Wrongful prosecution is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to prove.

Because it was overturned on appeal and the determination was not on the merits (ie. what he did isn't actually illegal) but instead on procedural grounds he loses a bunch of options for remedy.

Isn't there something in the CFAA about having to allege causing damage, measurable in financial terms?

Maybe they did not use that provision?

Surely there must be logical reasons I am overlooking, but I find it peculiar that today technology companies can so easily get federal authorities to bring proceedings on their behalf.

Whether it's the DMCA or the CFAA, these "violations" seem like civil matters to me.

Do they harm the public, or do they just (potentially) harm a business?

I thought this opinion was very clearly written and although it only addresses venue, it does have some precedential value for the future of "CFAA law".

For one, if you plan to rely on improper venue as a defense, stay away from the Second Circuit!

This is the most heartbreaking part of the case.

But compensation? Come on. He would still be convicted of some of the computer hacking charges in other states.

Didn't his co-accused plead guilty to those charges? What happens to him?

Not because the state would be dissuaded from pushing edge-cases but because we, the people, have robbed someone of part of their life. We should make it right.

Most states offer compensation packages to those wrongly incarcerated. Its usually a percentage of your expected income if you hadn't been put in jail

"An error regarding venue exhibits many of the characteristics of structural error. If the District Court had found venue lacking upon Auernheimer’s motion to dismiss, there would have been no trial in New Jersey at all"

That's hardly a sure bet. The prosecutors would have to convince a completely different jury that a crime had been committed, and that different group of jurors could be far more skeptical.