Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down
Author Topic: Aaron Swartz sucide  (Read 5052 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
0
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 4
Posts: 310
Posts: 40382
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Honour to bold Robin Hood,
Sleeping in the underwood!
Honour to maid Marian,
And to all the Sherwood-clan!
Though their days have hurried by
Let us two a burden try.
- John Keats
Logged

Global Moderator
UK
Offline Offline
Brattain Member
*****
Karma: 299
Posts: 26186
I don't think you connected the grounds, Dave.
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
If the nature of the product is that it is infinitely copy-able surely there is nothing artificial in increasing supply through that process.
Cattle are also infinitely copy-able, aren't they?
The scale and energy input are different, but it's actually a pretty good analogy, IMO.
Logged

"Pete, it's a fool looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart." Ulysses Everett McGill.
Do not send technical questions via personal messaging - they will be ignored.

Yorkshire England
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 2
Posts: 267
Arduino good init
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
If the nature of the product is that it is infinitely copy-able surely there is nothing artificial in increasing supply through that process.
Cattle are also infinitely copy-able, aren't they?
The scale and energy input are different, but it's actually a pretty good analogy, IMO.

mm yeah. They are not instantly copy-able though that isn't one of the property's of a cow. If it was it would be a normal part of farming and the economic model around farms would be different.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 11:13:27 am by EVP » Logged

Maine
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 14
Posts: 417
Caution: Explosives in use.
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

The bigger problem is that he seemed to think that it was his right (or obligation) to free other peoples ideas. It is what is known as theft if I choose to free your cattle or sheep or other property. If you come up with an idea should I have the right to publish it and benefit from it without your permission? He, like the Occupy Wall Street folk seemed to think that because he wants it a certain way, then all others should submit to his "superior" ideas.

My personal thought is that this is the end result of a spoiled life that was not taught right from wrong, or respect for others. He broke the law, stole other peoples property and could not accept that he was not the supreme abitter in this situation.

The game wasn't being played by his rules so he took his ball and went home. The ultimate act of a selfish individual.

As part of a society, I either have to work within that societies means for change of be prepared to deal with the results of my refusal to conform.

Its sad to see how this case is getting whitewashed.

The documents he "stole" are in the public domain. His only issues were with MIT (unauthorized access to a janitor's closet), and JSTOR (potential TOS violation, which they admitted did not exist). The feds should not have been involved at all. He shouldn't have been facing 35 years for computer fraud and hacking charges, for making an automated script that simply downloaded freely available files. He broke no encryption, used no exploits, had legitimate access, and did not distribute anything that was not in the public domain. The script simply went to the website and issued a download request, the same as a person would. This is yet another case of a government prosecutor trying to make a name for themselves by saving us from the evil "hackers".

Both JSTOR and MIT dropped their charges. Both of them realized that their TOS agreements failed to protect them from this type of case. The government continued their attack in an attempt to make an example of him.

The newsmedia trying to paint him as some spoiled brat anti-government type makes me sick.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 01:43:09 pm by wizdum » Logged

"Anyone who isn't confused really doesn't understand the situation."

Electronic props for Airsoft, paintball, and laser tag -> www.nightscapetech.com

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 116
Posts: 2205
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
The documents he "stole" are in the public domain.

What's in the "public domain" is quite subjective: if the "spread the wealth" folks have their way, what's theirs is theirs and what's yours is theirs too.
Logged

Manchester (England England)
Offline Offline
Brattain Member
*****
Karma: 618
Posts: 33943
Solder is electric glue
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
What's in the "public domain" is quite subjective:
No it is not. The authors were payed by your tax dollar, therefore you have a right to see them.

They got no extra payment for writing the stuff, they would have got payed the same if they never produced any papers.
Then this "publishing house" grabs the "rights" to the contents and do not pay the authors.
If any theft has taken place it is by the publishers.

It is a totally different situation to someone distributing another persons music which I am dead against.
Logged

New River, Arizona
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 19
Posts: 935
Arduino rocks
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Be fair Grumpy_Mike, they did index them and setup a database for full text searches.  However, it doesn't give them exclusive rights to the documents themselves since they are public, and that is what Swartz downloaded.  He didn't use their search to find them, he searched the old fashioned way.

He did nothing illegal in my opinion, and the plaintiffs withdrew complaints after they had looked into it.
Logged

Trying to keep my house under control http://www.desert-home.com/

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 116
Posts: 2205
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
He did nothing illegal in my opinion,

That's why things like this should be decided by a court, not by you, or me, or Mr. Swartz.

Quote
and the plaintiffs withdrew complaints after they had looked into it.

The fact that the plaintiffs withdrew their complaints shouldn't be sufficient to prove one's innocence. Lots of domestic abuse cases should be sufficient in convincing anyone of that.
Logged

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 8
Posts: 1341
If you're not living on the Edge, you're taking up too much space!
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

It wasn't suicide!

http://www.naturalnews.com/038650_Aaron_Swartz_suicide_assassination.html
Logged

If you fall... I'll be there for you!
-Floor

Skype Brighteyes3333
(262) 696-9619

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 116
Posts: 2205
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote

It shows you that for every right-wing nutjob, there is a left-wing nutjob.
Logged

New River, Arizona
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 19
Posts: 935
Arduino rocks
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
Quote
He did nothing illegal in my opinion,

That's why things like this should be decided by a court, not by you, or me, or Mr. Swartz.

Quote
and the plaintiffs withdrew complaints after they had looked into it.

The fact that the plaintiffs withdrew their complaints shouldn't be sufficient to prove one's innocence. Lots of domestic abuse cases should be sufficient in convincing anyone of that.

Regarding courts, they cost a LOT of money.  Prosecutors often ruin people and their entire extended family losing a case by simply running up the costs.  The power of a prosecutor's office is incredible and has extremely deep pockets.  When no one was hurt and the plaintiffs have removed their complaint, leave it the heck alone

dhenry, your second sentence should tell a whole lot of people how you think.  Coffin v. United States way back in the late 19th century set the stage in the U.S. and it has been reinforced thousands of times.  It's even explicitly stated in many country's constitutions.
Logged

Trying to keep my house under control http://www.desert-home.com/

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 116
Posts: 2205
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
When no one was hurt and the plaintiffs have removed their complaint, leave it the heck alone

Then it is upon Mr. Schwartz and his defense to prove that no one was hurt.

Quote
dhenry, your second sentence should tell a whole lot of people how you think.  Coffin v. United States way back in the late 19th century set the stage in the U.S. and it has been reinforced thousands of times.  It's even explicitly stated in many country's constitutions.

I am not really sure how Coffin vs. US is connected to your notion that the plaintiffs' dropping the complaints proved one's innocence.
Logged

New River, Arizona
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 19
Posts: 935
Arduino rocks
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

You did it again, this time in the first sentence.
Logged

Trying to keep my house under control http://www.desert-home.com/

Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 116
Posts: 2205
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
You did it again

I am not sure what "it" you are referring to.

I actually agree with your statement that if no one is hurt, we should leave it alone.

But to satisfy that condition (or assumption) that no one is hurt, Schwartz and his team will have to prove that no one is hurt. If he cannot, he will have to go to the court and let his peers judge his innocence (or lack of).

That, in case you didn't realize, has no thing to do with presumption of innocence.
Logged

New River, Arizona
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 19
Posts: 935
Arduino rocks
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

It has everything to do with presumption of innocence; you probably don't understand what that actually means.
Logged

Trying to keep my house under control http://www.desert-home.com/

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
Jump to: