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

Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

lofgren.house.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 174 posts

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#71

Post by marshray »

dsl wrote: post #68
marshray wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: his actions in evading filtering and shutoffs on MIT's networks Have you seen any halfway credible summary on what he did? I'll probably read the formal indictment eventually, but I'm not expecting a real balanced presentation. To be clear: just asking if anyone has a good hyperlink. For example, I'd like to know what did he do on the Wifi other than change his MAC address? It's said he "broke into" the wiring cl…

Burglary (entry for the purposes of committing an offense) is broken down into three sub-categories: forcible entry, unlawful entry where no force is used, and attempted forcible entry. It doesn't matter if you use a tank or a paperclip, or even if you're successful. You're not the first person to think up the "but it wasn't locked (very well)!" defense. :)

Of course, but then we ought to apply reasonable standards of trespass before we can talk of federal-level "breaking and entering". He was present as a guest on MIT campus and the trespassing charges had even been dropped.

Show me a university campus where the students don't poke around in unlocked basements and closets and I'll show you a worthless university.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#72

Post by jmvoodoo »

jacquesm wrote: post #40
tptacek wrote: post #7

Would Aaron's Law have helped Aaron? Both Orin Kerr and Jennifer Granick have said that his actions in evading filtering and shutoffs on MIT's networks would have created a plausible argument for the prosecution that he had been evading specific code-based authorization mechanisms and would have known his access was unauthorized. If you read Reason, you're immediately suspicious of laws with people's names on them; t…

I read the Granick piece. One thing that strikes me as completely absurd is that the plea deal is for a substantially lower sentence and that if the plea deal is rejected the prosecution will go for a much higher punishment, sometimes as much as 10 times as much as offered in the deal. It would seem to me that if you offer a guilty plea that is 10% of what you intend to seek that if such an offer is on the record tha…

This. The law should be rewritten to prohibit prosecutors from entering into plea deals of less than X% of the maximum sentence they are prosecuting someone for, with the exception of plea/immunity deals that include providing incriminating evidence in another case or against another person. Not sure what X% should really be, but it should be sufficiently high as to prevent prosecutors from using the large delta between plea and conviction sentences as leverage. My initial thought would be 50%.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#73

Post by mindslight »

jacquesm wrote: post #40
tptacek wrote: post #7

Would Aaron's Law have helped Aaron? Both Orin Kerr and Jennifer Granick have said that his actions in evading filtering and shutoffs on MIT's networks would have created a plausible argument for the prosecution that he had been evading specific code-based authorization mechanisms and would have known his access was unauthorized. If you read Reason, you're immediately suspicious of laws with people's names on them; t…

I read the Granick piece. One thing that strikes me as completely absurd is that the plea deal is for a substantially lower sentence and that if the plea deal is rejected the prosecution will go for a much higher punishment, sometimes as much as 10 times as much as offered in the deal. It would seem to me that if you offer a guilty plea that is 10% of what you intend to seek that if such an offer is on the record tha…

Biter. ;)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5064673

Mainly linking because I took two other stabs at ways to address the prosecutorial issues here.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#74

Post by dsl »

lwat wrote: post #45
rprasad wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting rid of plea bargaining doesn't make the problem better; it makes it worse by removing any compromise between walking away and the maximum sentence. From my own experience: in mental committment proceedings, there is no halfway point between letting the defendant stay free and committing them to a mental hospital. Consequently, the prosecutor's office simply never negotiates; they take every case to trial.

Here's the thing: Getting rid of pea bargaining will mean every case must go to court. Since the courts are unable to deal with that many cases the prosecutors will be MUCH more selective when deciding which cases to take on. Fewer people will get charged and fewer people will go to jail.

You go to jail once you're charged, not when you are convicted. My hometown is currently running into budgetary problems and has scaled back the court system to funnel more funds to the jail housing everyone awaiting trial.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#75

Post by marshray »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #64
jforman wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This meets your "halfway credible" standard, although I can't vouch for its ultimate accuracy: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ This blog describes a scenario in which JSTOR blocked Aaron's IP, then MIT blocked his MAC address, then JSTOR blocked an MIT IP range after he kept circumventing their attempts to cut him off. Ultimately, "Swartz broke into a closet in the basement of a building at MIT…

It's worth noting that Prof. Kerr stated that he used the indictment as a significant source of the facts in his legal analysis. I would be inclined to trust it a lot less as an account of what actually happened than for the analysis of what the law says given the facts he describes.

