Gregory's Server
@PiiiepsBrummm @pluralistic Sorry, I’m not really convinced. It is a problematic law, as it rules any data access to be illegal as long as the data is protected – it does not set any requirements on that protection. It doesn’t even require the data to be remote: I could access data on my own computer protected by military-grade ROT13 encryption, and it could be considered a violation of this law. This extremely broad definition is why we now have courts carving out restrictions where this law violates common sense, and they won’t always produce sensible results.
@WPalant @pluralistic
Every law needs interpretation. You _can't_ include all definitions and possible exceptions. If you would do this, the code for a bike fit for road use would still involve a 6V dynamo. Battery lamps not allowed.
The whole ruling depends on the interpretation of "protected". The error here is believing, that a hardcoded and unencryprted password fulfills the definition.