One has to wonder then, whose idea it was to charge him in New Jersey at all...

If there's a precedent already in the state court that it's not unauthorized access if there's no code or password stolen... and there's a pretty clear argument that the case doesn't even belong in New Jersey, how did we get here? Some three years of incarceration later!

(Obviously, the answer is that it's not a crime if a cop does it.)

But you could get $50 and a pizza party... with a chance to win an iPad!

Spin the wheel! Weeeeeewwwow!

Which is just what he didn't do, according to the opinion. I agree, this fact wouldn't be helpful to his case if he was tried in probably any other possible state, other than New Jersey.

I'll try a car analogy. If you're trying to drive to New Jersey and you're starting your trip in Ireland, it's not important that you don't have EZPass or any American money to pay the tolls. There's too much water in your engine by the time you reach the shore, assuming you didn't just run out of gas on the bottom of the ocean. You didn't fail to pay the roadway tolls in Jersey, since you never were in the state of New Jersey. So you don't go to jail for that.

It suggests (by way that no evidence was offered) that he is not guilty of unauthorized use of a code or password, which means he's not guilty of violating the precedent for the statute in NJ. It gives no opinion on whether or not this has any bearing on the federal charge under CFAA. The precedent cited is another NJ case, where the person on trial was a police officer who had a password and used it for reasons against internal policy. There was no password, but I believe the standards of the federal CFAA are actually much lower.

I haven't read the judgement (I am a good armchair lawyer though, have read lots of opinions and regurgitation of other peoples interpretation of the facts) but I am pretty sure that was a part of the New Jersey law, so in any retrial it would be irrelevant, since the standard is lower.

It would have probably been better for Weev if AT&T's servers actually were in New Jersey, since then this judges would be forced to say what they think about the NJ law as it applies to this case, which is pretty clearly what you said. The password or code - there was no such barrier to access, so no illegal access through forged authorization occurred.

This barrier requirement is part of the New Jersey law, and the threshold for abuse in the federal statutes is lower. Ah. Here, found it:
See State v. Riley, 988 A.2d 1252,
1267 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 2009) (p12 of the ruling)

...except that the situation you just described is the opposite of what happened.

The judges declined to give an opinion on whether or not any law was violated, they vacated the verdict in NJ because of a procedural violation that had taken place -- the venue the case was tried in was NJ, even though the events and parties (AT&T was not a plaintiff, so technically not a party... but the servers in question) were not any of them in NJ.

Almost. You can quit, of course, but it's illegal for your company to let you put pressure on others to quit by threatening to quit. It would seem.

Not just that... even renters whose leases do not forbid sublet, or actual property owners, are not allowed to rent for terms less than 30 days because they likely have not obtained the permit. It's said that this permit is onerous or expensive to obtain and so "is usually ignored."

If you can go to the store and buy one, and put it on your network, and your network monitoring software can show you what it's doing, and it's unambiguously doing something that's easy for you to do, and makes it easy to get something that arguably ought to be a secret without your having performed any heavy duty rocket surgery...

It's public! Any of your customers can gain this knowledge without anything you didn't just plain give over to them! If responsibly disclosed and the company won't do anything about it, then they ought to be exposed. Now what is it that was exposed again? "Private" e-mail addresses?

Come on!

As if I don't already get enough spam on Facebook... no thanks!

(Actually, my facebook feed consists mostly of updates from The Onion, it's honestly a joy sometimes to visit the News Feed.)

Psst... you actually put ADA in the subject of your post.

That's odd. For me, I can click on Valdrax or (32670) to get to /~Valdrax

On Beta, clicking your username would just expand/fold your comment.

Holy shit it's back. I must be right on the threshold. The nexus of the universe. I can see my house from here!

Try using it for a while. You can't link directly to comments, you can't click a username to visit somebody's profile, it seems to delete whole posts (for me at least) whenever that person tries to thoroughly exercise Unicode, instead of just deleting the Unicode characters like Classic. It has really got nothing at all positive over Slashdot Classic in my opinion. It should be clear what the users want, since every single article is crapflooded with comments about "FUCK BETA" and they are actually getting modded up.