Reddit Insider Charged With MIT Document Theft

[Earnest Cavalli]

Reddit Insider Charged With MIT Document Theft

24-year-old internet activist Aaron Swartz has been indicted on charges that he stole over four million documents from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Swartz is best known as one of the early heads of Reddit -- six months after Reddit was founded, it merged with Swartz's startup Infogami [https://plus.google.com/113164038788726940319/posts/9NUWmu2c9pq] -- as well as the former executive director of online activism troupe Demand Progress.

According to US Attorney Carmen Ortiz however, Swartz is also responsible for the theft of millions of documents from the MIT network. In a press release, Ortiz alleges that Swartz broke into an MIT wiring closet and used his technical know-how to swipe over four millions documents from JSTOR, a non-profit online service that collects scholarly works [http://about.jstor.org/].

"Stealing is stealing whether you use a computer command or a crowbar, and whether you take documents, data or dollars," Ortiz stated.

Current Demand Progress Executive Director David Segal however, sees things differently.

"This makes no sense. It's like trying to put someone in jail for allegedly checking too many books out of the library," Segal states on the group's site [http://blog.demandprogress.org/2011/07/federal-government-indicts-former-demand-progress-executive-director-for-downloading-too-many-journal-articles/].

Continuing, Segal claims that Swartz has the support of JSTOR. "It's even more strange because JSTOR has settled any claims against Aaron, explained they've suffered no loss or damage, and asked the government not to prosecute."

"Aaron's career has focused on serving the public interest by promoting ethics, open government, and democratic politics. We hope to soon see him cleared of these bizarre charges," he concludes.

If Swartz is found guilty of these charges, he could face up to 35 years in prison and as much $1 million in fines.

Source: New York Times [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/reddit-co-founder-charged-with-data-theft/]
(Image [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aaron_Swartz_profile.jpg])

Permalink

 

[mad825]

The charges filed against Mr. Swartz include wire fraud, computer fraud, obtaining information from a protected computer and criminal forfeiture.

and

This makes no sense. It's like trying to put someone in jail for allegedly checking too many books out of the library,

uh huh Segal, and punching someone randomly in the street is just a welcome jester?

 

[JakobBloch]

It seems odd for the law to go after a person when the aggrieved party doesn't seem to wanted charges to be brought. The JSTOR page does not specify that they support either side but only that they are cooperating with a subpoena, but it does seem to me that after reclaiming their documents and getting a guarantee that there are no additional copies, they see the case as closed. It seems a bit like the lawyers are going after the hacktivists and they are going in hard.

That being said, it also seems odd for an activist to target an initiative like JSTOR. The idea seems perfectly altruistic and while you have to pay for some documents I wager that is to cover the cost of storage and bandwidth. I can't really see the motivation for stealing these documents.

 

[Dalek Caan]

Is it me or does he look really smug in this picture? If that is him of course.

 

[Earnest Cavalli]

Is it me or does he look really smug in this picture? If that is him of course.

He does, and it is.

Bizarrely, this was the only non-copyrighted image of the guy on the 'net.

 

[Low Key]

Swartz could possibly get 35 years when the organization he allegedly committed a crime against doesn't want to press charges. This makes no sense.

The possibility of being charged by the state instead of whomever was the victim typically only happens when the perpetrator could be deemed a danger to society...you know, like beating someone so bad they are scared of retaliation if they press charges.

They can't even say this was stealing since I'd assume everything Swartz "stole" appears to be free to the public. Just because he had access to the hardware instead of just getting online doesn't change that.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

It seems odd for the law to go after a person when the aggrieved party doesn't seem to wanted charges to be brought. The JSTOR page does not specify that they support either side but only that they are cooperating with a subpoena, but it does seem to me that after reclaiming their documents and getting a guarantee that there are no additional copies, they see the case as closed. It seems a bit like the lawyers are going after the hacktivists and they are going in hard.

That being said, it also seems odd for an activist to target an initiative like JSTOR. The idea seems perfectly altruistic and while you have to pay for some documents I wager that is to cover the cost of storage and bandwidth. I can't really see the motivation for stealing these documents.

It could be that Swartz uncovered something shady going on. Non-profits that work with the government are known for graft.

 

[Cousin_IT]

I would think that a librarian would be inclined to ask Swartz what he was up to if he checked out the entire library at once

 

[Xannieros]

I received an email about this. Put bold the important parts.

As best as we can tell, he is being charged with allegedly downloading too many journal articles from the Web. The government contends that downloading so many journal articles constitutes felony computer hacking and should be punished with time in prison.

The charges are made all the more senseless by the fact that the alleged victim has settled any claims against Aaron, explained they've suffered no loss or damage, and asked the government not to prosecute.

James Jacobs, the Government Documents Librarian at Stanford University -- where Aaron did undergraduate work -- denounced the arrest: "Aaron's prosecution undermines academic inquiry and democratic principles," Jacobs said. "It's incredible that the government would try to lock someone up for allegedly looking up articles at a library."

They shouldn't have anything against him if this is the case. Like he said, its like someone taking too many books from the library. But not physical ones.

I think they just want to get at him.
Politics. Dirty business.

 

[Starke]

It seems odd for the law to go after a person when the aggrieved party doesn't seem to wanted charges to be brought.

Most of the time (in The States), with charges like theft, the decision to prosecute isn't made by the victim. But, you're right, the entire situation is fucking bizarre.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Information theft is kind of an interesting concept, it's (as far as I know) the only kind of theft where the victim doesn't lose what was 'stolen'.

EDIT: unless the perpetrator deletes/destroys the original information/storage of said information.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Dear Lord, that is one smug face he has.

OT: Yeah, I have no real opinion on this. As one of the posters said, they might not want charges pressed because they've got something shady going on. So there is that.