Another person who thought information should be free ...
Army Private Admits Giving Military Files to WikiLeaks

FORT MEADE, Md. — Pfc. Bradley Manning on Thursday confessed in open court to providing vast archives of military and diplomatic files to the antisecrecy group WikiLeaks, saying that he wanted the information to become public “to make the world a better place.”

Why isn't Swartz around? Because he wasn't held in a cell under a 24/7 suicide watch?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/01/1166253/-The-Torture-Techniques-Used-on-Bradley-Manning

---

Aaron Swartz's Girlfriend Explains 'Why Aaron Died'
At the time of his death, Swartz was facing a potential conviction of 35 years and up to $1 million in fines for allegedly...

Claptrap, BS and lies designed to sell advertising ...

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.

Calm truth.

Seems Martin is living in an altered state of reality.

That Swartz was is a given, it is obvious he thought he could do any crime and not be caught and punished. When reality arrived his guilt overcame and he took the cowards way out.

if he had initially accepted the plea bargain and plead guilty to something that he believed wasn't a crime yes he could have taken that one time offer

since he didn't take it when it was on the table the DA removed it

Source for claiming the TWO different offers were removed from the table? Also note that it was not a DA prosecuting him, but an AUSA. (If a crime beat writer doesn't know the difference he is automatically untrustworthy.)

and as such he was looking at 35 to 60 years if found guilty in court

That is utter BS and had been refuted before.
From Volokh

To calculate how much time Swartz might have faced if he went to trial and was convicted, we need to consider the relevant provision of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Section 2B1.1. ... Swartz’s lawyers thought that Swartz might get just probation

Where are these claptrap BS numbers coming from?

Volokh is quoting the US Sentencing guidelines! Maybe you should read them!

---

Aaron Swartz's Girlfriend Explains 'Why Aaron Died'
At the time of his death, Swartz was facing a potential conviction of 35 years and up to $1 million in fines for allegedly...

Claptrap, BS and lies designed to sell advertising ...

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.

Calm truth.

Seems Martin is living in an altered state of reality.

That Swartz was is a given, it is obvious he thought he could do any crime and not be caught and punished. When reality arrived his guilt overcame and he took the cowards way out.

if he had initially accepted the plea bargain and plead guilty to something that he believed wasn't a crime yes he could have taken that one time offer

since he didn't take it when it was on the table the DA removed it and as such he was looking at 35 to 60 years if found guilty in court

---

Aaron Swartz's Girlfriend Explains 'Why Aaron Died'
At the time of his death, Swartz was facing a potential conviction of 35 years and up to $1 million in fines for allegedly...

Claptrap, BS and lies designed to sell advertising ...

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.

Calm truth.

Seems Martin is living in an altered state of reality.

That Swartz was is a given, it is obvious he thought he could do any crime and not be caught and punished. When reality arrived his guilt overcame and he took the cowards way out.

---

Martin, the idea for the prosecution is big wins, the more they get the better their career path becomes.

That is the prosecution, same for drugs, tax fraud or terrorism. The people want a quick plea so taxpayer dollars are saved not wasted on trying the guilty. Nothing wrong with that.

There's everything wrong with that if you include the scope for coercion and "legal abuse"...

That leads me to one of three conclusions:
He is deliberately trolling,
He is a fool,
He must be living in an altered state of reality.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall,...?


Meanwhile, recently in the real world of the USA:

Aaron Swartz's Girlfriend Explains 'Why Aaron Died'

... she is the person Swartz spent the most time with in the last 20 months of his life — living together, commuting together and working together. And for her, that person she spent so much time with was not showing symptoms of depression, according to an emotional blog post on Tumblr.

At the time of his death, Swartz was facing a potential conviction of 35 years and up to $1 million in fines for allegedly...

... "I don’t know exactly why Aaron killed himself. I don’t know exactly what was going through his mind. If I had known those things on January 11, if I had even known the right questions to ask, maybe I could have stopped him. Since January 11, I think about it every hour of every day. . .

I believe Aaron’s death was caused by exhaustion, by fear, and by uncertainty. I believe that Aaron’s death was caused by a persecution and a prosecution that had already wound on for 2 years (what happened to our right to a speedy trial?) and had already drained all of his financial resources.

I believe that Aaron’s death was caused by a criminal justice system that prioritizes power over mercy, vengeance over justice; a system that punishes innocent people for trying to prove their innocence instead of accepting plea deals that mark them as criminals in perpetuity; a system where incentives and power structures align for prosecutors to destroy the life of an innovator like Aaron in the pursuit of their own ambitions."

