Message boards :
Politics :
DEAD. Murder? usa internet LAW REFORM REQUIRED!
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 11 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
This directly affects and sets a precedent for ALL INTERNET USERS in the USA: I for one am getting sick of being called a criminal. He is the one who commited suicide by HIS OWN choice. If there is any justice in the world his parents will sue the pants off his prosecutor and ruin her life to maybe suicide, And maybe get a few million cash to boot. Will that make you feel any better? He was an activist rebel who got caught doing something stupid that should have been punished. Not like the prosicutor wanted, But he decided he wanted the cowards way out. Now hes being elevated to a Geek internet martyr. He should have gone to court and seen what would have happend. Thats why we have juries over here. And appeals courts. You have problems with Americas justice system,Fine. Just stop saying Americans are criminals. I doubt youd like a thread saying Brits are criminals over something stupid your leagal systems does. [/quote] Old James |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
I for one am getting sick of being called a criminal. Clearly, you are not reading the posts in full. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20291 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
This directly affects and sets a precedent for ALL INTERNET USERS in the USA: If you have an internet connection or use one or you are in any way associated with such, then apparently, according to the RIAA, MPIAA, and "Hollywood", and Ortiz's office, you most certainly will be criminal punishable by over 50 years in an American jail. Note that your predecessor Swartz exhausted all his money defending himself. So... What should be the punishment for opening an unlocked closet and exceeding your permitted internet download limit? Only in America, supposedly the land of the free? Disgusted! Martin Essential disclaimer: All just my own personal views as always. See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
This directly affects and sets a precedent for ALL INTERNET USERS in the USA: Note that your predecessor Swartz exhausted all his money defending himself. Where were all his activist internet buddys? Why did they not lavish him with cash to fight off the capitalist pigs? How many pounds did you send him? Seeing you are so outraged. As to your links. They have a right to the profits off of the copyrights. Lets say you are a movie producer and youve just spent 10 million quid on a movie you hope to recoup your investment by showing in theaters and then on DVD. But some jerkwad puts a copy on the internet and 100 million people download it. So your saying its ok? [/quote] Old James |
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
I for one am getting sick of being called a criminal. Well then please enlighten me. [/quote] Old James |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
I for one am getting sick of being called a criminal. I think he is making an over the top comment that it is not possible to stay within the TOS. Of course that is false, one can stay within the TOS. You simply have to realize that IP has rights and respect that. Some people do not and can't believe that all others don't think as they do. Perhaps they have a collectivist mind set and believe everything belongs to everyone. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
I for one am getting sick of being called a criminal. I'm not sure who you are referring to with "he" and "they". If, perhaps, you are suggesting, that I am in complete agreement with Martin, I haven't said that. I've just been reading. I think that post and this post make just 2 posts by me in this thread. All I said is this: James seemed to be saying that his interpretation of Martin's comment "all US citizens could be called criminals" is that he thinks/thought Martin is saying we're all responsible for Aaron's death. Martin did not appear to be any such thing at all. Instead, more along the lines of your opening to your post: Martin was saying all US citizens with an internet connection run the risk of doing something considered illegal and that, if caught, Martin believes that the punishment does not fit the crime. (Actually, Martin seems to have made two possible points: is it a crime at all vs. it's a crime, but does the punishment fit? Which do you stand by, Martin?) |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
... You've said that repeatedly. Which makes me wonder if you've missed the point. here are some questions you should be asking: Why is downloading research papers and bigger crime that rape or murder? What does that tell you about the value of things verses people in society? Is a society that values things with a monetary value more than people, a healthy and benevolent society? Is society something we have to benefit just an elite few, or should everyone benefit? If society is there just to benefit an elite few, how do we decide who those people should be? What are we rewarding? Reality Internet Personality |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
I suppose we should really look at the Grand Jury indictment http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/09/swartzsuperseding.pdf and not rely on sensationalist media reports. A less sensational analysis is here: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ III. Conclusion As to the sentence: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/ Why are you hearing that Swartz faced 35 or 50 years if it was not true? First, government press releases like to trumpet the maximum theoretical numbers. Authors of the press releases will just count up the crimes and the add up the theoretical maximum punishments while largely or completely ignoring the reality of the likely much lower sentence. The practice is generally justified by its possible general deterrent value: perhaps word of the high punishment faced in theory will get to others who might commit the crime and will scare them away. And unfortunately, uninformed reporters who are new to the crime beat sometimes pick up that number and report it as truth. A lot of people repeat it, as they figure it must be right if it was in the news. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
... It isn't, but saying it is sells papers. See my previous post which I was composing as you sent yours. |
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
I suppose we should really look at the Grand Jury indictment http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/09/swartzsuperseding.pdf and not rely on sensationalist media reports. Thanks for that link Gary. Very good reading. Swartz was not some misguided young man swayed by altruistic goals. He was a thief who knew what he was doing was downright wrong. He continually used various ruses to hide his tracks while stealing documents. For over 3 months yet. If he had such issues with Jstor he could have used other means to make his point. Stealing documents with the point of placing them on a file sharing system is going to far. So sorry Martin, Swartz was no poor internet geek who just made a little mistake. He was a thief by any definition. And why does internet law in the US need to be changed. So spoiled rotten kids can rip music and movies to share with no recomp to the people who spent money to make them. Seems the law we have is working as it was intended. Is it perfect? No but what law is? [/quote] Old James |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20291 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
