* Computer Fraud (7 counts, for each time he 'deceived' JSTOR) "the defendent, knowingly and with intent to defraud, accessed a protected computer -- namely, a computer on MIT's network and a computer on JSTOR's network -- without authorization and in excess of authorized access"
* Unlawfully Obtaining Information from a Protected Computer (12 counts??? These weren't even protected computers!)
* Recklessly Damaging a Protected Computer (because he downloading the files fast enough to impact other users)
* Wire Fraud (because he was logged in as a guest on MIT's network and downloading JSTOR articles)
They throw in details like him using a mailinator email as if it's illegal to do that. It's ridiculous. You're ridiculous for trying to justify it.
And yes, all of these charges are basically 'hacking' charges. He was not charged with copyright infringement or anything of that nature.
Forget the last article, read this one instead: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/. Now read the ridiculous comments throughout this post that I've been arguing against.
Again, it doesn't matter if it's extremely easy to run someone over with a car or whether it's easy for a computer programmer to bypass download limits and sneak a laptop into a closet at MIT with a spoofed MAC. Simplicity has nothing to do with it.