Code-based and contract-based restrictions on authorization (sources of unauthorized access).
Suppose you overheard someone say that
• the conduct (the worm unleashed, with passwords and accounts circumvented) of Mr. Robert Morris should be illegal, and that his case (at p. 40, with notes and questions at pp. 43-49) was properly decided,
• the conduct of David Nosal should be illegal and that his case (Nosal II at p. 46 note 5) is also properly decided
—how might you agree with that point of view (giving the best argument you can to the effect that both cases are correct)? How would you respond in disagreement? (giving the best argument you can that one or both cases should have been decided differently?)
Suppose you agree that each case is properly decided; what do you think about the problem of password sharing (the problem faced by companies that stream online video, described at the bottom of p. 47)?