Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

documentcloud.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 324 posts

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#181

Post by jrockway »

asciilifeform wrote: post #99
jrockway wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have a lot of comments for someone who doesn't even have a TV Drama-level understanding of the criminal justice system. You know that even people accused of murder are often free during their trials, right?

A political prisoner is not usually granted bail. It isn't hard to see why. Murder is a genuine crime recognized by all nations. One accused of murder will find few people who are automatically sympathetic. On the other hand, the "crime" Mr. Swartz is accused of would be seen as an entirely moral act by a great many people around the world, myself included. It is quite possible that if he were to board a plane, he co…

The prosecutor would be quite foolish to grant bail.

This is what I'm saying. The prosecutor does not make bail decisions. That's a decision for a presumably-neutral judge.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#182

Post by jongraehl »

stephth wrote: post #162
mbreese wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't suing him... this is a criminal case: The criminal investigation and today’s indictment of Mr. Swartz has been directed by the United States Attorney’s Office

You're right, thanks. Replace suing by charging and strike make them a little richer and . The rest of the point still stands.

Victims don't charge.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#183

Post by bbatsell »

stephth wrote: post #162
mbreese wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't suing him... this is a criminal case: The criminal investigation and today’s indictment of Mr. Swartz has been directed by the United States Attorney’s Office

You're right, thanks. Replace suing by charging and strike make them a little richer and . The rest of the point still stands.

Swartz's organization seems to pretty clearly claim that both MIT and JSTOR asked the feds not to charge him. While JSTOR's statement doesn't actually say thatº, it certainly seems plausible to me since they very clearly say that they privately engaged and dealt with the matter with Swartz. You simply don't do that if you're pursuing criminal charges.

º I would probably be hesitant to say that publicly as well, considering the feds came down with a monster 35-year indictment against a juicy target. The "victim" announcing on Day 1 that they don't support the charges would not be accepted very charitably by federal prosecutors.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#184

Post by GHFigs »

stephth wrote: post #157
mbreese wrote: post #110

JSTOR's statement http://about.jstor.org/news-events/news/jstor-statement-misu... JSTOR Statement: Misuse Incident and Criminal Case The United States Department of Justice announced today the criminal indictment of an individual, Aaron Swartz, on charges related to computer fraud and abuse stemming from his misuse of the JSTOR database. We have been subpoenaed by the United States Attorney’s Office in this case and…

This sounds very hypocritical. If their "Mission and Work" is to support scholarly work and academic usage, and encourage usage of large sets of data, why are they suing Aaron's ass instead of working with him to further understand what were his needs that their system was lacking and how they could reduce that gap? Why else would Aaron hack their system if not for research? Sounds like instead of spending money in i…

Why did Aaron hack their system instead of working with them to further understand what were his needs that their system was lacking and how they could reduce that gap?

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#185

Post by yid »

kbutler wrote: post #172
yid wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't breaking and entering if someone repeatedly trespasses somewhere (say, banned from a store) even if they change their clothes to avoid detection. It might not be breaking & entering, but it's still trespassing, which is a crime.

> It might not be breaking & entering, but it's still trespassing, which is a crime. Jaywalking is murder! Well, it's still a crime...

I'm not sure what you're appealing to. Real-world analogies don't always transfer readily to digital law. Even in the words of the ageing CFAA, "exceeding authorization" to steal commercial information is most certainly a punishable crime. You don't have to pull out nmap and zero days to be convicted of hacking.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#186

Post by radu_floricica »

stephth wrote: post #162
mbreese wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't suing him... this is a criminal case: The criminal investigation and today’s indictment of Mr. Swartz has been directed by the United States Attorney’s Office

You're right, thanks. Replace suing by charging and strike make them a little richer and . The rest of the point still stands.

I don't think it's "them" at all. They sound as if they'd be happier if the incident was already closed, as they thought it was.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#187

Post by burgerbrain »

tptacek wrote: post #175
burgerbrain wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some of us, memory of how Mitnick was treated (or for a more modern example, Manning), still taints how we expect accused "hackers" to be treated by the criminal justice system. Physical detainment of someone accused of such crimes is hardly unheard of.

Mitnick's story is absolutely nothing like Aaron's. Mitnick was a fugitive after already having done prison time and had to be tracked down via cell phone triangulation.

Read my comment again, I'm not asserting anything more than a passing similarity.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#188

Post by tedunangst »

pyre wrote: post #176
SpikeGronim wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but legally speaking unauthorized access is a crime regardless of how easy it was to gain access.

This was struck down by the courts by the way. Why? If unauthorized access is a federal offense, and unauthorized access can be determined by (e.g.) a EULA, then it basically allows a business to dictate criminal law. For example: 1. This would allow all of those 'You agree that you are not a law enforcement official' B.S. 'terms of use' on warez servers to actually have teeth. 2. "If you are a {black,hispanic,gay,et…

That's because those restrictions are illegal themselves. "Don't download the whole database" is not an illegal restriction.

Re: Aaronsw indicted for hacking MIT network to download millions of JSTOR docs

#189

Post by jancona »

fleitz wrote: post #165
mbreese wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no operative security barriers in place I don't know... Even if my front door was open, you still aren't allowed to enter my house without my permission.

A stranger would probably be allowed to enter the property unless you had posted No Trespassing signs. They'd be required to leave upon request but I'm not sure that simply entering your house via an open door would constitute a crime or tort. An open door could likely be construed as implied consent.

Do you have any basis for claiming that "an open door could likely be construed as implied consent"?

I would not advise that you try that in many parts of the US. You'll be risking getting shot, and the homeowner would not have committed a crime.

Post reply on HN