web analytics
February 28, 2015 / 9 Adar , 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Virus Attachment (Part Two)

Business-Halacha-logo

Rabbi Dayan asked Ruby and Zev to sit down. “Remind me what the issue was,” he said. “It’s been a while since we spoke.”

“Zev sent me a computer virus as an email attachment,” said Ruby. “Supposedly, the file was a ‘helpful computer program,’ which he told me to install. The file was a virus, though; when I clicked on it, it attacked my computer! The repair cost $250. I think that Zev should pay for the repair.”

“Did you send the file to Ruby?” Rabbi Dayan asked Zev. “Were you aware that it was a virus?”

“Yes, I was trying to get even with him,” acknowledged Zev. “Ruby borrowed my notes before a test and refused to return them on time, causing me to do poorly on the test.”

Rabbi Dayan turned to Ruby. “Refusing to return a borrowed item borders on theft,” he said. “It was very wrong of you to withhold the notes. You owe Zev a sincere apology, especially since you ruined his grade.”

Rabbi Dayan then turned to Zev. “Ruby’s wrong does not give you the right to damage him, though,” he admonished him. “In addition to possible liability for damage, it’s also a clear violation of the prohibition against revenge.”

Ruby and Zev sat silent for a moment, each reflecting on what he had done.

Finally, Zev spoke up. “Am I liable for the repair?” he asked.

“I mentioned to Ruby that infecting a computer with a virus is considered doing damage,” said Rabbi Dayan. “However, there is an issue here that needs to be clarified. Let me share with you another question that came my way.”

Ruby and Zev listened intently. “There was a person who owned an animal which his neighbor objected to,” Rabbi Dayan said. “The neighbor decided to get rid of the animal, so he left some food with poison near the animal. The animal ate the food and died. The owner sued the neighbor for killing his animal. What do you say about this case?”

“I would say he’s liable,” said Zev. “He poisoned the animal.”

“I’m not so sure,” objected Ruby. “The neighbor didn’t actually kill the animal. Although he put out the poison, the animal chose to eat the food.”

“Animals don’t exactly have choice,” reasoned Zev. “If they see food, they eat. Anyway, even if the neighbor didn’t directly kill the animal, he certainly brought about the animal’s death.”

“But is that enough to hold him liable?” argued Ruby. He turned to Rabbi Dayan.

“The Gemara [B.K. 47b; 56a] teaches that a person who places poison before an animal is considered grama,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “The animal did not have to eat the poison food. Therefore, the neighbor is not legally liable in beis din, but is responsible b’dinei shamayim. This means that he has a strong moral liability to pay, albeit not enforceable in beis din.” (Shach 386:23; 32:2)

“I still don’t understand,” said Zev. “Since the neighbor expects the animal to eat the poisoned food, why isn’t there a full legal liability?”

“The truth is, the Rosh indicates that the person is exempt only if it was unusual for the animal to eat,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “For example, if the poison was not regular food or if the animal overate. However, Tosfos explains that although the person placed danger before animal, since the animal caused injury to itself through its action of eating, we cannot obligate the person.”

“What does all this have to do with our case of a virus attachment?” asked Ruby.

“In the typical case, e-mail viruses are not self-opening,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “Although Zev sent you the computer virus, you had to click on it in order to activate it. Many contemporary authorities compare this to placing poison before the animal. Just as there it is not possible to impose a legal liability because the animal chose to eat the food and brought the damage upon itself, so too, you chose to click on the file and thereby activate the virus.”

“So where does that leave us?” asked Zev.

“Our case would similarly be one of grama, like placing poison before the animal,” said Rabbi Dayan. “Therefore, it is not possible to impose a legal liability on Zev, but he has a chiyuv b’dinei shamayim to pay for the repair.” (See Mishpetei HaTorah B.K. #67; Shimru Mishpat 2:71)

About the Author: Rabbi Meir Orlian is a faculty member of the Business Halacha Institute, headed by HaRav Chaim Kohn, a noted dayan. To receive BHI’s free newsletter, Business Weekly, send an e-mail to subscribe@businesshalacha.com. For questions regarding business halacha issues, or to bring a BHI lecturer to your business or shul, call the confidential hotline at 877-845-8455 or e-mail ask@businesshalacha.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Virus Attachment (Part Two)”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Israeli Arabs in Nazerth protest against Israel's response to terror last July.
Israel Arabs Greet Herzog and Livni with PA Flags and Fist Fights
Latest Judaism Stories
Niehaus-022715

One should not give the money before Purim morning or after sunset.

Mendlowitz-022715-Basket

The mishloach manos of times gone by were sometimes simple and sometimes elaborate, but the main focus was on the preparation of the delicious food they contained.

Winiarz-022715-Kids

Does Hashem ever go away and not pay attention to us?

Torat-Hakehillah-logo-NEW

In other words, the Torah is an expression of the Way that we must follow in order to live a divine-like life and to bond in the highest way possible with God or Being Itself.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The avodah (service) of the kohen gadol is vital and highly sensitive; the world’s very existence depends on it.

Moreover, even if the perpetrator of the capital offense is never actually executed, such as when the fatal act was unintentional, Kam Lei applies and the judge cannot award damages.

Forever After?
‘Obligated for Challahh and Not Terumah’
(Kesubos 25a)

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

“We really appreciate your efforts in straightening the shul,” said Mr. Reiss. “How is it going?”

This was a spontaneous act of rest after the miracle of vanquishing their respective foes. The following year they celebrated on the same days as a minhag.

The way we must to relate to our young adult children is to communicate with genuine loving-kindness

Jewish prayer is a convergence of 2 modes of biblical spirituality, exemplified by Moses and Aaron

In holy places it’s important to maintain a level of silence permitting people to dialogue with God

Eventually, after some trial and error, including an experience with a prima donna and one with a thief, I baruch Hashem ultimately found a fine, honest and reliable household helper.

More Articles from Rabbi Meir Orlian
Business-Halacha-logo

“We really appreciate your efforts in straightening the shul,” said Mr. Reiss. “How is it going?”

Business-Halacha-logo

“Halacha differentiates between giving a gift, forgoing a debt [mechila], and granting permission to take something,” answered Rabbi Dayan.

“I don’t accept this,” said Mr. Zummer. “I want you to finish! You’re not allowed to just stop in the middle!”

“That’s what you’re wondering?” laughed Mr. Rubin. “That ring is not mine at all. A relative gave me money to buy it for him.”

“How could you have expected my glasses to be there?” argued Mr. Weiss. “You shouldn’t have to pay.”

“It means that the disqualification of relatives as witnesses is a procedural issue, not a question of honesty,” explained Rabbi Dayan.

“The issue is not just logistical,” replied Mr. Kahn. “I thought that halacha requires that the beginning of the adjudication and acceptance of testimony be during daytime.” (C.M. 5:2; 28:24)

A few days, Mrs. Feldman called back. “I would prefer a nice cake rather than the chocolate.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/halacha-hashkafa/virus-attachment-part-two/2013/09/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: