.png)
The man from Tiel who was acquitted by the Supreme Court in 2020 for breaking into the website of a GP post in The Hague in 2017 has been vindicated once again. The judge's ruling states that a website cannot be considered an automated work, echoing a previous decision from 2022.
The Supreme Court's judgment declares, "Given that a website is essentially just a collection of data without physical form, possessing more of a 'design' nature, there is ample justification for not categorizing a website as an automated work." Thus, the Supreme Court affirms that a website does not fall under the definition of an automated work, a term used to describe a device designed to electronically store, process, and transmit data.
This decision aligns with a previous ruling from a Hague court in 2022. Following a conviction in 2020 for unlawfully intruding into an automated work, the Tiel resident appealed and in 2022 saw the original verdict overturned, leading to the return of his confiscated equipment. The court determined that a website does not meet the criteria outlined in article 80sexies of the Criminal Code.
Despite the court's decision, the Public Prosecution Service disagreed and took the case to the Supreme Court. However, the appeal was ultimately rejected, solidifying the ruling that a website is not considered an automated work.
The hacking incident at the GP post in The Hague occurred in 2017 when the man from Tiel exploited a security vulnerability to access the website. He contacted the GP post's director to claim he had obtained sensitive personal data of all the doctors, including bank account details, passwords, and usernames. A subsequent demand for payment between 16500 and 23000 euros to fix the breach, accompanied by a warning about potential fines and damage to the GP post's reputation if the breach became public, prompted the director to report the incident to the police, initiating an investigation.
English (US)