A mother is talking on the phone. The person on the phone says, "Hi, this is your son's school. We're having some computer trouble." The mom responds, "Oh dear — did he break something? The other person answers, "In a way — ... Did you really name your son Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;--?" The mom says, "Oh, yes. Little Bobby Tables, we call him." The other persons says, "Well, we've lost this year's student records. I hope you're happy." The mom says, "And I hope you've learned to sanitize your database inputs."

I think it's obvious that Little Bobby Tables's mom has broken the law. Let's assume this is his legal name and does not break any naming laws; it's still probably illegal, because she obviously gave him that name with intent to harm computer systems.

However, when Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;-- grows up, he will also have to type the name into many online forms - and it may have the same effect. Would he be commiting a crime by entering his legal name into a computer if the name was intentionally chosen by his parents to harm computer systems?

This is not a duplicate of an existing question about this comic. That question is about the consequences for the mother, while this one is about the future consequences for the child after he becomes an adult. The title of that question does ask about the child, but the body is about the parent.

  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on Law Meta, or in Law Chat. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
    – Dale M
    Jan 6 at 21:34
  • 1
  • 1
    @TheWreckersCompanion no, it does not. As I explained in this question, that question focuses on the consequences for the parent, while this one is about the future consequences for the child after he becomes an adult. The title of that question does ask about the child, but the body is about the parent.
    – Someone
    Jan 7 at 2:40

6 Answers 6


It depends on the mens rea element of any given statute.

If Bobby's home state makes it a crime to purposefully enter harmful data into a computer system, he is unlikely to ever run afoul of that law while conducting legitimate business; his purpose is to pay his taxes or renew his driver's license or sign up for classes.

However, if he moves to a state where it is a crime to knowingly enter harmful data into a computer system, he could face liability if he's learned what his name means and knows the system won't sanitize the input.

If he moves to a state where it is a crime to negligently enter harmful data into a computer system, he's on the hook once he knows the effects of entering his name.

And if he moves to a state where it is a strict-liability offense to enter harmful data into a computer system, he is on the hook every time he causes a problem by entering his name, regardless of whether he understands the consequences of doing so.

  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on Law Meta, or in Law Chat. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
    – Dale M
    Jan 9 at 8:56

If Bobby was born in Germany, he won't have this problem. German laws requires the parents to select a name appropriate for the gender of the newborn, and DROP TABLES is not a suitable name for a boy (or a girl, for that matter). The parents would have to try and explain to the registry clerk that there is a culture where '); is a perfectly normal name, the clerk would be unlikely to believe that, and the matter would go to court -- where much less absurd names have been rejected as being akin to child abuse.

If Bobby immigrated to Germany, there would be an official transliteration of foreign characters into German documents (mostly following the ISO standards). Here it may get tricky, since ', ) and ; are valid characters of the standard latin character set, just not alphabetic. Still, a clerk who lets that pass would never live the embarassment down.

So Bobby (or Bobby's parents) would have to win a precedent-making lawsuit to make the name possible. And after that makes national headlines, the excuses for sloppy input validation/escaping run thin.

A nice question would be if Bobby, should he win the court cases, now has a right to be addressed in his full name in official communications ...

  • 8
    This answer spends a lot of time discussing why this wouldn't happen because of the specific name. However, I don't think the name itself is particularly relevant. There are perfectly valid names consisting only of Latin letters that could cause issues with poorly designed apps.
    – PC Luddite
    Jan 5 at 6:43
  • 12
    @PCLuddite: Indeed. Christopher Null wrote about his plight for example. Jan 5 at 9:47
  • 11
    Many real, acceptable names contain apostrophes, and apostrophes are enough (without parentheses or semicolons) to exploit real SQL injection vulnerabilities. Something like Timmy O'or't'is't looks a bit strange but isn't obviously not a real name from some culture.
    – kaya3
    Jan 5 at 17:16
  • 3
    @PCLuddite, I'm nó judge, but if entering a name like 'Null' into a database causes a crash, I would always blame the programmers and not the users. Certainly a Mr Null has a much more reasonable expectation that the string is valid than a Mr '); drop database.
    – o.m.
    Jan 6 at 10:00
  • 6
    (-1) because the question clearly states "Let's assume this is his legal name and does not break any naming laws; " This answer does not address any consequences. Jan 7 at 12:43

For someone born in France, no consequences, because it would never happen. The état civil officer registering the name of newborns has the power to veto names that "seem contrary to the interest of the child". The relevant text is Code Civil, Article 57. Parents can contest the decision, to be adjudicated by a court.

