I've heard this assertion so many times, and after thinking about it, I don't think it's actually true. I agree with the sentiment of your comment, but I don't think I'm actually breaking multiple laws every day. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Edit: Could anyone at least provide me with an example of some laws that many people, and perhaps I, break every day unknowingly? That would be a start.
Not stopping completely at a stop sign.
Sharing a cat photo you found online. Doubly so if you rehosted it (imgur, Instagram, etc). Sharing stuff on the internet, even without shades of piracy, is fraught with copyright problems.
Speeding. I'd be very surprised if you drove at or below the speed limit all the time, every day.
Not speeding - there are minimum speed statutes in some jurisdictions.
Not in the US, but in other jurisdictions like Japan and France, taking a random picture on the street where someone is identifiable.
The list goes on, and on, and on...
Here in Seattle it used to be quite common to get a ticket for jaywalking. Now it only seems to happen if you block traffic flow on a downtown street during rush hour.
According to Texas Criminal and Traffic Law section 101.31, possession of more than one quart of liquor or more than 24 12-ounce beers in a dry area is evidence of intent to sell alcohol.
I've lived in two dry cities in TX, BTW.
http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Innocent-ebook/dp/B...
Do you have specific knowledge of someone possessing controlled substances in a jurisdiction or situation where they're forbidden (e.g., someone in a medical marijuana state who possesses even misdemeanor amounts of pot but doesn't have official medical sanction for its use, or anyone possessing any amount in a "dry" state)? Obstruction of justice.
Have you ever taken a "mental health day" and called in sick when you aren't actually sick? You've defrauded your employer.
These are all acts specifically described as illegal by the relevant statute.
EDIT: clarifying language on "exceeding authorized access" case.
Not true:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/253581/court_violating_work_c...
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".