"Stolen" credit card numbers, "stolen" bank account information, "stolen" browser histories, "stolen" copyrighted files. Swartz wasn't charged with criminal copyright violation.

"Copied" credit card numbers, etc... (FTFY)

Fraudulently charging a card is prohibited and addressed in other laws. Copying isn't injury on its own.

Copyright infringement is already illegal without the CFAA.

So there's no need for it.

Non sequitur.

To clarify, by your own assertion, the CFAA isn't necessary to address specific claims of damage (you have suggested copyright). Removing it would place the justification of damage (for example, copyright) back at the center of the debate, where I think it should be.