Famous examples include:

  • In 1999, Mr and Mrs Renaud tried to call their daughter Mégane. This was initially blocked by the état civil officer, on the basis of it being suspiciously close to Renault Mégane, a then-new French car model. A judge later ruled the daughter could be named Mégane after all.

  • In 2009, a couple decided to call their child Titeuf, a French comic series. This was blocked, and the decision was confirmed by the courts. Because it went up to the highest jurisdiction of the land, this decision is now legal precedent.

  • In 2015, the name Nutella was blocked (a brand of hazelnut spread). The same year, Fraise (French for "strawberry") was also blocked. In both cases, parents changed the name.

While only the French alphabet is allowed for use in names (excluding e.g. ñ) plus space and dash, beyond that there is no hard rule to what names are allowed. A line of computer code would definitely never be allowed as a name.

For anyone else with such a legal name, then it would most likely be a crime.

There is a Code Pénal chapter concerning the relevant computer crimes. Articles 323-1, 323-2, and 323-3 forbid entering or staying into a data system fraudulently, or to introduce, modify or delete data, to modify the operation of the system.

French law does recognise lack of intent as exonerating, however it also recognises imprudence and négligence (Art. 121-3). It would be quite difficult to convince a court that you did not know your name was malicious code and would disrupt a computer system. Using the mother's argument (i.e. the operator should have had better security) would almost certainly play against you in showing you were aware of the risks involved in using your name.

If your name isn't transparently computer code but simply a regular name in a different culture, it would likely be recognised as an innocent happenstance.

  • 3
    This analysis ignores the possibility of immigrants (or even visitors) to France who bear names that would qualify.
    – Tiercelet
    Jan 5 at 15:00
  • 4
    Like the other "this wouldn't happen" answer, the problem here is that you are assuming any malicious string would be obviously not a valid name. But names can have apostrophes, apostrophes are enough to exploit SQL injection vulnerabilities in string input fields, and not all code is obviously code. Would an immigrant who wants to name their child Timmy O'or't'is't absolutely, definitely be rejected by the government?
    – kaya3
    Jan 5 at 17:25
  • 2
    Again, I and others have linked examples under nearly every answer of perfectly valid names under any reasonable naming statute or convention that break poorly configured applications
    – PC Luddite
    Jan 5 at 17:41
  • 4
    How could French law reasonably justify banning a name such as "Jennifer Null" or "George True"?
    – PC Luddite
    Jan 5 at 17:44
  • 3
    -1: As with o.m.'s answer for Germany, trivia about baby-naming laws are irrelevant to the question, which specifically precludes this line of argument ("assume this is his legal name and does not break any naming laws"). Further, if someone with this name visited France as a tourist, or otherwise did business with French entities, such that their actions fell under the law of France, then they wouldn't be required to change their name. So the claim "it would never happen" is false, and this answer is incorrect. Jan 7 at 19:42

This has already happened, with a name that's not inherently malicious.

Some badly-designed systems parse values and convert their names from strings to something else automatically. An example I've heard is actress Rachel True, whose last name has locked her out of Twitter as well as iCloud.


From the cartoon, I don't think it is obvious that he typed in his name. My first assumption was that school administrators and teachers are typing in his name. If that is correct then there is no actus reus on his part and therefore no crime has been committed.

If he is typing his name in then the analysis regarding mens rea holds.

Does the cartoon require that he use his given name (is Tables his surname?) as a username to have this effect?

For a fascinating article on the laws in the U.S. concerning naming children, read here.

  • 10
    The question was about a hypothetical situation in which he, years after the comic, does have to enter his name. It's not about the actual situation in the comic.
    – Someone
    Jan 4 at 21:46
  • 2
    @Someone the problem with the comic is, that, as the other question elaborated, the name is not possible in most places.
    – Trish
    Jan 4 at 23:24
  • 7
    The likelihood of someone possessing such a name is higher than you would expect. Any name that may be interpreted as part of a SQL statement could be an issue for poorly programmed applications (meet Mr. Null)
    – PC Luddite
    Jan 5 at 6:38
  • 3
    @PCLuddite: Even in the days before computers, I would expect someone called "FNU" might have cause trouble in police departments that would normally use that "name" as a placeholder for suspects whose first name was unknown. A resolution to this problem would be to say that anyone whose actual name happened to be "FNU" should have their name recorded as "XFNU", and recognize that two entries related to XFNU SMITH may or may independently refer either to people actually named XFNU JONES or FNU JONES. Of course, the concept wouldn't be anything unusual--entries related to...
    – supercat
    Jan 5 at 16:55
  • 3
    @PCLuddite the comic isn't simply about names that cause "problems" with systems. Most such names cause problems only for the user whose name it is. Someone named "Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;--" will cause damage to the system affecting everyone, not just an inability to process certain data.
    – phoog
    Jan 6 at 3:02

Believe it or not, this is not an unfamiliar problem for bureaucracies.

