I assume you mean relative to other sentences/crimes you're aware of? It may be low compared to those, but in general, American sentences seem exceptionally high to me, and this is a good example.
I don't think a stronger sentence would have deterred him. I doubt he sat down and thought "If I get caught, I'll only get 3 1/2 years, which isn't too bad. Now, if I would get 10 years, that's another story..." I doubt he even knew the specific penalties for doing this. It seems to me he assumed he'd never get caught.
I think others reading this article will be deterred by the thought of losing 3 1/2 years of their life, and having their life after prison ruined in many ways. For example, try to explain a 3 1/2 year gap in your employment history during a job interview. And for the ones who aren't, I don't think a 10 year sentence would somehow deter them.
I don't think this guy is likely to commit another such crime after his release. I doubt he figures that 3 1/2 years in jail and putting his life back together isn't that big a deal and planting another logic bomb feels so good that it's worth it to do it again.
The only other motivation for punishing a crime is vengeance, an emotional feeling of hurting someone who tried to hurt us. That seems a poor motivation for taking away even more of someone's life.
He did something malicious that could have caused a lot of problems. He needs to be punished. But the punishment seems way out of proportion to what's needed to reduce crime.
What annoys me about this is not the sentence, it's the way that corporations can get away with doing the same thing.
If malicious software is a bad thing -- and it is -- then let's punish everyone who does it. Starting with Sony when they put a rootkit in CDs. But of course, Sony are a big corporation, so that makes it OK.
For completeness' sake, there is a third reason for incarceration - The prisoner can't commit new crimes while detained. Not that it matters in this case.
I don't think a stronger sentence would have deterred him. I doubt he sat down and thought "If I get caught, I'll only get 3 1/2 years, which isn't too bad. Now, if I would get 10 years, that's another story..." I doubt he even knew the specific penalties for doing this. It seems to me he assumed he'd never get caught.
I think others reading this article will be deterred by the thought of losing 3 1/2 years of their life, and having their life after prison ruined in many ways. For example, try to explain a 3 1/2 year gap in your employment history during a job interview. And for the ones who aren't, I don't think a 10 year sentence would somehow deter them.
I don't think this guy is likely to commit another such crime after his release. I doubt he figures that 3 1/2 years in jail and putting his life back together isn't that big a deal and planting another logic bomb feels so good that it's worth it to do it again.
The only other motivation for punishing a crime is vengeance, an emotional feeling of hurting someone who tried to hurt us. That seems a poor motivation for taking away even more of someone's life.
He did something malicious that could have caused a lot of problems. He needs to be punished. But the punishment seems way out of proportion to what's needed to reduce crime.