Why is that trespassing? There's no sign that says I can't go behind the counter? In fact, in many cases you can go behind the counter, just you aren't expected to jump on their computer. The problem isn't that I'm behind the counter. The problem is that I'm using a computer I'm not authorized to use -- it's just whoever set up the computer didn't set up an authorization gateway.
But really access to the computer really isn't fraud. It's what you do once your at the computer that matters much more. Its authorization for the action that matter, not access authorization.
There’s actually an argument to be had around how illegal this should be.
Let’s take computers out of the picture again. Suppose I know that an organization O throws out folders with sensitive data D into the trash can in their publicly-accessible lobby every Friday at 3 pm. People that want to know D pay me to come there at 2:55, root through the can and write down the pieces that they need.
Should what I am doing be illegal? Whatever your answer, is it in any way different from walking around that same lobby sniffing O’s open Wi-Fi network except for “computers were involved”?
So how is this any different than my front door if I don't lock it. Can you just walk around in my house if the door is unlocked. Trespassing doesn't depend on doors being locked or not. The act of trespassing (and most crimes) doesn't depend on the victim setting up a suitable defense before what you've done is a crime. Even things like sex require some sort of consent (implied or otherwise) or it's a crime.
Can I walk into a bank and take all the money from the vault if they leave it open? But yet somehow with a computer that isn't yours you seem to be stating that if you don't properly protect it then access to it by anyone who happens upon it is completely legal.
> Why is that trespassing? There's no sign that says I can't go behind the counter?
You wrote it as if it's somewhere you're not authorized to be, e.g. an Employee's Only section which would tend to be trespass. If you are authorized to be there and they leave records out that they shouldn't, I think that failure is on them and they need to improve security.
If someone leaves a database of everyone's personal details on an open webserver, that doesn't become hacking or computer fraud if someone visits the site. I mean, I don't think it should be true that I could say "you, specifically, aren't authorized to read this post" and have that morph into a federal felony.
In my view, there has to be at least some kind of notice that someone is crossing a criminal boundary. I think lying makes a decent, if imperfect, boundary. It's possible that someone can think of something better, too.
That's either a true threat, or assault and battery. It only becomes computer fraud if you fraudulently use my credentials to access the computer.
> Another example is what if I just walk around the counter while you're not there. There is no one around to deceive.
That's trespass, not computer fraud.
There's more than one crime on the books. Saying that something isn't computer fraud isn't claiming that all those things should be legal.
Like in this case, I think it should be bribery more than computer fraud.