(shrug)
The law is not a static thing. Language is elastic, and language means different things to different people--generally for reasons of self-interest.
So the DoJ pursues one line of argument; a defendant will pursue another and in the end the court will attempt to give some clarity.
You may consider this to be "going off the deep end," and that point of view is certainly a valid one. But for my part, I am more interested in what is motivating this interpretation from the DoJ. The DoJ doesn't actually care if you lie about your weight on match.com. But they do care, it would seem, about violations of Terms of Service. Now, it seems to me a key issue of interest to them is the use of the internet for money laundering, and there are many means by which, for example, multiple user accounts can be used to facilitate that practice.
Now, that's not to say that the ends justify the means--the DoJ has to be able to stand up in court, argue its interpretations and defend is investigative practices, to be sure. But I don't dismiss this as silly quite yet.
_________________
--James