2 ms·
What "everybody doesn't contest" is different from the 13 felony charges, including wire fraud (!), the government indicted him on. For instance, the trespassi
by politician 14y ago
What "everybody doesn't contest" is different from the 13 felony charges, including wire fraud (!), the government indicted him on.
For instance, the trespassing charges, supported by the surveillance video of him opening an unlocked closet used by the homeless to store their personal effects, were dropped. [1]
[1] http://boingboing.net/2013/01/13/expert-witness-describes-aaron.html http://boingboing.net/2013/01/13/expert-witness-describes-aa...
- anigbrowl 14y agoThat article strikes me as absurdly biased. To take just one example, the argument is made that Swartz did nothing to cover his tracks, but if this is the case why buy a new laptop for this purpose instead of using his everyday one? What is so wrong about the comparison between spoofing one's MAC address and changing the VIN on a car, when the purpose of both is to identify a specific piece of hardware? Why cover one's face with a cycling helmet if one does not care about being identified? Why place one's computer in a wiring closet if one could have just downloaded freely from anywhere on campus? Look, I don't want to bash the poor guy for his idea that such material should be free. But plugging into other peoples' networks without permission and so on are criminal offences, and Swartz was educated enough to know this. If you look through the indictment (http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/09/swartzsuperseding.pdf http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/09/swartz...) it's very clear about which statutes were being broken. Boingboing is presenting it as if Swartz was some wide-eyed ingenue that didn't realize that anyone would consider his downloading a problem.