohlendorf & Others, US Military Trib., Nuremberg, 10 Apr. 1948 (1953) 15
Ann. Dig. 566.
In re Weizsaecker and Others, US Military Trib., Nuremberg, 14 Apr. 1949 (1955)
16 Ann. Dig. 344.
International Arbitration
Amco Asia Co v. Rep. of Indonesia [Award of 20 November 1984], ICSID Case No.
ARB/81/1, FA.
Boundary Dispute between Argentina and Chile concerning the Frontier Line
between Boundary Post 62 and Mount Fitzroy, 22 R.I.A.A. 3 (1994).
Case concerning the Loan Agreement between Italy and Costa Rica, 26 R.I.A.A. 21
(2006).
Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands/United States of America), Award of 4 Apr.
1928, 2 U.N.R.I.A.A. 829 (1928).
Kenneth P. Yeager v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, Iran-US Claims Trib. Rep., vol.
17, p. 92.
Naulilaa (Portugal v. Germany), Award of Oct. 1928, 2 R.I.A.A. 1011 (1949).
Sambaggio Case (Italy v. Venezuela), 10 R.I.A.A. 499 (1903).
National Court Judgments
Canada
R.v. Hape, 2007 SCC 26 (CanLII) (2007) 2 SCR 292.
Germany

Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof), Judgments, StR 347/92 of 30 July
1993, juris; StB 11/91 of 29 May 1991, juris.
Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), Judgments, 2 BvL 19/91,
2 BvR 1206/91, 2 BvR 1584/91 and 2 BvR 1601/93 of 15 May 1995, juris.
Volskszählung (Mikrozensus) case, Constitutional Court, Bundesverfassungsgericht,
decisions volume 27, p. 1.


xx

Table of Cases

Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court), Judgment of 14 Jul.
1999, BVerfGE 100, 313.
Ireland
Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner (Hogan J.), 18 Jun. 2014
[2013 No. 765JR].
Japan
Judgement of the Tokyo District Court, 9 Oct. 2014 (Judge Nobuyuki Seki).
The Netherlands
The Habbo case, Rechtbank Amsterdam, 2 Apr. 2009, LJN: BH9789, BH9790,
BH9791.
The RuneScape case, Supreme Court, 31 Jan. 2012, LJN: BQ9251, J. 10/00101.
A. v. Google,Amsterdam District Court, 18 Sept. 2014, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2014:6118.
Republic of Korea
Online Real-Name Case, Constitutional Court of Korea, 2010 Honma 47 (23 Aug.
2012)
Thailand
Supreme Court Judgment no. 7435/2541 (1999).
Turkey

Constitutional Court, Decision No. 2014/3986 (2 Apr. 2014).
Constitutional Court, Decision No. 2014/4705 (29 May 2014).
UK
A and Others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56.
Fayed v. Al-Tajir [1988] 1 QB 712.
Govt. of the United States of America v. Lauri Love, Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(N. Tempia, J.), 16 Sept. 2016 (unreported).
Joyce v. DPP [1946] AC 34.
McKinnon v. Government of the United States of America and Others [2008] UKHL
59.
The Queen (on the application of Louis Olivier Bancoult) v. Secretary of State for
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2013] EWHC 1502 (Admin).
R v. Anjem Choudary and Mohammed Rahman, Central Crim. Ct., Sentencing
Judgment of 6 Sept. 2016 (Holroyde J.).
R. v. Gul [2013] UKSC 64.
R. v Terence Roy Brown [2011] EWCA Crim 2751.
Regina (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No.
3) [2014] EWCA Civ 708; [2014] WLR (D) 237.
Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc. v. Maclaine Watson and Co. Ltd. and International
Tin Council (Intervener) (No. 2) [1988] 1 WLR 16.
Wood v. Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2009] EWCA Civ. 414.
Human Rights Watch Inc. & Ors v. The Secretary of State for the Foreign &
Commonwealth Office & Ors [2016] UKIPTrib 15_165-CH.


