Thats a different claim. Spammer is authorized to send packets. You can't charge them with a real theft. "Theft of service" is a term used by anti-spammers, not a legal statement of a criminal activity. In this case, you don't have any bonafide abuse of your property rights. So you can't claim the abuse clause.

Spammer is _NOT_ authorized to send SPAM packets through my network. Spammer has no way to get to my network other than through networks which have signed an AUP/TOS which specifically precludes them from sending SPAM packets through my network for SPAMMER. As such, spammers SPAM packets are theft of service, and I have the property rights to block them. Owen