If there’s anyone’s amicus brief on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) I’d want to read, it would be Orin Kerr’s. Today, he is submitting an amicus brief to the Supreme Court on a big CFAA case: Nathan Van Buren v. United States of America.
From his brief, the “INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE” section:
Orin S. Kerr is a Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. He has written extensively about 18 U.S.C. § 1030, known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). His experience includes working as a lawyer in CFAA cases fromthe prosecution side, criminal defense side, and civil defense side; testifying about the law before congressional committees; and helping to draft amendments to it. The interest of amicus is the sound development of the law.
Here’s just one paragraph to hopefully encourage you all to read the whole brief:
This case asks the Court to settle what makes access unauthorized—in the words of the statute, either an access “without authorization” or an act that “exceeds authorized access.” 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2). The question is hard because two different theories of authorization exist. The first theory, based on technology, is universally accepted. The second theory, based on words, is deeply controversial. This case asks whether CFAA liability is limited to the first theory or if it also extends to the second theory.
You can read his brief here.