[anonymouz]

Yes, it would be for a jury to decide. But a jury (or a judge) is perfectly capable of distinguishing between someone signing up to two Gmail accounts and someone gaining unauthorized access to a network by circumventing countermeasures taken specifically to prevent him from accessing said network.

Application of law is not a an execution of a script applied by a stupid robot: It does allow for intent and the bigger picture to be factoring in.

There are many reason to claim that Aaron's actions were rather harmless, and that, taking all factors into account, they do not warrant significant punishment. But claiming that he did not do anything illegal at all requires some serious twisting of the facts.

[analog]

Unauthorised access to the network is not illegal, just as unauthorised access to a building is not illegal if you don't break any locks to get in.

http://unhandled.com/2013/01/12/the-truth-about-aaron-swartz...