He was apparently fired for violating his terms of employment, so he was punished, but not <i>criminally</i> punished. While I am very disturbed that a major restraint (the threat of <i>criminal</i> prosecution) has been taken off the table for abuse of sensitive private government data, I&#x27;m happy that it has been taken off the table for me as well, as a non-government employee that only has access to sensitive <i>company</i> private data.<p>Quote from the appeals court ruling: &quot;Valle concedes that he violated the terms of his employment by putting his authorized computer access to personal use...&quot;<p>Ref: &lt;<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;tech-policy&#x2F;2015&#x2F;12&#x2F;repugnant-online-discussions-are-not-illegal-thoughtcrime-court-rules&#x2F;&gt;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;tech-policy&#x2F;2015&#x2F;12&#x2F;repugnant-online-...</a>