> Accordingly, the policy clarifies that hypothetical CFAA violations that have concerned some courts and commentators are not to be charged. Embellishing an online dating profile contrary to the terms of service of the dating website; creating fictional accounts on hiring, housing, or rental websites; using a pseudonym on a social networking site that prohibits them; checking sports scores at work; paying bills at work; or violating an access restriction contained in a term of service are not themselves sufficient to warrant federal criminal charges.
> However, the new policy acknowledges that claiming to be conducting security research is not a free pass for those acting in bad faith. For example, discovering vulnerabilities in devices in order to extort their owners, even if claimed as “research,” is not in good faith.
What exactly does this policy change even mean? Who was being charged with a federal crime for checking a sports score or paying a bill at work? And since the claim to be conducting security research is not a "free pass" for unauthorized research, I'd really like to know who exactly was being charged under the old policy that is protected by the new?
This "change" just seems like a bunch of pointless grandstanding.