Dec 192011
 
 December 19, 2011  Court, Laws

Orin Kerr offers a few thoughts on oral argument in United States v. Nosal, a Ninth Circuit case that was heard en banc last week. I’ve mentioned Nosal number of times on this blog because the government’s interpretation of the federal law known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) puts anyone who’s ever violated a site’s Terms of Service or used their boss’s computer for non-approved purposes at risk of criminal prosecution.  Nosal was intended to be an anti-hacking statute, and its overbroad interpretation and application by the Department of Justice is cause for concern.

Read Orin’s commentary on The Volokh Conspiracy.  Orin has been one of the most influential proponents of a narrow interpretation of the law, and I hope the Ninth Circuit sees this one the way he does.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.