[lswainemoore]

Hmm. I don't agree with the ruling either. But I don't think this analogy does the original argument justice.

The point of mentioning "accessing the internet" is it's a lot easier for the hacker to scale up their wrongdoing with ease. It's much simpler to put a virus of some sort (say, a fake download button on a media sharing site) and reach a large audience, than it is to break into the homes of a similarly large group of people.

Where I primarily disagree with the judgment is that this notion makes it a "virtual certainty" that hacking occurs for any given person. Smart browsing habits, and general computer literacy, can make the odds decrease to near zero.