Works matching Computer fraud
1
- Trends in Organized Crime, 2022, v. 25, n. 2, p. 226, doi. 10.1007/s12117-021-09422-1
- Article
2
- Criminal Law Writings / Caiete de Drept Penal, 2011, n. 3, p. 47
- Article
3
- Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2022, v. 14, n. 4, p. 100, doi. 10.17705/1pais.14404
- Article
4
- Law Review: Judicial Doctrine & Case-Law, 2017, v. 7, n. 2, p. 66
- Article
5
- AGORA International Journal of Juridical Sciences, 2014, v. 2, p. 29
- Article
6
- European Science Review, 2015, n. 1/2, p. 126
- Aleksandrovna, Efremova Marina
- Article
7
- Criminal Law Writings / Caiete de Drept Penal, 2012, n. 2, p. 139
- Article
8
- Touro Law Review, 2017, v. 33, n. 2, p. 541
- Article
9
- Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet, 2014, v. 6, n. 1, p. 67
- Article
10
- Southern Law Journal, 2016, v. 26, n. 2, p. 191
- USNICK, WILLIAM;
- USNICK, LEE
- Article
12
- Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 2014, v. 38, n. 3, p. 469
- Article
13
- University of Chicago Law Review, 2020, v. 87, n. 5, p. 1437
- Article
14
- Internal Security, 2013, v. 5, n. 2, p. 63, doi. 10.5604/20805268.1094062
- Shapochka, Serhiy Vladimirovich
- Article
15
- International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 2012, v. 6, n. 2, p. 984
- Article
16
- Penn State Law Review, 2020, v. 124, n. 3, p. 743
- Article
17
- Management & Accounting Review, 2017, v. 16, n. 2, p. 59, doi. 10.24191/mar.v16i2.671
- Zainal, Rafidah;
- Som, Ayub Md;
- Mohamed, Nafsiah
- Article
18
- South Carolina Law Review, 2011, v. 63, n. 1, p. 141
- Article
19
- New England Law Review, 2014, v. 48, n. 2, p. 421
- Article
21
- Computer Law Review International, 2022, v. 23, n. 3, p. 75, doi. 10.9785/cri-2022-230304
- Article
22
- ABA Journal of Labor & Employment Law, 2014, v. 29, n. 2, p. 373
- Article
23
- National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review, 2014, p. 145
- Article
24
- Information Systems Frontiers, 2017, v. 19, n. 3, p. 443, doi. 10.1007/s10796-017-9752-4
- Liao, Ruochen;
- Balasinorwala, Shenaz;
- Raghav Rao, H.
- Article
25
- St. Mary's Law Journal, 2014, v. 45, n. 3, p. 491
- HANNA, PAUL;
- LEAL, MATTHEW
- Article
26
- William & Mary Business Law Review, 2022, v. 14, n. 1, p. 215
- Article
27
- Tulane Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property, 2013, v. 16, p. 231
- Article
28
- American University Law Review, 2012, v. 61, n. 5, p. 1543
- Article
29
- Bench & Bar of Minnesota, 2022, v. 79, n. 8, p. 10
- Article
30
- Charleston Law Review, 2013, v. 7, n. 3, p. 489
- Article
31
- University of Illinois Law Review, 2018, v. 2018, n. 2, p. 847
- Article
32
- George Mason Law Review, 2019, v. 26, n. 3, p. 965
- Article
33
- William & Mary Law Review, 2011, v. 52, n. 4, p. 1369
- Article
34
- Creighton Law Review, 2014, v. 47, n. 3, p. 423
- Article
35
- University of Cincinnati Law Review, 2018, v. 86, n. 1, p. 315
- Article
36
- University of Cincinnati Law Review, 2013, v. 82, n. 1, p. 359
- Article
37
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2011, v. 26, n. 1, p. 905
- Article
38
- Jurimetrics: The Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 2013, v. 53, n. 4, p. 447
- Article
39
- Journal of Science & Technology Law, 2015, v. 21, n. 2, p. 357
- Article
40
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2014, v. 47, n. 3, p. 901
- Article
41
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2016, v. 34, n. 1, p. 281
- Article
42
- Brooklyn Law Review, 2022, v. 87, n. 3, p. 1077
- Article
43
- Brooklyn Law Review, 2017, v. 82, n. 4, p. 1849
- Article
44
- Widener Law Review, 2011, v. 17, n. 1, p. 261
- Article
45
- Duke Law & Technology Review, 2010, n. 11/12, p. 1
- Article
46
- Washington Law Review, 2016, v. 91, n. 4, p. 1813
- Article
47
- George Washington Law Review, 2016, v. 84, n. 6, p. 1703
- Article
48
- George Washington Law Review, 2016, v. 84, n. 6, p. 1644
- Article
49
- George Washington Law Review, 2016, v. 84, n. 6, p. 1523
- Article
50
- George Washington Law Review, 2016, v. 84, n. 6, p. 1442
- Article