Anything which wins damages under a civil action could also (at federal discretion) be charged criminally: the CFAA elements which allow civil recovery (section (g)) are a proper subset of those that allow criminal prosecution.
As the EFF amicus brief notes: "…although this is a civil dispute, the CFAA is also a criminal statute, and permitting Craigslist's computer hacking claims to go forward would also mean creating criminal liability."
Craigslist's specific allegations againt 3Taps would seem to qualify the responsible parties for imprisonment up to 5 years, on a first offense, by CFAA (c)(2)(B), if a prosecutor felt like making an example of them.
I'm not sure I know how to respond to this, because it doesn't make sense to me.
I don't think what 3taps did under any interpretation of the facts should be considered criminal.
Having said that:
If something's criminal, it's criminal whether or not a private entity sues you for it! Craigslist suing 3taps no more enables the DOJ than would Craigslist simply writing an angry blog post alleging the same facts.
It's not the Craigslist allegation that makes something criminal; it's the Craigslist interpretation, if accepted by the court.
Have you read the linked brief? That's its concern. It's clear and written by experts who agree with your opinion, as expressed here, that nothing 3Taps did should be considered criminal.
However, if that's your opinion, your defense of the use of the CFAA, upthread, is odd. CFAA (g) is clear: the elements allowing civil damages/relief are a strict subset of those that impose criminal liability. You'll only get damages/relief if you've proven that something that's criminally-prosecutable under the CFAA has taken place.
Of course, the standards-of-proof are lower in a civil case, and it remains unlikely most civil judgements would change a federal prosecutor's priorities. But your casual assurance upthread that CFAA civil actions and CFAA criminal prosecutions are "worlds apart" was misleading.
As the EFF amicus brief notes: "…although this is a civil dispute, the CFAA is also a criminal statute, and permitting Craigslist's computer hacking claims to go forward would also mean creating criminal liability."
Craigslist's specific allegations againt 3Taps would seem to qualify the responsible parties for imprisonment up to 5 years, on a first offense, by CFAA (c)(2)(B), if a prosecutor felt like making an example of them.