6 ms·

Why do they call it a prank? My impression is what was nothing of the sort.

watty 14y ago
Because it's a ridiculously sensational article. > ...Swartz and arguing that his college prank aimed at “liberating” a collection of academic articles with little commercial value was a serious crime.
cardamomo 14y ago
Alternatively, to avoid labeling the JSTOR downloads as a hack, which has different connotations for Harpers' readers and the public in general as it does here.
- Peaker 14y ago
  It definitely wasn't a "hack", though I wouldn't call it a prank either.
  - nealabq 14y ago
    Call it a peaceful, selfless and courageous act of civil disobedience.
BenoitEssiambre 14y ago
It's true that it didn't have the same intent as a prank. However, purely in terms of his actions, I can easily imagine students doing much more intrusive and ToS breaking things than Aaron did on an university network to execute a prank. Downloading from a network in a manner that violates the network's ToS would make for a particularly tame prank.
DanBC 14y ago
No-one got hurt. No damage was done. If I have to chose between "prank" or "federal crime" I'm going with prank. 'Pranks' have a history in political activism - see La Barbe or Pussy Riot or others.
- raldi 14y ago
  > No-one got hurt. No damage was done. If a burglar is sneaking out of a house with a sack of stolen goods, and the police catch him and return everything to the owner, you'd still consider that a crime, right? If so, then you agree that situations where nobody is hurt and no permanent damage done can still be crimes.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    No.
  - NickNameNick 14y ago
    If a user gets caught leaving a library with photocopies of public, published documents, would you consider that a crime too?
    - raldi 14y ago
      No, but I don't see how that's relevant to my point.. which was merely that it's possible for a person to commit a crime without harming anyone or doing damage.
      - ucee054 14y ago
        Were you making that point in the abstract, or were you, I don't know, in a thread of comments on an article about Aaron Swartz?
        GHFigs 14y ago
        He was responding to a comment making the argument that something cannot be a crime if no damage is done and no one is hurt. He even quoted the as much of the comment he was replying to. Please, please, please, pay attention to context before accusing someone of ignoring context. It makes it very difficult for people to have nuanced debates about complex events if nobody is allowed to isolate a part of the problem independent of others.

watty 14y ago

Because it's a ridiculously sensational article. > ...Swartz and arguing that his college prank aimed at “liberating” a collection of academic articles with little commercial value was a serious crime.

cardamomo 14y ago

Alternatively, to avoid labeling the JSTOR downloads as a hack, which has different connotations for Harpers' readers and the public in general as it does here.

Peaker 14y ago
It definitely wasn't a "hack", though I wouldn't call it a prank either.
- nealabq 14y ago
  Call it a peaceful, selfless and courageous act of civil disobedience.

BenoitEssiambre 14y ago

It's true that it didn't have the same intent as a prank. However, purely in terms of his actions, I can easily imagine students doing much more intrusive and ToS breaking things than Aaron did on an university network to execute a prank. Downloading from a network in a manner that violates the network's ToS would make for a particularly tame prank.

DanBC 14y ago

No-one got hurt. No damage was done. If I have to chose between "prank" or "federal crime" I'm going with prank. 'Pranks' have a history in political activism - see La Barbe or Pussy Riot or others.

raldi 14y ago
> No-one got hurt. No damage was done. If a burglar is sneaking out of a house with a sack of stolen goods, and the police catch him and return everything to the owner, you'd still consider that a crime, right? If so, then you agree that situations where nobody is hurt and no permanent damage done can still be crimes.
- DanBC 14y ago
  No.
- NickNameNick 14y ago
  If a user gets caught leaving a library with photocopies of public, published documents, would you consider that a crime too?
  - raldi 14y ago
    No, but I don't see how that's relevant to my point.. which was merely that it's possible for a person to commit a crime without harming anyone or doing damage.
    - ucee054 14y ago
      Were you making that point in the abstract, or were you, I don't know, in a thread of comments on an article about Aaron Swartz?
      - GHFigs 14y ago
        He was responding to a comment making the argument that something cannot be a crime if no damage is done and no one is hurt. He even quoted the as much of the comment he was replying to. Please, please, please, pay attention to context before accusing someone of ignoring context. It makes it very difficult for people to have nuanced debates about complex events if nobody is allowed to isolate a part of the problem independent of others.