Lots of readers here will fall into the "e-addict" category, I reckon. ;-)
Try the checklist from NS blog to see if you qualify:
1. Excessive use, often associated with a loss of sense of time or a neglect of basic drives
2. Withdrawal, including feelings of anger, tension, and/or depression when the computer is inaccessible
3. Tolerance, including the need for better computer equipment, more software, or more hours of use
4. Negative repercussions, including arguments, lying, poor achievement, social isolation, and fatigue
Now I'm sure at the extreme end there are a minority of individuals whose behavioural patterns are such that the diagnosis is useful and each of us knows that there are times when we too behave as if we were e-addicts and we need to get a grip. But I also suspect that the majority of folk will find the notion of e-addiction overblown and not relevant to them. And they're not wrong.
That said, it seems to me that this paper represents an interesting bit of cultural border skirmishing: an interesting collision between an opportunist attempt at a new diagnostic frame (doctors do like to medicalise things, don't they? Like all good "medical landgrabs", it gives them a sense of power and control) and the emerging social trend of the age (in which you - by dint of reading this - are probably participating).
But also by virtue of the nature of the landgrab (and the resistance you see for example in the NS blog comments), isn't it also a collision between a fearful and moralising view of human nature and a rather more optimistic or at least one? Two big views of human nature, head to head.
That said, maybe the doctor has a point worth making here: perhaps we should all get out a bit more - even into the sleet and the wild winds this Easter weekend... I'm off to see Chris and Cranach. Have fun everyone!