M14_SCHM8860_01_SE_C14.QXD 2/1/08 6:07 PM Page 281 PART III Criminological Perspectives on CyberJ Crime O H N S O N , O L I V I A 9 1 1 0 M14_SCHM8860_01_SE_C14.QXD 2/1/08 6:07 PM Page 282 J O H N S O N , O L I V I A 9 1 1 0 M14_SCHM8860_01_SE_C14.QXD 2/1/08 6:07 PM Page 283 Chapter 14 Space Transition Theory of Cyber Crimes J K. Jaishankar O Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, India H Dr. K. Jaishankar is a lecturer in the DepartmentN of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, India. He is the founding editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Cyber Criminology and the founding editorS of Crime and Justice Perspective—the official organ of the Criminal Justice Forum (CJF), India, and Othe founding managing editor of the International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences. He serves in the international editorial boards of Journal of Social Change (U.S.), Electronic Journal of Sociology (Canada),N Crime, Punishment and Law: An International Journal (U.S.), Journal of Physical Security (U.S.),, and Graduate Journal of Social Science (UK). He is the National Focal point for India for the International Police Executive Symposium’s working paper series and expert of world police database at www.coginta.com. He is a co-investigator of the interna- tional project on cyber bullying funded by SSHRC, Canada, involving eight countries, along with the principal investigator Dr. Shaheen Shariff, McGillO University. He is a pioneer in developing the new field “cyber criminology,” and is the proponentL of Space Transition Theory, which gives an explanation for the criminal behavior in cyberspace. He is a recognized expert in the field of cyber criminology and invited by various universities in United StatesI to deliver lectures on his space transition theory of cyber crimes. He is a member of the UNODC (UnitedV Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) Core group of experts on identity-related crime. His areas of academic competence are cyber criminology, crime map- ping, GIS, communal violence, victimology,I policing, and crime prevention. A Abstract Some researchers have tried to explain cyber crimes with traditional theories such as social learning theory (Skinner and Fream 1997;9 Rogers 1999, 2001), Kohlberg’s moral develop- ment theory and differential reinforcement theory (Rogers 2001), Cohen’s strain theory (O’Connor 2003), deindividuation theory1 (Demetriou and Silke 2003), Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (Foster1 2004), routine activities theory (Adamski 1998; McKenzie 2000; Grabosky 2001; Pease0 2001; Yar 2005a) and multiple theories (McQuade 2005; Taylor et al. 2005; Walker, Brock, and Stuart 2006). However, those theoretical justifi- cations have proved to be inadequate as an overall explanation for the phenomenon of cyber The author wish to express his profound gratitude to Professors Susan Brenner, Eric Suler, Keith Harries, and Eric Lambert for reviewing this chapter on request and for their wise comments and constructive criticisms which enabled to improve the quality of this chapter. The author also sincerely thanks Prof. Dipika Halder for editing and proofreading the theoretical propositions. 283 M14_SCHM8860_01_SE_C14.QXD 2/1/08 6:07 PM Page 284 284 Chapter 14 Space Transition Theory of Cyber Crimes crimes. To fill the gap in explaining cyber crimes, the space transition theory has been devel- oped. This theory is presented and discussed in this chapter. INTRODUCTION The Internet has become a powerful force in today’s world (Burney 2001). The access of the Internet into the everyday lives of millions of population across the world has begun to trans- form many different aspects of life. Some of the transformations have occurred because of the manner in which Internet users are directed toJ negotiate their relationship with the real and vir- tual spaces they now inhabit (Mitra and Schwartz 2001). In the past five years, the number of Internet users has skyrocketed from 0.5 millionO to 6.5 million—a 13-fold increase. In the process, an entirely new universe has been created—theH world of cyberspace. Cyberspace is a virtual space that has become as prominent as real space for business, politics, and communities. The term cyberspace is sometimes treatedN as a synonym for the Internet, but is actually a broader concept. The term cyberspace emphasizesS that it can be treated as a place (Byassee 1995). The word cyberspace (a portmanteauO of cybernetics and space) was coined by William Gibson, a Canadian science fiction writer, when he sought a term to explain his vision of a global computer network, linking all people,N machines, and sources of information in the world, and through which one could move or, navigate as through a virtual space (Heylighen 1994), in 1982 in his novelette Burning Chrome in Omni magazine and was subsequently popularized in his novel Neuromancer. In the early 1980s, Gibson observed youngO players in video game parlors and extrapolated a future of communication and control through game-like globally linked graphical computer systems. His