... or even for that matter that they were ready to offer a reasonable plea deal that wouldn’t have marked Aaron as a felon for the rest of his life — would Aaron have killed himself on January 11? The answer is unquestionably no." ...


U.S. attorney: Criticism of Aaron Swartz prosecution is 'unfair'

... Ortiz, 57, said in a radio interview that a wave of criticism -- which includes a congressional investigation, a court Web site hack, and a petition demanding her removal from office -- is off-base and uninformed. ...

... WBUR and Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly published a joint report into Ortiz's tenure that found "other prosecutions that parallel the Swartz case" that may "raise similar concerns about her hands-off leadership style, overzealousness, judgment and use of discretion at the grand jury and trial levels." ...


JSTOR Statement

... We have had inquiries about JSTOR’s view of this sad event given the charges against Aaron and the trial scheduled for April. The case is one that we ourselves had regretted being drawn into from the outset, since JSTOR’s mission is to foster widespread access to the world’s body of scholarly knowledge. At the same time, as one of the largest archives of scholarly literature in the world, we must be careful stewards of the information entrusted to us by the owners and creators of that content. To that end, Aaron returned the data he had in his possession and JSTOR settled any civil claims we might have had against him in June 2011. ...


Lawmakers Demand Answers About Aaron Swartz Case

... "Many questions have been raised about the appropriate level of punishment sought by prosecutors for Mr. Swartz's alleged offenses, and how the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, cited in 11 of 13 counts against Mr. Swartz, should apply under similar circumstances,"...


Congresswoman Posts Revamped 'Aaron's Law' on Reddit

... "Thank you, Reddit and everyone else who provided feedback to the original rough draft bill to reform the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and the wire fraud statute — the laws the government used to unfairly prosecute Aaron Swartz,"...


Still a great shame Aaron had to die for the sake of someone else's career elevation. All very unnecessary.

So... Are you happy to forfeit say, 2 years of your life and all your fiduciaries, for the sake of tripping up over one of your ridiculous laws that is then randomly and arbitrarily laid against you?


Only in the USA...
So much for freedom?
Martin

So lets say you wrote a book. And the publisher thinks it is a best seller. They are printing it up for release but then some hacker who thinks copyrights are stupid gets into the publishers computer and steals your book and puts it on the internet so everyone can read for free. The publisher ask for the advance they gave you beacuse your book is not selling. After the hacker is caught he gives the publisher back the thumb drive he downloaded your book to.
So that makes everything all right?

You keep harping on when ever we use the internet we are breaking the lwas. Well prove it. Give us some examples. Why if we use google are we going to prison? And I say to you the UK must have some stupid laws to. Why look at the poor travelers in your own country. Dont squatters have rights also?

---

[/quote]

Old James

Martin, the idea for the prosecution is big wins, the more they get the better their career path becomes.

That is the prosecution, same for drugs, tax fraud or terrorism. The people want a quick plea so taxpayer dollars are saved not wasted on trying the guilty. Nothing wrong with that.

There's everything wrong with that if you include the scope for coercion and "legal abuse"...

That leads me to one of three conclusions:
He is deliberately trolling,
He is a fool,
He must be living in an altered state of reality.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall,...?


Meanwhile, recently in the real world of the USA:

Aaron Swartz's Girlfriend Explains 'Why Aaron Died'

... she is the person Swartz spent the most time with in the last 20 months of his life — living together, commuting together and working together. And for her, that person she spent so much time with was not showing symptoms of depression, according to an emotional blog post on Tumblr.

At the time of his death, Swartz was facing a potential conviction of 35 years and up to $1 million in fines for allegedly...

... "I don’t know exactly why Aaron killed himself. I don’t know exactly what was going through his mind. If I had known those things on January 11, if I had even known the right questions to ask, maybe I could have stopped him. Since January 11, I think about it every hour of every day. . .

I believe Aaron’s death was caused by exhaustion, by fear, and by uncertainty. I believe that Aaron’s death was caused by a persecution and a prosecution that had already wound on for 2 years (what happened to our right to a speedy trial?) and had already drained all of his financial resources.

I believe that Aaron’s death was caused by a criminal justice system that prioritizes power over mercy, vengeance over justice; a system that punishes innocent people for trying to prove their innocence instead of accepting plea deals that mark them as criminals in perpetuity; a system where incentives and power structures align for prosecutors to destroy the life of an innovator like Aaron in the pursuit of their own ambitions."

