8 ms·

Did Prosecutors Go Too Far In Swartz Case?

58 points by codegeek 14y ago

jordanb 14y ago
Horrible article. Most of it seems to be written from the view point of that random unrelated lawyer they decided to interview, Jeff Ifrah who's connection is that he "has been following the case."
- MartinCron 14y ago
  NPR News is very aware of the persistent bias allegations and often works hard to "balance" the presentation, sometimes to the point of creating an unreasonable false equivalency between points of view. I didn't see any glaring factual inaccuracies, nor was it sensationalized. It seems to be a good intro to the case for a non-technical audience.
  - throwaway675810 14y ago
    Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig, a friend of Swartz, told NPR that making a big federal case over the computer hack was out of hand. So you believe that is an accurate portrayal of what Lawrence Lessig "said" to NPR when he "told" them direct quotes from his blog post? Joke.
    - MartinCron 14y ago
      I don't see any reason not to believe it. Lawrence Lessig is often interviewed by NPR, and I wouldn't be surprised if he used exact same language as his blog posts. Legal people like precision in language. I guess I don't get your joke.
  - jordanb 14y ago
    "No glaring factual inaccuracies" is a high standard indeed. :) I think NPR erred when they repeatedly quoted a man who has about as much connection to the case as you or I do. I also think they erred in repeatedly describing what Swartz did as "hacking." They even dropped the obligatory "alleged" after the first mention. Someone reading this article would come away thinking that Swartz "hacked into" the MIT network and "stole" millions of documents. That he was prosecuted for this crime, and that his "friends" feel that the punishment was too harsh.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
- hldropout 14y ago
  Here's a better analysis, which concludes that the charges were legally appropriate: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ It will be followed by another article that will examine the tactfulness of the prosecution.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
michaelfeathers 14y ago
"Should it be a crime? That's an issue for Congress. But Congress decided to make it a crime, and prosecutors have an obligation to enforce those crimes." They certainly did enforce a crime.
mmanfrin 14y ago
"I'm really not sure that anyone in this country would disagree that computer hacking is a problem," says Washington defense lawyer Jeff Ifrah, who has been following the case. "Should it be a crime? That's an issue for Congress. But Congress decided to make it a crime, and prosecutors have an obligation to enforce those crimes." This is so absurdly pointless and dumb -- in the context of this case, he's talking about how law is binary.
redthrowaway 14y ago
This is an incredibly poor article. It shows little understanding of the facts of the case, and is simply a collection of quotes from other people. I'd have thought NPR would have better quality control than this.

58 points by codegeek 14y ago

Horrible article. Most of it seems to be written from the view point of that random unrelated lawyer they decided to interview, Jeff Ifrah who's connection is that he "has been following the case."

MartinCron 14y ago
NPR News is very aware of the persistent bias allegations and often works hard to "balance" the presentation, sometimes to the point of creating an unreasonable false equivalency between points of view. I didn't see any glaring factual inaccuracies, nor was it sensationalized. It seems to be a good intro to the case for a non-technical audience.
- throwaway675810 14y ago
  Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig, a friend of Swartz, told NPR that making a big federal case over the computer hack was out of hand. So you believe that is an accurate portrayal of what Lawrence Lessig "said" to NPR when he "told" them direct quotes from his blog post? Joke.
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    I don't see any reason not to believe it. Lawrence Lessig is often interviewed by NPR, and I wouldn't be surprised if he used exact same language as his blog posts. Legal people like precision in language. I guess I don't get your joke.
- jordanb 14y ago
  "No glaring factual inaccuracies" is a high standard indeed. :) I think NPR erred when they repeatedly quoted a man who has about as much connection to the case as you or I do. I also think they erred in repeatedly describing what Swartz did as "hacking." They even dropped the obligatory "alleged" after the first mention. Someone reading this article would come away thinking that Swartz "hacked into" the MIT network and "stole" millions of documents. That he was prosecuted for this crime, and that his "friends" feel that the punishment was too harsh.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
hldropout 14y ago
Here's a better analysis, which concludes that the charges were legally appropriate: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ It will be followed by another article that will examine the tactfulness of the prosecution.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

michaelfeathers 14y ago

"Should it be a crime? That's an issue for Congress. But Congress decided to make it a crime, and prosecutors have an obligation to enforce those crimes." They certainly did enforce a crime.

mmanfrin 14y ago

"I'm really not sure that anyone in this country would disagree that computer hacking is a problem," says Washington defense lawyer Jeff Ifrah, who has been following the case. "Should it be a crime? That's an issue for Congress. But Congress decided to make it a crime, and prosecutors have an obligation to enforce those crimes." This is so absurdly pointless and dumb -- in the context of this case, he's talking about how law is binary.

redthrowaway 14y ago

This is an incredibly poor article. It shows little understanding of the facts of the case, and is simply a collection of quotes from other people. I'd have thought NPR would have better quality control than this.