space is “consensually hallucinated,”L not real (a “nonspace of the mind”), but effec- tive and dominant (Aarseth 1998). In his novelI Neuromancer (1984), Gibson invented the notion of cyberspace as a computer-available location where all the existing information in the world was collected. Later, John Perry Barlow describedV the real world of connected computers using exactly the same term as Gibson used. In 1990,I Barlow first applied the science-fiction term cyberspace to the Internet (or precisely, as Barlow states on his Web site, to the “already-existing global electronic social space now in most instancesA referred to by that name”). Until his citing it, it had not been considered any sort of place (Barlow 1991). Some claim, therefore, that cyber- space, as it exists today, should be called “Barlovian cyberspace” in order to distinguish it from the fictional “Gibsonian cyberspace” of cyberpunk literature (Jordan 1999). In this chapter, the concept of cyberspace means the global aggregate9 of digital, interactive, electronic communica- tion networks; cyberspace thus includes the 1constituent networks comprising the global inter- network (the “Internet”) as well as the Internet itself as a separate, emergent phenomenon. Suler (2005) has accentuated that the1 term cyberspace has been hackneyed and overly commercialized. He explains that the experience0 created by computers and computer networks can in many ways be understood as a psychological “space.” Many users who have connected to a remote computer or explored World Wide Web will describe the experience as “travelling” or “going someplace.” On an even deeper psychological level, users often describe how their com- puter is an extension of their mind and personality—a “space” that reflects their tastes, attitudes, and interests. In psychoanalytic terms, computers and cyberspace may become a type of transi- tional space that is an extension of the individual’s intrapsychic world. It may be experienced as an intermediate zone between self and other that is part self and part other (Suler 2005). M14_SCHM8860_01_SE_C14.QXD 2/1/08 6:07 PM Page 285 Criminal Behavior in Cyberspace 285 Mitra (2003) has clearly examined the two significant differences between the physical space and cyberspace, as well as brought out a new space that he calls as “cybernetic space,” which is an intersecting space of physical and cyber (Mitra and Schwartz 2001). The first dif- ference between the physical space and cyberspace is that cyberspace defies boundaries. The second component of the cyberspace is its discursive nature which suggests that experience of space moves away from the realm of the sensory to an interpretation of texts, images, and sounds. Simply put, it is not possible to “touch” the virtual but it is only possible to “read” the virtual. Cyberspace, within a modernistic epistemology, does not exist, but can only be inter- preted (Tyner 1998; Mitra 2003). Brenner (2004a) has provided another two important differ- ences between the cyberspace and the realJ space, that is, absences of physical constraints and lack of hierarchical constraints. Lessig (1998) brings the very important difference between physical space and cyberspace, anonymity.O Menthe (1998) argued that, for jurisdictional analysis, cyberspace should be treated asH a fourth international space along with other three international spaces, Antarctica, outer space, and the high seas. However, these three physical spaces are nothing at all like cyberspace,N which is a nonphysical space (Menthe 1998; Mann and Sutton 1998) and is perfectly differentS from physical space (Lessig 1998). The cyberspace presents an environmentO in which both healthy and pathological behav- iors may be pursued (Suler 1999, 2004; Suler and Phillips 1998). Joinson (1998, 2003), in a thoughtful review, examined how modernN electronic tools have valuable, positive aspects for people’s advancement and success, as well, as destructive, negative aspects that humiliate, ter- rorize, and block social progress. Cyberspace at the new millennium resembles the frontier at the beginning of the eighteenth century: bullies and criminals swagger electronically through the commons, stealing what they want,O breaking what they don’t, and interfering with peo- ple’s activities (Kabay 2005). In the present chapter, an effort is madeL to construct a theory that explains the criminal behavior in the cyberspace. This chapterI is structured in the following way. Firstly, a brief description of the criminal behavior of cyberspace is provided that includes cyber crime def- inition, typology of cyber crime, definitionV and typology of cyber criminal, and the differ- ences between the crimes of physical spaceI and cyberspace. Secondly, the need for a new theory for the criminal behavior in cyberspace is emphasized. Thirdly, the space transition theory of cyber crime is established and,A discussed. CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IN CYBERSPACE 9 The vast majority of people in our society1 are productive, law-abiding citizens, including when they are on the Internet (Danda 2001).