"The truth of the matter is that people who happen to have brown or black skin should be more sympathetic than white Americans to the kind shit that led to Swartz's death."

That is a complicated thought. To think that this thought comes across by the mere use of the word "black" is what the commenter was referring to.

Shorthand words that mean one thing to you do not mean the same thing to vast majority of your audience.

Say what you want to say. Build your argument. And maybe you did in your original article. But you already lost your audience by then.

Charles,
Swartz's death was a tragedy. His life was short and unfortunate. I believe Pres. Obama let alone his racial heritage had nothing to do with it.

Yesterday it was reported that a Nepalese fan of the Brazillian soccer team committed suicide because Brazil lost to Germany. But Brazil, its President (Dina Rousseff), Team Brazil and its coach are no more responsible for that death than Obama is for Swartz's.

It's just bloody sad.

@3: Those are entirely separate. One is a case of a president elected on promises of change who failed to use the majorities he had to push through meaningful change on a large number of issues, the other is a sports team losing.

Seriously, as Supreme Leader, why doesn't Obama use his absolute, unchecked power to fix this country's ailments?

His death was a tragedy, but he also did access computers that were not his, to acquire information he had no right to. That is and should be a crime.

@8: Wrong. He used his own laptop. He connected it to JSTOR via the Internet via MIT's computer network. MIT's network is open to campus guests and visitors. JSTOR provided open access to journals on their system to (people using) machines on MIT's network.

If anything, he was guilty of 1) entering an unlocked wiring closet at MIT, and 2) downloading JSTOR articles at a rate faster than they expected people to do so.

@8 JSTOR dropped their case.

Charles, what exactly would you have liked to see the President do, given the constraints placed on him regarding direct involvement in Justice Department investigations and prosecutions?

I'm sure you realize the problems we've had in the past when a sitting president directly interferes with such an investigation, so are you looking for some kind of preemptive pardon?

I get that the President broadly sets the DOJ agenda/priorities, but once a case is going that's left to prosecutorial discretion.

This doesn't nullify your greater point mind you, but I'm curious as to what you would have done in his place.

@10 Just because a room is unlocked, doesn't mean you can go in and do whatever you want.

@12: Indeed, it does not. As I wrote @10, he may have been guilty of trespass by entering that unlocked room.

Regardless, that is not contrary to my assertion that your assertion @8 (that Swartz "did access computers that were not his, to acquire information he had no right to") is incorrect. Everything I've read indicates that he used computers that were his or that he was authorized to use, and that he acquired information that he was authorized to acquire.

Swartz was guilty of breaking the law as a form of protest without being prepared to deal with the fallout.

@13 He was not affiliated with MIT, and even if he had been, he utilized JSTOR in a manner expressly prohibited by the terms of service.

Take a look at the indictment. He most certainly did not have a right to access the information, especially not in the manner he did, and took numerous affirmative steps to avoid detection and subvert efforts to stop him from his theft.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2…

@15 He was offered a plea deal and declined
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/01/…

@13: His lack of affiliation is not relevant. MIT's guest network is open to all visitors.

@17 No it's not. There are rules in place and registration required. Which he repeatedly ignored and subverted over the couple month period in which he was regularly breaking into MIT.

Allowing limited guest access is not the same as granting someone license to break in, hook up multiple laptops, engage in rather sophisticated efforts to avoid restrictions and hid your identity, and download an entire database.

Might as well say that because Costco gives out free sample, I can sneak in after dark and give away all their food to the homeless.

@14 the dude was prepared to take on a fallout but wasn't prepared for the Armageddon of YOU WILL BE BEHIND BARS FOR LIFE FOREVER AND YOU WILL NEVER TOUCH A KEYBOARD AGAIN THE CAGE WILL BE WHERE YOU DIE. The school didn't even want to press charges and the prosecutor here went bat shit crazy on him to make an example of him. His blood is on their hands and I'm sure they sleep just fine at night, they don't care, never have and never will, I don't expect them to care because of an internet blog post.

So, "people who happen to have brown or black skin should be..." "should know...", etc.

Gotcha.

It's a shame that he killed himself, but I do believe he was guilty. I think journals should be free, but that doesn't make downloading the database for distribution less of a crime.

The silver lining for me is that all MIT alumni have been provided access to JSTOR. Losing access to all the journals and databases after graduation is a bit of a bummer.

@21: What gives you the idea that his intent was distribution? I've read lots about this. I haven't seen that.

I agree with the first commenter which Muede cited in this post. I don't see what President Obama's race has to do with what happened to Swartz. I assume Swartz was going to get a fair trial had he survived, right? If you break the law (even the unfair ones), there are consequences. Perhaps we should be pushing our Congress to change the laws that Swartz broke so that no one else has to be tried for breaking them.

Wow. What a bunch of misinformed twits.

1. On one hand. Muede has a point about Obama. Although this whole episode showed that at least at the top of the food chain minorities can act as cruelly and self interested as any white people. Carmen Ortiz, the Federal Prosecutor for the Boston area is both a minority and one of Eric Holder's best friends. She was planning a run for the Massachusetts Governor's office. Swartz was not her only get tough on crime ploys. She is also embroiled in another case where she went after a young man for simply translating Al Queda posts on-line. It has never been proved that he did anything else. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarek_Mehan…

2. Aaron Swartz KNEW he was breaking the rules at MIT. That's just obvious. You don't hide a computer, hide your face, circumvent several attempts to stop your activities if you think you're doing something that was okay. Please.

3. The government didn't kill Aaron. He did. He had problems that he didn't deal with and his enabling friends and family refused to push him to get that help. He also should have taken the plea deal.

4. Having said that. What the hell was going on with Lawrence Lessig? Dude has some pull at the WH. Why didn't he go to Obama and have the POTUS lean on Holder to get his best friend, Oritz, to call off the dogs. If Lessig thought the government was killing his boy why didn't he do something. Answer. He only claimed that nonsense that after Swartz killed himself. Cause it lets enablers like Lessig off the hook. And now on toip of it, Lessig's been raising money off Swartz's name. What a creep.

5. The whole episode is sad but the fact is Swartz was a coddled brat who had everything handed to him at a young age and still f-ed up. His Dad was a terrible parent who didn't know how to parent. Ortiz and Holder are creeps. Obama probably never even knew who Swartz was and probably didn't care if he did. And lots of people are now raising money and moving their careers along thanks to Aaron's death. If anyone had really cared about Aaron he might still be alive but seemingly the only one in Aaron's life who saw through his BS was his former business partner Alexis Ohanian, who Swartz f-ed over after making a lot of money. He actually called the cops after Swartz posted a suicide note and was quoted later as saying he knew that Swartz was truly depressed and suicidal.