... or even for that matter that they were ready to offer a reasonable plea deal that wouldn’t have marked Aaron as a felon for the rest of his life — would Aaron have killed himself on January 11? The answer is unquestionably no." ...


U.S. attorney: Criticism of Aaron Swartz prosecution is 'unfair'

... Ortiz, 57, said in a radio interview that a wave of criticism -- which includes a congressional investigation, a court Web site hack, and a petition demanding her removal from office -- is off-base and uninformed. ...

... WBUR and Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly published a joint report into Ortiz's tenure that found "other prosecutions that parallel the Swartz case" that may "raise similar concerns about her hands-off leadership style, overzealousness, judgment and use of discretion at the grand jury and trial levels." ...


JSTOR Statement

... We have had inquiries about JSTOR’s view of this sad event given the charges against Aaron and the trial scheduled for April. The case is one that we ourselves had regretted being drawn into from the outset, since JSTOR’s mission is to foster widespread access to the world’s body of scholarly knowledge. At the same time, as one of the largest archives of scholarly literature in the world, we must be careful stewards of the information entrusted to us by the owners and creators of that content. To that end, Aaron returned the data he had in his possession and JSTOR settled any civil claims we might have had against him in June 2011. ...


Lawmakers Demand Answers About Aaron Swartz Case

... "Many questions have been raised about the appropriate level of punishment sought by prosecutors for Mr. Swartz's alleged offenses, and how the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, cited in 11 of 13 counts against Mr. Swartz, should apply under similar circumstances,"...


Congresswoman Posts Revamped 'Aaron's Law' on Reddit

... "Thank you, Reddit and everyone else who provided feedback to the original rough draft bill to reform the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and the wire fraud statute — the laws the government used to unfairly prosecute Aaron Swartz,"...


Still a great shame Aaron had to die for the sake of someone else's career elevation. All very unnecessary.

So... Are you happy to forfeit say, 2 years of your life and all your fiduciaries, for the sake of tripping up over one of your ridiculous laws that is then randomly and arbitrarily laid against you?


Only in the USA...
So much for freedom?
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Martin, the idea for the prosecution is big wins, the more they get the better their career path becomes.

That is the prosecution, same for drugs, tax fraud or terrorism. The people want a quick plea so taxpayer dollars are saved not wasted on trying the guilty. Nothing wrong with that.

Martin thinks a copyright is theft from the people, his issue is with the Congress, and the Constitution that make copyrights enforceable. He simply can't admit the multiple felonies over an extended period of time as he refuses to believe that copyright can exist, or so it seems.

I suppose it might be the first time Martin has ever looked at a law. If so he has no idea that it is impossible to walk to the market, buy a few things, and walk back without breaking some law. There are tens of thousands of ridiculous laws on the books. People don't go to jail for them. Prosecutors would be fired for charging people with flatulence in the US, but in Malawi it is a capital crime. A US jury would laugh at that. The judge would rant and rave at the prosecutor for wasting his time. I simply can't believe that it is Martin's first time looking at a law.

That leads me to one of three conclusions:
He is deliberately trolling,
He is a fool,
He must be living in an altered state of reality.

---

Martin, the idea for the prosecution is big wins, the more they get the better their career path becomes.

---

Your bank gives online access. So when a script kiddie empties your account you shouldn't be upset, because your bank gave him access, after all he used a valid user id and password to log on. This is your logic Martin.

Sorry, you're just spouting random drivel. That is no analogy to the Aaron persecution to death.

Just the usual random trolling from you we see...


In the Aaron case, the prosecutors had enough legal vagueness to do exactly as they please at their whim with him. Which is what they appeared to do... Unto persecuted death.

No everyday private individual has the funds against the financial might of their department.


So... Just roll over and admit that you are guilty for whatever is randomly claimed? Such appears to be the USA justice system.

All just 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)

Your bank gives online access. So when a script kiddie empties your account you shouldn't be upset, because your bank gave him access, after all he used a valid user id and password to log on. This is your logic Martin.

---

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.

Phew!

So, by the same logic, by how much is Google monetarily (fiduciaryly) valued at?

How many years under the USA system should you be forfeit for having the audacity to use Google provided output?


Under the laws used, you are perpetrating a crime.

And yes, the USA laws are that vague.


It's the law is it?

You are criminal.

Regards,
Martin


All just my opinion after all...

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

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.

---

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.

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

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?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSTOR

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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.

---

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...

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)

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.

---

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)