The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act $($CFFA$)$ is at the heart of nearly all the controversial hacking cases in the past decade. Critics of the law sometimes argue that the law is too broad and too vague. For example, the CFFA makes it illegal to gain access to a protected computer $$without authorized access$$ or in a manner that $$exceeds authorized access.$$ However, the law does not make clear what $$authorization$$ might actually mean. As a result, prosecutors have occasionally used this lack of clarity to bring criminal charges that are not really about hacking a computer but are instead related to other behaviors that take place using a computer. For example, one of the more infamous cases is that of United States v$.$ Drew. In this case, a woman created a fake identity on social media to taunt a teenager. The teenager being taunted ultimately committed suicide. The taunting inflicted on this victim was inexcusable but was not itself illegal, so the prosecutor charged Drew under the CFFA, arguing that her fake persona violated the terms of use for the social media platform and was, therefore, an $$unauthorized$$ use. A judge ruled in favor of Drew that the application of the CFFA was inappropriate in this case.

Do a little sleuthing and find a controversial case where the CFFA was applied. Summarize the case and your thoughts about the appropriateness of its application.