There was an editorial in the Sun Sentinel on September 2 that caught my eye. It discussed the implications of a recent appellate court ruling:
In a decision sure to confound the prosecution of thieves, the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled last week in favor of a burglar.
That a crime occurred wasn’t the issue. At issue was whether prosecutors filed the appropriate charges to match the value of the stolen goods.
The appellate court sided with the defendant, a decision that means prosecutors in Broward, Palm Beach and four other counties may now have to depreciate the value of stolen goods before they can lodge grand theft felony charges against someone who breaks into your home and steals your treasures.
[…]
But if the court really wants to go that route, let’s talk about value — replacement value, to be specific. If someone were to steal your two-year-old computer, how much would it cost to replace all the software, documents and vacation photos it holds?
I’ll let you read the editorial for yourself, but not surprisingly, my thoughts drifted to how one would put a market value for depreciation purposes on personal information. If a stolen laptop contained 500 employee records including SSN, do we value the data by what that info might go for in underground markets today? Would the “freshness” of the PII matter? Would the court even consider data breach mitigation costs in considering the value of stolen laptops or devices?
I think I’ll need to go read that appellate decision if I can track it down to see what the court was saying.