"Hiding his computer under a box so no one would see it."

That's always the part on TV where the defense objects to the prosecution drawing inferences or something like that.

Even if we saw him on authentic video placing a box over a computer, it's still something very different to say it was so no one else would see it.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#76

Post by mindslight »

Bud wrote: post #27

Zoe Lofgren is my Congresswoman. Her office is across the street from where I live. I think I'll visit her office tomorrow to thank her for this; it makes me proud.

Before you do, make sure you spend some time reading the analysis here and on reddit, and come to a solid conclusion whether this proposed change actually would have helped Aaron, or whether it's a feel good attempt to use his name for political gain.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#77

Post by jlgreco »

marshray wrote: post #75
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that Prof. Kerr stated that he used the indictment as a significant source of the facts in his legal analysis. I would be inclined to trust it a lot less as an account of what actually happened than for the analysis of what the law says given the facts he describes.

"Hiding his computer under a box so no one would see it." That's always the part on TV where the defense objects to the prosecution drawing inferences or something like that. Even if we saw him on authentic video placing a box over a computer, it's still something very different to say it was so no one else would see it .

Exactly. Even if it was "so no one else would see it", for all we know that "someone else" to Aaron was the homeless person that kept his stuff in that closet.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#78

Post by gojomo »

Bud wrote: post #32
tptacek wrote: post #7

Would Aaron's Law have helped Aaron? Both Orin Kerr and Jennifer Granick have said that his actions in evading filtering and shutoffs on MIT's networks would have created a plausible argument for the prosecution that he had been evading specific code-based authorization mechanisms and would have known his access was unauthorized. If you read Reason, you're immediately suspicious of laws with people's names on them; t…

The validity of this bill, of course, has nothing whatever to do with its name. That's self-evident. So we should evaluate it on its merits, even if there may be a demonstrable tendency in the past for bills with sensationalistic names to lack substance.

Ignore ad nominum arguments, you say?

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#79

Post by mpyne »

gyardley wrote: post #50
anigbrowl wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it's a problem with sentencing in general. If you have $2m and I steal $1m from your safe, it's judged a much worse crime than if you have $200 and I steal all of it, even though the outcome for you is a lot worse in the second case. Ideally the imposition would be quantified in terms of the marginal cost to the injured party, but then there's another economic theory that says we have to multiply that by the pr…

Sure, the legislation won't go anywhere if you go out of your way to make it seem like a one-party issue. Some of us have been reaching out to our GOP representatives, especially those who've expressed prior concerns about prosecutorial abuse of power. I see Darrell Issa - on the Oversight Committee, and hardly a liberal - has already agreed to look into the appropriateness of Aaron's prosecutors' behavior. It's real…

> Sure, the legislation won't go anywhere if you go out of your way to make it seem like a one-party issue.

And to pile on, it's hardly only GOP members who believe in "personal responsibility". But that doesn't let overzealous prosecutors off the hook anyways.

Re: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduces Aaron's Law [pdf]

#80

Post by tedunangst »

mindslight wrote: post #70
alxndr wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked quickly at the reddit comment thread that someone else linked to, and it appears that Lawrence Lessig has responded to a related question: "would your proposed 'Aaron's law' prevent the situation by which Aaron was refused a plea deal that did not include jail time?" --alexwilhelm "If "Aaron's Law" had been law, Aaron would not have been charged with a felony, and so there would not have been jail time to re…

This response lowered my opinion of Lessig. Does he honestly believe this? In addition to the TOS, there were technical restrictions that Aaron evaded as well.

My Lessig is not always technically correct moment came while reading the future of ideas. He compares radio spectrum to an Ethernet hub, everybody plugs in and it just works. Problem is, there's a reason everybody moved from using hubs to switches, which are a lot more like centrally controlled cell towers. Its not a bad thing, but he is not a bits and bytes person.
Post reply on HN