5 ms·

I've argued till I've become blue in the face about this and I guess I'm a glutton for punishment so I'll ask it again: exactly where in the facts do you think

by MWil 13y ago

I've argued till I've become blue in the face about this and I guess I'm a glutton for punishment so I'll ask it again: exactly where in the facts do you think authorization was missing? MIT allows a level of access on it's networks that people not on MIT have trouble understanding, it's not what you or I (assuming you're not from MIT) would think of on other campuses and certainly not in the private sector Second, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't have an unusually open access system in place, one that allows any and all visitors to come on with any email they wish, but then think that blocking an IP means you can call it a day, authorization over. That makes no sense. If he uses a new address, he gets authorization again. If he gets a new MAC address he gets authorization again. Sadly, I think for MIT to remove authorization they would have to be less open, they would have to actually change policies for signing up to campus networks. And don't get me started on the unlocked, well grafitti'd closet...

tptacek 13y ago
http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/
- Flenser 13y ago
  I think this puts it more succinctly: http://www.volokh.com/2013/02/18/no-aaron-swartz-was-not-charged-with-violating-jstors-terms-of-service/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/02/18/no-aaron-swartz-was-not-cha...
rayiner 13y ago
> Second, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't have an unusually open access system in place, one that allows any and all visitors to come on with any email they wish, but then think that blocking an IP means you can call it a day, authorization over. When it's their private property, they can have their cake and eat it too. I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. The only consideration is notice. Does blocking a MAC address reasonably signal to the user that their consent was revoked, either objectively or in actual fact? I think you'd have a hard time arguing that Aaron, being very technically savvy, didn't realize that MIT was trying to kick him off its network.
- wisty 13y ago
  > When it's their private property, they can have their cake and eat it too. I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. And if I come back wearing prosthetic ears, is that a felony?
  - raldi 13y ago
    It is if you then sneak into his closet and start tampering with the wiring.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    It's a misdemeanor just like a CFAA violation by itself.
- rhizome 13y ago
  I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. No, it isn't, and it isn't how property law works, either. Free and equal access to private property has been bandied about for decades, and leans away from your interpretation.
  - foobarbazqux 13y ago
    What do you mean? As far as I am aware, you only need to ask somebody to leave your property, and if they don't leave then the police will come and take them away for you.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    > Free and equal access to private property has been bandied about for decades There is no such thing unless the property is something like a restaurant or hotel and you discriminate based on a protected characteristic (race, mostly).
    - rhizome 13y ago
sigzero 13y ago
You are just being obtuse. There is no level of authorization that would allow him to go into a network closet (regardless of easy access) and setup his laptop to do what he did. Apparenly you are in the minority. When his IP and/or MAC was blocked it was because of un-authorized usage of the network. When he actively circumvented that, it was an illegal act. I would also argue that Aaron KNEW he was not authorized to do what he did the moment he stepped into that network closet.

by MWil 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/

Flenser 13y ago
I think this puts it more succinctly: http://www.volokh.com/2013/02/18/no-aaron-swartz-was-not-charged-with-violating-jstors-terms-of-service/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/02/18/no-aaron-swartz-was-not-cha...

rayiner 13y ago

> Second, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't have an unusually open access system in place, one that allows any and all visitors to come on with any email they wish, but then think that blocking an IP means you can call it a day, authorization over. When it's their private property, they can have their cake and eat it too. I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. The only consideration is notice. Does blocking a MAC address reasonably signal to the user that their consent was revoked, either objectively or in actual fact? I think you'd have a hard time arguing that Aaron, being very technically savvy, didn't realize that MIT was trying to kick him off its network.

wisty 13y ago
> When it's their private property, they can have their cake and eat it too. I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. And if I come back wearing prosthetic ears, is that a felony?
- raldi 13y ago
  It is if you then sneak into his closet and start tampering with the wiring.
- rayiner 13y ago
  It's a misdemeanor just like a CFAA violation by itself.
rhizome 13y ago
I can let everyone in town into my living room but capriciously disallow you one day because I realize you have attached earlobes. That's just how license works. No, it isn't, and it isn't how property law works, either. Free and equal access to private property has been bandied about for decades, and leans away from your interpretation.
- foobarbazqux 13y ago
  What do you mean? As far as I am aware, you only need to ask somebody to leave your property, and if they don't leave then the police will come and take them away for you.
- rayiner 13y ago
  > Free and equal access to private property has been bandied about for decades There is no such thing unless the property is something like a restaurant or hotel and you discriminate based on a protected characteristic (race, mostly).
  - rhizome 13y ago

sigzero 13y ago

You are just being obtuse. There is no level of authorization that would allow him to go into a network closet (regardless of easy access) and setup his laptop to do what he did. Apparenly you are in the minority. When his IP and/or MAC was blocked it was because of un-authorized usage of the network. When he actively circumvented that, it was an illegal act. I would also argue that Aaron KNEW he was not authorized to do what he did the moment he stepped into that network closet.