See this for another example in comedy, and a certain style of solution:

Derek (drops lighter) Nippl-e

The standard way of handling it is that bureaucracies have rules about how names must be represented in writing.

In the Anglophone world, a typical requirement is that names be represented only with letters of the English alphabet.

In terms of "legal" names - that is, presumably meaning a name recorded at the registry office upon a standard set of life events like birth, marriage, or death - the registrar (an official employed by the state) may also control the proposed registration of names which he thinks are motivated by mischief or would contribute to mischievous ends.

The string Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;-- is not therefore a person's "name" in an English-based legal jurisdiction. It is not a name firstly because it does not consist only of English letters, and secondly because (even when shorn of the punctuation elements) a registrar could well suspect mischief and therefore refuse the registration of such a name for any official purpose of the state.

In terms of whether entering such a string into a computer system would be criminal, that is likely to be highly dependent on context, including whether it was done with a malicious purpose.

If the purpose of making the entry was not malicious - for example, if some waggish computer programmer chose it as a screen name, and then "damage" was caused (i.e. the computer belonging to the bureaucracy reacted differently than the bureaucracy would have preferred) - then I doubt it would be a criminal act.

There is not in general any requirement for the public operating or making entries into computer systems, when explicitly or implicitly authorised to operate the computer as a member of the public, to understand technical matters or (even if they do understand technical matters) to anticipate how the computer may react adversely to their use.

Nor are they required to understand what opinion the bureaucracy may have on whether certain reactions by the computer are desirable for their ends, and the mere fact that a computer has reacted adversely in the opinion of the bureaucracy which owns and programs it, does not determine the question of whether the operator was engaged in a criminal act by triggering that adverse reaction.

By analogy, if we had a `Robert Jump-Off-Roof Tables" who submitted his name to a bureaucracy, and a human clerk administering records with this name then proceeded to the roof of the building and jumped off, a court may well decide that the result is too remote for the mere submission of that name to be a criminal act.

It might be too remote even if the submission was performed mischievously to see what reaction it provoked amongst the clerical staff, because no reasonable person would think that a clerk should react to seeing such a name by jumping off a roof, even if they did in fact do so. Likewise, if a computer reacts to certain inputs in ways that are unreasonable.

  • 3
    "In the Anglophone world, a typical requirement is that names be represented only with letters of the English alphabet". Citation needed. This is certainly not the case in the UK or the US. In the UK we have for example Cowley vs. Cowley where the following is stated: "Speaking generally, the law of this country allows any person to assume and use any name, provided its use is not calculated to deceive and to inflict pecuniary loss". In the US we even have practical examples thanks to good ol' Elon Musk that this is not the case.
    – Voo
    Jan 6 at 23:13
  • 5
    @Steve I have a US friend who has a â in his legal first name - which I'm sure you know was never part of the English alphabet. So if your only argument against this is that the "claim so extreme and contrary to experience" then you simply don't know enough people. I just looked it up and in the US the rules vary from state to state, but there are several states that don't seem to have any legal limits on the chosen name.
    – Voo
    Jan 7 at 10:33
  • 2
    @Steve It's a completely different letter which is not part of the English alphabet and is part of his legal name. Sure many people wouldn't know how to pronounce it - but that'd be a weird legal requirement (the same is true for many names using only the English alphabet). But now that we agree that having a non English alphabet character in your name is very much not "extreme and contrary to experience" do you have any actual citation for your claim?
    – Voo
    Jan 7 at 11:07
  • 4
    @Steve "Naming Baby: The Constitutional Dimensions of Parental Naming Rights", written by a law professor from UC Davis explicitly states on page 168 that only some states prohibit ideograms and pictograms and later says that there are several states that explicitly state there are no limitations on the name.
    – Voo
    Jan 7 at 18:20
  • 3
    I mean I agree that for practical purposes there will be limits even if there's no legislation contrary to it (gov IT systems being what they are), but it seems very clear to me that contrary to other countries that have very strict legislation about naming, common law legislation is for the most part very laissez faire on this issue.
    – Voo
    Jan 7 at 18:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .