5 ms·

Kerr's writeup also relies on "pre-crime", heaping punishment on Aaron for something he might do (release the documents publicly), but, crucially, never did. I

by wes-exp 14y ago

Kerr's writeup also relies on "pre-crime", heaping punishment on Aaron for something he might do (release the documents publicly), but, crucially, never did. I do think it's a strong possibility that Aaron intended to do so, but I also have my doubts. There was another instance where Aaron obtained documents en masse but did not "liberate" them: from Westlaw; he contributed to a statistical study on them. The results were published in the Stanford Law Review. I cringe at the thought of Aaron's life being ruined over guesses about his future behavior.

sociotech 14y ago
"Crime" often relies on "pre-crime." The legal definition of "burglary" is breaking into a building with an intent to steal or commit another serious crime. Prosecutors have to decide whether they think they can prove "burglary" or can only prove "trespass." The jury decides whether the prosecutor has done so beyond a reasonable doubt. Aaron never published anything in the Stanford Law Review. The student article in the Stanford Law Review that seems to form the basis of your claim doesn't even credit Aaron.
- wes-exp 14y ago
  "While at Stanford, Swartz had worked with a law student to download all the law review articles in the Westlaw database, to map funders of research with research conclusions. The result of that research was published in the Stanford Law Review, and showed a troubling connection between funders and their conclusions. At the time of Aaron's alleged "crime," he was a fellow at my Center at Harvard. The work of the Center? Studying the corruption of academic research (among other institutions) caused by money." http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/a-law-for-aaron-swartz-20130117 http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/a-law-for-aaro...
  - sociotech 14y ago
    I saw that too and read the Standard Law Review article. He is not credited it in. He may have helped a law student write a Python script, which she then used. The article does mention that a Python script was used to collect some data.

by wes-exp 14y ago

sociotech 14y ago

"Crime" often relies on "pre-crime." The legal definition of "burglary" is breaking into a building with an intent to steal or commit another serious crime. Prosecutors have to decide whether they think they can prove "burglary" or can only prove "trespass." The jury decides whether the prosecutor has done so beyond a reasonable doubt. Aaron never published anything in the Stanford Law Review. The student article in the Stanford Law Review that seems to form the basis of your claim doesn't even credit Aaron.

wes-exp 14y ago
"While at Stanford, Swartz had worked with a law student to download all the law review articles in the Westlaw database, to map funders of research with research conclusions. The result of that research was published in the Stanford Law Review, and showed a troubling connection between funders and their conclusions. At the time of Aaron's alleged "crime," he was a fellow at my Center at Harvard. The work of the Center? Studying the corruption of academic research (among other institutions) caused by money." http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/a-law-for-aaron-swartz-20130117 http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/a-law-for-aaro...
- sociotech 14y ago
  I saw that too and read the Standard Law Review article. He is not credited it in. He may have helped a law student write a Python script, which she then used. The article does mention that a Python script was used to collect some data.