Table of Cases

xxi

Privacy International v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

& Ors, [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH.
USA
ACLU v. NSA, 493 F.3d 644, 671 (6th Cir. 2007).
ACLU v. Clapper, 785 F.3d 787 (2d Cir. 2015).
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002).
Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011).
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 133 S. Ct. 1138 (2013).
California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988).
Cox Broad. Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469 (1975).
Devon Robotics v. DeViedma, No. 09-cv-3552 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 7, 2010).
Fields v. Twitter, Inc., No. 16-cv-00213-WHO (N.D. Cal., Aug. 10, 2016)( Order
Granting Motion to Dismiss).
Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989).
Gates v. Discovery Commc’ns, Inc., 34 Cal. 4th 679, 101 P.3d 552 (2004), cert.
denied, 125 S. Ct. 2290 (2005).
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).
Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010).
In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Prod. of Tangible Things,
No. BR 14-01 (FISA Ct. Mar. 7, 2014).
In re Google Inc. Gmail Litigation, Case No. 13-MD-02430-LHK (N.D. Cal. Mar.
18, 2014).
In re JetBlue Airways Corp. Privacy Litig., 379 F. Supp. 2d 299 (E.D.N.Y. 2005).
In re Smartphone Geolocation Data Application, 977 F. Supp. 2d 129 (E.D.N.Y.
2013).
In re A Warrant to Search a Certain E-Mail Account Controlled & Maintained by
Microsoft Corp., 15 F. Supp. 3d 466 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).
In re An Apple iPhone Seized During the Execution of a Search Warrant on a Black
Lexus IS300, No. ED 15-0451 M, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20543 (C.D. Cal. Feb.
16, 2016).

In re Order Requiring Apple, Inc. to Assist in the Execution of a Search Warrant
Issued by this Court, 149 F. Supp. 3d 341 (E.D.N.Y. 2016).
Jewel v. NSA, 965 F. Supp. 2d 1090 (N.D. Cal. 2013).
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950).
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
Klayman v. Obama, 957 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2013).
Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001).
Long v. OPM, 692 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2012).
Microsoft Corp. v. United States (In re Warrant to Search a Certain E-Mail Account
Controlled & Maintained by Microsoft Corp.), 829 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2016).
People v. Versaggi, 83 N.Y.2d 123, 608 N.Y.S.2d 155, 629 N.E.2d 1034 (1994).
Phillippi v. CIA, 178 U.S. App. D.C. 243, 546 F.2d 1009 (1976).
Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844 (1997).


xxii

Table of Cases

Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (2014).
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (2006).
Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979).
Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States Dist. Court for S. Dist.,
482 U.S. 522 (1987).
United States v. Aleksandr Andreevich Panin, a/k/a Gribodemon, and Hamza
Bendeliadja, a/k/a Bx1, Case 1:11-cr-00557-AT-AJB Document 35 (filed 26 Jun.
2013).
United States v. Alkhabaz, 104 F.3d 1492 (6th Cir. 1997).
United States v. Bowker, 372 F.3d 365 (6th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Forrester, 512 F.3d 500 (9th Cir. 2008).
United States v. Gajdik, 292 F.3d 555 (7th Cir. 2002).
United States v. Iannone, 184 F.3d 214 (3d Cir. 1999).
United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 949 (2012).
United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (2001).
United States v. Kramer, 631 F.3d 900 (8th Cir. 2011).
United States v. Matish, No. 4:16-cr-00016-HCM-RJK.
United States v. Mehanna, 735 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2013).
United States v. Michaud, No. 3:15-cr-05351-RJB.
United States v. Mitra, 405 F.3d 492 (7th Cir. 2005).
United States v. Morris, 928 F.2d 504 (2d Cir. 1991).
United States v. Odeh (In re Terrorist Bombings of United States Embassies in
E. Afr.), 552 F.3d 157 (2d Cir. 2008).
United States v. Phillips, 477 F.3d 215 (5th Cir. 2007).
United States v. Seleznev, No. CR11-70RAJ (W.D. Wash. Aug. 25, 2016).
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990).
Vernonia Sch. Dist. 47 J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995).
Wilner v. NSA, 592 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2009).
United States v. Wang, No. 14–118 (W.D. Pa., May 1, 2014).
Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l’antisémitisme (LICRA) and L’Union
des Etudiants Juifs de France (UEJF), 169 F.Supp.2d 1181 (N.D. Cal, Nov. 7,
2001); 433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2006).


