It's not the Craigslist allegation that makes something criminal; it's the Craigslist interpretation, if accepted by the court. Have you read the linked brief?

It's not the Craigslist allegation that makes something criminal; it's the Craigslist interpretation, if accepted by the court. Have you read the linked brief? That's its concern. It's clear and written by experts who agree with your opinion, as expressed here, that nothing 3Taps did should be considered criminal. However, if that's your opinion, your defense of the use of the CFAA, upthread, is odd. CFAA (g) is clear: the elements allowing civil damages/relief are a strict subset of those that impose criminal liability. You'll only get damages/relief if you've proven that something that's criminally-prosecutable under the CFAA has taken place. Of course, the standards-of-proof are lower in a civil case, and it remains unlikely most civil judgements would change a federal prosecutor's priorities. But your casual assurance upthread that CFAA civil actions and CFAA criminal prosecutions are "worlds apart" was misleading.