|
|
|
|
|
by tptacek
3999 days ago
|
|
2nd graf: suggests Craigslist "abused" the CFAA to "kill" a company. Instead, Craigslist relied on the one private cause of action in the US code specific to enforcement of ToS's --- a limited cause, with limited damages. It was inaccurate to call this an "abuse" (it's the whole intent of 1030g!) and misleading to invoke the CFAA boogeyman over it. 4th graf: Claims Craigslist relied on a "tortured" definition of CFAA, linking to another Techdirt story about a judge's upholding of Craigslist's claims on two different counts. "Torturous" here means "the suggestion that access was unauthorized after Padmapper received a cease and desist from Craigslist's lawyers, and changed IP addresses to evade a ban. 6th graf: Techdirt grossly misrepresents Orin Kerr, perhaps assuming readers won't click through to the Volokh story they quote out of context. Kerr sees the ruling as a missed opportunity to more rigidly define "unauthorized access" as "circumvention of technical controls" but does not disagree with the ruling. HN readers in general would not be happier in a world where Kerr's view of the CFAA was reliably enforced. Most importantly, I think: the article also never makes the argument it teases in its headline: at no point is it ever made clear how Newmark has "made the CFAA worse". This is a defect density rate worthy of early-period PHP Wordpress. Your normal instinct about Techdirt is almost always going to be right. It's not a good site. I'm glad it's penalized. Penalize it more. |
|