Table of National Legislation

Belgium
Wet betreffende de methoden voor het verzamelen van gegevens door de inlichtingen – en veiligheidsdie.

Brazil

Act (Law N° 12.965) of 23 April 2014.
Preliminary Draft Bill for the Protection of Personal Data (Anteprojeto de Lei para
a Proteção de Dados Pessoais).

Canada
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, Part VI.
Federal Law on Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
(S.C. 2000, c. 5)
An Act to enact the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act and the Secure Air
Travel Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Security Intelligence
Service Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and to make related
and consequential amendments to other Acts, 2nd Session, 41st Parliament (‘Bill
C-51’).

China
Cybersecurity Act of 7 Nov. 2016.

xxiii


xxiv

Table of National Legislation

France
Sénat, Project de loi, adopté par l’Assemblée Nationale après engagement de la
procédure accélérée, renforçant les dispositions relatives à la lutte contre le terrorisme, 9 Oct. 2014, available at: />Intelligence Act of 2015.

Georgia
Criminal Code 2007.

Germany
Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch): data theft (section 202a), phishing (section 202b),
attempting data theft and phishing (section 202c), data tampering (section 303a),
and computer sabotage (section 303b).
BND-Gesetz vom 20 Dezember 1990, amended in 2013.

Hong Kong
Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance, E.R. 1 of 2013.

India
Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008.

Italy
Personal Data Protection Code, Legis. Decree No. 196 of 30 Jun. 2003.
Law No. 124 of 3 Aug. 2007, Official Journal No. 187 of 13 Aug. 2007, Sec. 6(2).


Table of National Legislation

xxv

The Netherlands
West op de inlichtingen – en veiligheidsdiensten (WIV) 2002, Art. 6.2.d, 27(1).

Republic of Korea
Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and
Information Protection, Act No. 3848 of May 12, 1986, as amended [2005]
PrivLRes 2.

Russia
Federal Law “About Personal Data” (No. 152-FZ, dated 27 Jul. 2006).
Federal Law on Personal Data as amended, 4 Jun. 2014.

Sweden
Govt. Bill 2008/09:2.

Switzerland
Federal Data Protection Act 1992.
Data Protection Ordinance 1993 (DPO).

Thailand
Computer Crime Act 2007 (B.E. 2550), sections 8 and 25.

UK
Official Secrets Act 1989.
Computer Misuse Act 1990.


xxvi

Table of National Legislation

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA).
Terrorism Act 2000 and 2006.
Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014.
Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014.
Investigatory Powers Act 2016.

USA

First Amendment to the US Constitution, U.S. Const. amend. I.
Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, U.S. Const. amend. IV.
All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2000).
Economic Espionage Act, Pub. L. No. 104-294, 110 Stat. 3488 (codified as amended
at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831–1839 (2000)).
Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (1976).
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783
(codified at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801–1811 (2000)).
Exec. Order No. 12333, 3 C.F.R. 200 (1981), reprinted in 50 U.S.C. § 401 app. at
44–51 (1982).
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984 (CFAA), 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (2012).
Stored Communications Act, Pub. L. No. 99-508, tit. II, 100 Stat. 1860 (1986) (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701–2712 (2012)).
Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq. (1986).
US Communications Assistance of Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-­
414, 108 Stat. 4279 (codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 1001–1010).
Communication Decency Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c) (1996).
Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, Pub. L. 106-102, §§ 501–510, 6821,
6823, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999) (codified in scattered sections of 12 and 15 U.S.C.).
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-458,
118 Stat. 3639 (2004).
USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272 (2001).
USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-­
177, 120 Stat. 192 (2006).
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act of 2008, 50 U.S.C.
1801–1862.
Presidential Policy Directive 28 on Signals Intelligence Activities (“PD-28”, 17 Jan.
2014).
Presidential Executive Order 13694: Blocking the Property of Certain Persons
Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities, 80 FR 18077.
USA FREEDOM Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-23, 129 Stat. 268 (2015).

Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, S. 754, 114th Cong. (2015), available at:
/>Judicial Redress Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-126.