I don't think that ruling means what you think it means. The court adopted this interpretation and expanded its scope, ruling that an employee "exceeds authori

I don't think that ruling means what you think it means. The court adopted this interpretation and expanded its scope, ruling that an employee "exceeds authorized access" under the CFAA when they use a computer in way that violates an employer's access restrictions... They decided that, as a logical extension of this finding, the question of whether an employee "exceeds authorized access" is likewise determined by the employer's actions, including (but not limited to) the promulgation of computer use restrictions. Since Korn/Ferry indeed had such computer use restrictions, which the defendants violated when they accessed the executive database for fraudulent purposes, the Ninth Circuit court reversed the district court's decision and remanded the district court to reinstate the five counts under Section (a)(4). [1] If your employer says you can't browse Facebook or Hacker News with your work computer, and you do, you're "exceeding authorized access". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nosal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nosal