AT&T isn't a named party and did not bring the suit. Their civil liability is pretty much zero as far as I understand it.
Wrongful prosecution is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to prove.
Because it was overturned on appeal and the determination was not on the merits (ie. what he did isn't actually illegal) but instead on procedural grounds he loses a bunch of options for remedy.
If he had been convicted would he have also been required to pay for the "damage" done to AT&T's computer?
Isn't there something in the CFAA about having to allege causing damage, measurable in financial terms?
Maybe they did not use that provision?
Surely there must be logical reasons I am overlooking, but I find it peculiar that today technology companies can so easily get federal authorities to bring proceedings on their behalf.
Whether it's the DMCA or the CFAA, these "violations" seem like civil matters to me.
Do they harm the public, or do they just (potentially) harm a business?
I thought this opinion was very clearly written and although it only addresses venue, it does have some precedential value for the future of "CFAA law".
For one, if you plan to rely on improper venue as a defense, stay away from the Second Circuit!
Wrongful prosecution is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to prove.
Because it was overturned on appeal and the determination was not on the merits (ie. what he did isn't actually illegal) but instead on procedural grounds he loses a bunch of options for remedy.