Re:Why Did the Justice System Target Aaron Swartz?
by brudgers on Monday January 28, 2013 @11:16AM
(#5129075)
"You can argue semantics about whether walking into an unlocked closest is "physical intrusion" or whether the "actual target" was JSTOR but that's all just a matter of characterization. The Feds are not "shades of gray" people--everything is like the show "24" to them. They will assume the worst."
To the extent I am arguing anything, it is against the convenience of casting events into the form of a morality play...or of a Fox Television apologetic for torture. Cartoon characterizations don't require much of us and simple causal chains don't require us to deal with messy realities.
They just make for easy journalism and lazy citizenship.
Of course it was the "signature" of Swartz's actions that raised the federal government's interest.
1) The "target" was MIT;
2) There was physical intrusion into MIT's network;
3) Millions of documents were downloaded;
4) Swartz previously did something similar to PACER.
You can argue about whether walking into an unlocked closest is "physical intrusion" or whether the "actual target" was JSTOR but that's all just a matter of characterization. The Feds are not "shades of gray" people--everything is like the show "24" to them. They will assume the worst.
I'd bet money that the "bullet points" similar to the above landed on someone's desk, and even though I think the prosecution definitely was overzealous, I'm not at all surprised at the way they reacted. I'm really shocked that anyone is surprised.