>>I wonder too where the concept of Freedom of Speech comes into this. Though the rest of the world doesn't pay it much respect, it does, I thought, have some importance in the USA.
>
>I think the crime he was charge for was "disrupting communications". I wasn't the message or the medium but the intent to cause harm.

Evan;

A further response. Do you not think that the medium has some responsiblity in the "disruption of communication"? What if i decided to send a 600MB file to 100 or a thousand friends? (Or even all the members of UT). If that disrupted communications, would I then be criminal for it? (Freely admitting I sent the message?) And if the systems involved easily handled the message would I then be saved from any criminal activity?

Is it really the capacity of the transport layer, over which I have no control, that decides my criminality?

Here's another question. Suppose I got the Melissa virus message, which I then thought was so neat I transferred it (cut & paste) to another email account and passed it on to someone who wasn't in the top 50. Would that make me more or less criminally responsible than the originator? Or is the originator alone responsible because he/she is the *AUTHOR*?