|
|
|
|
|
by kube-system
2246 days ago
|
|
The CFAA doesn't protect "content", though. It protects "protected computers". In this case, Amazon fully owns, possesses, and operates the "protected computer". You'd have to successfully argue that Amazon fraudulently accessed their own computer. It might be possible, but I'm guessing it'd be a first. The difference in Aaron's case is huge: he didn't own the computers that hosted JSTOR. |
|
> The difference in Aaron's case is huge: he didn't own the computers that hosted JSTOR.
His access was authorized, though. They still threw CFAA at him.