-- by Horatio Algeranon
If Swartz was a "criminal"
So are you
And could be prosecuted
For "hacking" too.
The "Terms of Service"
To the State
Are strict and harsh
If that's your fate.
Who can honestly say with absolute certainty that they have never violated "terms of service"? (basically what Aaron Swartz was being prosecuted for)
Who can honestly say that they actually know (or have even read, to say nothing of followed to the letter) all the "terms of service" (or "terms of use") for all the software and online services they have used over the years? (eg, before you click on that "yes" box to start a service or download software)
Who can can honestly say with complete assurance that they have never downloaded music, games or other software in violation of the "terms of use" (ie, illegally)?
Who can honestly say that they have never installed software on more than one computer when the "terms of use" allowed it on only one?
The following is from Democracy Now! (Exclusive: Aaron Swartz’s Partner, Expert Witness Say Prosecutors Unfairly Targeted Dead Activist)
ALEX STAMOS* "So. Aaron was accused of, as been discussed a couple times, downloading too many files, or checking too many books out of the library. He found a loophole that he—that was a convenient way for him to get access to a lot of the JSTOR documents...."
"You know, I can’t actually condone everything Aaron did. I think—as I have written online, I think what he did was perhaps, you know, discourteous or inconsiderate of taking advantage of the, you know, library privileges that he was basically granted. But at no time did he actually do any actions that I would consider hacking...."
"...at what point does somebody doing something that is allowed become in excess of authorization? What Aaron was doing was exactly the same activity that thousands of people do at MIT every year: He was going and looking at documents. Now, he was doing it at a much wider scale. He did it more than they seemed to want. But at what point does he exceed authorization? And by having these incredibly broad definitions and a word that doesn’t really mean anything, like "authorized," we end up in a situation where if a prosecutor doesn’t like you or doesn’t like what you did, if it happened to use a computer, they can find a way to call it "hacking" and an abuse of that system."
*Stamos is "chief technology officer of Artemis Internet. He is a computer security and forensics expert who had planned to testify on Aaron Swartz’s behalf during his upcoming trial."
