Mr. Byrne's article starts with and promotes as true the prosecutor's claim that Mr. Swartz is a thief who "stole" a database, despite the fact that Mr. Swartz,

Mr. Byrne's article starts with and promotes as true the prosecutor's claim that Mr. Swartz is a thief who "stole" a database, despite the fact that Mr. Swartz, both as a Harvard fellow, as a visiting family member of an MIT employee, and as a random member of the public visiting the MIT campus, had the legal right to access the JSTOR archive, and MIT was paying JSTOR hefty licensing fees for this access. The only stealing going on was JSTOR stealing the access that MIT legally paid for. It is infuriating that Mr. Byrne makes his argument based on questionable claims, but even more so that his blog has no comments permitted or contact info rather than to contact any of four sets of high paid lawyers that represent him.