I suspect that the definition of "maliciously interfere" is the tricky part to define. In this case, the convention center was effectively DOS-ing its visitors/customers to vendor-lock internet access, which is as clean a case that a court could receive.
AFAIK (and IANAL) in the USA (IANAL in other countries either :)), some areas even criminalize the act of intentionally joining an open wifi, so I imagine a court could be extremely broad in its definition of "interfere" -- in our technophobic atmosphere, I wouldn't be shocked if this extended to scanning for SSIDs outside of the context of the OS.
aircrack-ng itself doesn't send anything, so it wouldn't be affected by this. Its sister tool aireplay-ng however can be used for exactly this kind of attack, and that is illegal.
Nothing has changed though, those laws have been in place since soon after the invention of radio.