“… said that the law as it’s written could very likely be interpreted in a way that achieves a just outcome, as long as people involved have adequate understanding of technology.”
Okay, then if that’s not what you mean by the above, please explain your real intent.
Because that blog post documents at least three separate types of violations of the CFAA:
Unauthorized access, computer fraud, and computer trespass.
So I’m not sure what special technical knowledge the judges or lawyers involved could have that would resolve the case without a conviction, unless you mean that because they have that knowledge they understand how arcane and unjust the CFAA law is, and would move to nullify it.
But you’re adamant that is not what you mean, so help me understand.
It comes across as someone who genuinely believes that American legal system is either technocratic, or otherwise operating on an alternative set or principles that aren’t currently present.
And in this aspirational version of the American legal system, the CFAA wouldn’t exist, and this gray hat whistleblower would be afforded some legal protections for documenting the gross negligence of that service provider.
But if we’re stuck operating in reality as it currently exists, he’d be SOL and there’d be no technocratic mechanisms to save him, except for prosecutorial discretion.
Okay, then if that’s not what you mean by the above, please explain your real intent.
Because that blog post documents at least three separate types of violations of the CFAA:
Unauthorized access, computer fraud, and computer trespass.
So I’m not sure what special technical knowledge the judges or lawyers involved could have that would resolve the case without a conviction, unless you mean that because they have that knowledge they understand how arcane and unjust the CFAA law is, and would move to nullify it.
But you’re adamant that is not what you mean, so help me understand.
Just read the comment I literally made before you made that reply. It explains it pretty precisely.
It comes across as someone who genuinely believes that American legal system is either technocratic, or otherwise operating on an alternative set or principles that aren’t currently present.
And in this aspirational version of the American legal system, the CFAA wouldn’t exist, and this gray hat whistleblower would be afforded some legal protections for documenting the gross negligence of that service provider.
But if we’re stuck operating in reality as it currently exists, he’d be SOL and there’d be no technocratic mechanisms to save him, except for prosecutorial discretion.