Jason Smathers, an employee of America Online (AOL), misappropriated an AOL customer list with 92 million screen names. He sold the list for $28,000 to Sean Dunaway, who sold it to Braden Bournival. Bournival used it to send AOL customers more than 3 billion unsolicited, deceptive e-mail ads. AOL estimated its cost of processing the ads to be at least $300,000. Convicted of conspiring to relay deceptive e-mail in violation of federal law, Smathers was ordered to pay AOL restitution of $84,000 (treble the amount for which he had sold the AOL customer list). Smathers appealed, seeking to reduce the amount. He cited a judgment in a civil suit for a different offense against Bournival and others for which AOL had collected $95,000. Smathers also argued that his obligation should be reduced by restitution payments made by Dunaway. Which federal law did Smathers violate? Should the amount of his restitution be reduced? Explain. [United States v. Smathers, 879 F.3d 453 (2d. Cir. 2018)] (See Internet Law.)