Weev was also accessing AT&amp;T&#x27;s servers from his own computer using his own software.<p>This user was accessing Google&#x27;s debug servers and debug information. Did you read up on the Weev case? It&#x27;s not that dissimilar.
It seems like you&#x27;re being intentionally obtuse in saying &quot;his computer was not protected from him&quot;, well, no, Google&#x27;s debug servers and information were meant to be.<p>If someone accesses the source code of a website while knowing that the website author intends them to not access it, then yes, they&#x27;re potentially exceeding their authorized access and breaking the law under the CFAA.<p>I don&#x27;t think the law is good nor makes sense, but explaining why it&#x27;s dumb logically to me doesn&#x27;t help. You&#x27;re preaching to the choir. I know it&#x27;s dumb and doesn&#x27;t make sense. This law was created by people who do not understand technology or the internet except by analogies to it being &quot;kinda like a supermarket&quot; or such.<p>I gave suitable evidence that this is quite possibly illegal because of a dumb law. You&#x27;ve told me that it&#x27;s dumb for this to be illegal (yes it is dumb) as if that means it can&#x27;t be illegal. That&#x27;s not a rebuttal to the links and statements I provided and, without a meaningful counter argument that isn&#x27;t you intentionally being obtuse about what I said, you aren&#x27;t furthering this discussion.