Hi, Tom

As I understand it, the cited provision[s] of the Patriot Act are loosely based upon the 'draconian' Va. anti-spam legislation - howbeit with 'dangerously expanded & ambiguous scope'...

Please note; the following is expressive of *my* understanding of the subject and is in *no* way intended as an authoritative statement...

Initially the term 'spamming', as applied to digital messaging, described malicious, usually automated, 'flooding' of 'nets' (i.e. newsgroups, etc.) to the end of interference with legitimate communication -- Later 'redefined' as broadcast of unsolicited advertisement/propaganda material (often through deceitful, misleading or otherwise fraudulent means [i.e. forged headers, etc]) -- Recently the term 'spamming' has taken on a ‘parallel definition' to wit: Submission of 'spurious' messages to online services with intent to disrupt same via incitement of dissent, etc...

Please note the similarly of the latter definition of 'spamming' to that of 'Trolling' (i.e. heckling via introduction of material expected to elicit a general negative reaction from members of the 'target' community)? While spamming (in this sense) and trolling are described from one and other via intent (Spamming=disruption, trolling=attention seeking) the terms are (with increasing frequency) being used interchangeably to describe all manner of (intentionally) disruptive and/or belligerent behavior...

Tom, I must confess to feeling a bit like 'the village idiot' in that I am unable cite the applicable section of code --- However I have it from several trusted sources that acts of 'spamming' or 'trolling' may constitute 'schedule 6 felonies' under provisions of the (original) Patriot Act... --- Should they (and hence *I*) be mistaken, then I've learned several valuable (if *painful*) 'lessons'! - Not the least of which is to do *_my own_* ‘homework’ – without exception!!!

About 'hacking', yes indeed! Unauthorized use, and/or intrusion into, the facilities of another is, and always was, unlawful (as it should be) -- What I find unfortunate is the popular (and, it seems, legal) redefinition of 'hacker' as one who _necessarily_ partakes of illicit activity... In point of fact exploration of one's own computer may be deemed 'criminal' (via [anti] reverse-engineering legislation) even where use (or non-use) of insight so derived poses no ‘threat’ the rights holder[s]…

Well I’ve ‘rabbited on’ long enough and then some…

Please, Gary! Everybody! Accept my *genuine* apologies! – My unqualifiedly *IDIOTIC* behavior has left me profoundly remorseful and deeply embarrassed :(

With utmost sincerity
Dan Sarandon