I'm happy to hear we're on the same side, then. This time I agree with what you say about CFAA. The punishments are too high which, as you say, gives prosecutor

I'm happy to hear we're on the same side, then. This time I agree with what you say about CFAA. The punishments are too high which, as you say, gives prosecutors an unfair amount of leverage. I'm simply trying to inject a dose of realism into the YC conversation on this issue: unfortunately, I don't think any judge is going to strike down, or meaningfully limit CFAA any time soon. The legal arguments just are not there. If we want it fixed, we need to come up with a strategy to get Congress to fix it. That won't be easy, but I think it may be the only way. (Of course, CFAA is only one of many criminal laws that need to be reformed in precisely the same way. Drug laws are, of course, another great example.) I do want to try to dispel just a bit of your cynicism about the criminal justice system, though. Unfortunately, I can't say a lot about the state systems, but I can tell you from extensive first hand experience behind the scenes in the federal court system that the plea bargaining process (and all the rest of it) works pretty much as advertised. While prosecutors may be overzealous, there is no shady back room business going on behind judges and prosecutors in strip clubs or anywhere else. (I'm not saying, of course, that it NEVER happens, but that, if it does, it would be a rarity and all the other judges would be aghast. The actual culture among federal judges would never condone what you've described.) This doesn't mean that defendants always get a fair chance. They typically have few resources, little knowledge of the system, and are threatened with huge penalties (though at least in federal court the appointed representation actually tends to be decent). But at least the courts themselves are not rigged against them. (I suspect much the same can be said for many state courts, but not, unfortunately, all.)