Agreed; I want to keep the focus on JSTOR's behavior, not the legislation, but: (The No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act (1997) was introduced by Bob Goodlatte (R-

Agreed; I want to keep the focus on JSTOR's behavior, not the legislation, but: (The No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act (1997) was introduced by Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), whose big donors include media rights holders and law firms and their PACs [0]. And that legislation was brought specifically to "remedy" the inability to criminally prosecute non-commercial infringements in the 1994 LaMacchia case [1][2], although that was about a warez bulletin-board of commercial software, not published academic papers. The NET Act amended the definition of "commercial advantage or private financial gain" to include the "receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works" (still not seeing any of that applied to Swartz, but they would have cheerfully bankrupted him fighting it, and destroyed his life if they'd won an adverse ruling). But now, back to JSTOR's behavior and reputation. [0]: Bob Goodlatte Representative (R-VA) | Donor Summary https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/bob-goodlatte/summary?cid=N00009154 https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/bob-goodlatt... [1]: "United States v. LaMacchia" (1994) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._LaMacchia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._LaMacchia [2]: "Before there was Aaron Swartz, there was David LaMacchia" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5143897 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5143897