A good summary is given in this media report: Has Aaron Swartz's death made him an internet 'martyr'? Aaron Swartz was many things - a brilliant young technologist, an entrepreneur, and an advocate for internet freedom. But according to the United States government, he was also a criminal. After downloading millions of academic papers from the online service JSTOR, Swartz was prosecuted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and faced up to 35 years in prison. He denied the charges of computer fraud against him and his trial was set to begin this month. Tragically, Swartz committed suicide in January. The case against Swartz and his ensuing death have brought new scrutiny to the US's anti-hacking law, which critics say is too vague and unnecessarily harsh. ... To my personal view and opinion: A simple analogy is that of the federal prosecutors demanding the death penalty for the sake of 'stealing' an apple laying on the ground in an orchard. Just? Judge for yourselves. By the same rules, by merely reading this post, you are already guilty under such a vague and wide description of criminality. Only in the USA? Only on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
To my personal view and opinion: A simple analogy is that of the federal prosecutors demanding the death penalty for the sake of 'stealing' an apple laying on the ground in an orchard. Just? A much fairer description by people who understand the US system ... http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/ So, realistically, Swartz was facing ... 0-6 months in jail if he pled guilty. And you think zero to 6 months is the death penalty? Speaks volumes about you. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20291 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
To my personal view and opinion: A simple analogy is that of the federal prosecutors demanding the death penalty for the sake of 'stealing' an apple laying on the ground in an orchard. Just? So you are happy to brand yourself "criminal" and forever gain a "criminal record" for the sake of something so trivial? You still ignore the ridiculous threats available and levied of 50+ years in jail for something so trivial. Also, all without a trial you are happy to be at the 'mercy' of, and victim to, the arbitrary whims of a prosecutor? Surely only in the USA... Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
You still ignore the ridiculous threats available and levied of 50+ years in jail for something so trivial. Anyone who lives in the USA knows a case of the vapors when they see it, unfortunately writers from other countries who are ordered to write about the US criminal justice system aren't aware of the vapors and in their haste to sell advertising, their real purpose - it isn't writing straight news - they intentionally over sensationalize. That you somehow think this fiction is fact ... <edit>as to trivial, that is for a jury to decide and in this case they won't get that chance. But I detect that you don't think any crime happened. As all reasonable people do think a crime was committed, how does your mind function? You need to read the links posted. They are fair and deep. They are reality. I know you won't like it, you want the fiction of the sensationalism to be the truth. |
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
Martin did you read the grand jury indictment? Now matter how anyone feels about jstor. Stealing those papers was against the law. And he did steal them. by circumventing the safegauards jstor had put in place. He didnt do it just once he did it repeatedly and used various names and personnas to get them for over two months. Why do you think no crime was committed? And seeing as he took the moral cowards way out, We will never know what a jury would have arrived at. [/quote] Old James |
skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 9541 Credit: 50,759,529 RAC: 60 |
Martin did you read the grand jury indictment? Now matter how anyone feels about jstor. Stealing those papers was against the law. And he did steal them. by circumventing the safegauards jstor had put in place. He didnt do it just once he did it repeatedly and used various names and personnas to get them for over two months. Because the majority of the people that wrote what he "stole" thought their material should be open for all to read. It is the institution that has a problem with the legality of it all In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope |
James Sotherden Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 10436 Credit: 110,373,059 RAC: 54 |
Martin did you read the grand jury indictment? Now matter how anyone feels about jstor. Stealing those papers was against the law. And he did steal them. by circumventing the safegauards jstor had put in place. He didnt do it just once he did it repeatedly and used various names and personnas to get them for over two months. And who is the institution? If the majority of people who wrote the papers said they should be availabel why not self publish them? Make them available on the internet? Mabey because said institutions maight own them? [/quote] Old James |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19063 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
Martin did you read the grand jury indictment? Now matter how anyone feels about jstor. Stealing those papers was against the law. And he did steal them. by circumventing the safegauards jstor had put in place. He didnt do it just once he did it repeatedly and used various names and personnas to get them for over two months. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSTOR |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSTOR Inquiries have been made about the possibility of making JSTOR open access. According to Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig, JSTOR had been asked "how much would it cost to make this available to the whole world, how much would we need to pay you? The answer was $250 million". [31] So Schwartz was out to steal $250,000,000.00 from Jstor, and the journal publishers by downloading and publishing all their content for free. And Martin is saying that 0 to 6 months is like a death penalty for the theft of $250,000,000.00. At least that is how it comes across. I would say six months is a lot of forgiveness, just consider Kenneth Lay or Bernie Madoff. The journals, not Jstor owns the content. The authors signed the copyright over to the journal. Jstor has to negotiate the usage and the payment for the content with the journal and might even be on the hook for the misuse of that content by their customers or by not securing it from misuse. You may think the journal adds nothing of value to the paper. So get rid of them. Everyone can just upload papers to their blog. Heck, just hit post to thread here at Seti ... How about this analogy. You are a research library so you charge your patrons a small flat fee because you have to buy every book and journal on your shelf. A person impersonates your patron and eventually checks out every book on your shelf and makes a copy. Then he opens up a library across the street using the copies and gives access for free. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.