By David Li, bostonese.com
Boston, Jan. 21, 2013, — Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and also inauguration day for President Obama’s second term. However, many Internet activists were angry about US government’s persecution of Aaron Swartz (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013) that ended in Aaron Swartz’s death ten days ago. They were also not impressed by Obama administration’s poor record in defending the open and free Internet over past four years.
|
|
One of the most creative minds of the Internet generation, Aaron Swartz was found dead in his Brooklyn apartment that he shared with his girlfriend Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman on Jan. 11. Aaron Swartz hanged himself after insisting Ms. Stinebrickner-Kauffman to go to work earlier that morning. Ms. Stinebrickner-Kauffman attributed Aaron Swartz’s suicide as a direct result of the ruthless prosecution by the government in various media interviews. |
The following bio of Aaron Swartz is from wikipedia.com.
“Swartz was a member of the RSS-DEV Working Group that co-authored the “RSS 1.0″ specification of RSS, built the website framework web.py and created the architecture for the Open Library. In the early days of Reddit, Swartz’s Infogami and Reddit merged; the merger agreement made Swartz an equal partner in the merged company. Swartz also focused on sociology, civic awareness and activism. In 2010 he joined the Harvard University Center for Ethics. He founded the online group Demand Progress (known for its campaign against the Stop Online Piracy Act) and later worked with U.S. and international activist groups Rootstrikers, and Avaaz. He also worked as a contributing editor to The Baffler.
On January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested by federal authorities in connection with systematic downloading of academic journal articles from JSTOR. Swartz opposed JSTOR’s practice of compensating publishers, rather than authors, out of the fees it charges for access to articles. Swartz contended that JSTOR’s fees limited access to academic work produced at American colleges and universities..”
|
|
In the classic 1960 novel To Kill a Mockingbird, author Harper Lee used the mockingbird to symbolize innocence in the novel. Aaron Swartz will always be a symbol of how an innocent mind can be destroyed by the justice system, and his unfinished work of preserving Internet as an open and free source of knowledge will be continued by many others.
The following is statements and comments on Aaron Swartz’s death. |
Aaron’s father Robert Swartz’s comments
“He was killed by the government, and MIT betrayed all of its basic principles.”
“Aaron did not commit suicide but was killed by the government. Someone who made the world a better place was pushed to his death by the government.”
“Aaron’s death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts US Attorney’s office and at MIT contributed to his death.”
President Reif writes to MIT community regarding Aaron Swartz
Jan. 13, 2013
To the members of the MIT community:
Yesterday we received the shocking and terrible news that on Friday in New York, Aaron Swartz, a gifted young man well known and admired by many in the MIT community, took his own life. With this tragedy, his family and his friends suffered an inexpressible loss, and we offer our most profound condolences. Even for those of us who did not know Aaron, the trail of his brief life shines with his brilliant creativity and idealism.
Although Aaron had no formal affiliation with MIT, I am writing to you now because he was beloved by many members of our community and because MIT played a role in the legal struggles that began for him in 2011.
I want to express very clearly that I and all of us at MIT are extremely saddened by the death of this promising young man who touched the lives of so many. It pains me to think that MIT played any role in a series of events that have ended in tragedy.
I will not attempt to summarize here the complex events of the past two years. Now is a time for everyone involved to reflect on their actions, and that includes all of us at MIT. I have asked Professor Hal Abelson to lead a thorough analysis of MIT’s involvement from the time that we first perceived unusual activity on our network in fall 2010 up to the present. I have asked that this analysis describe the options MIT had and the decisions MIT made, in order to understand and to learn from the actions MIT took. I will share the report with the MIT community when I receive it.
I hope we will all reach out to those members of our community we know who may have been affected by Aaron’s death. As always, MIT Medical is available to provide expert counseling, but there is no substitute for personal understanding and support.
With sorrow and deep sympathy,
L. Rafael Reif
US Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz’s statement
As a parent and a sister, I can only imagine the pain felt by the family and friends of Aaron Swartz, and I want to extend my heartfelt sympathy to everyone who knew and loved this young man. I know that there is little I can say to abate the anger felt by those who believe that this office’s prosecution of Mr. Swartz was unwarranted and somehow led to the tragic result of him taking his own life.
I must, however, make clear that this office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case. The career prosecutors handling this matter took on the difficult task of enforcing a law they had taken an oath to uphold, and did so reasonably. The prosecutors recognized that there was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his acts for personal financial gain, and they recognized that his conduct – while a violation of the law – did not warrant the severe punishments authorized by Congress and called for by the Sentencing Guidelines in appropriate cases. That is why in the discussions with his counsel about a resolution of the case this office sought an appropriate sentence that matched the alleged conduct – a sentence that we would recommend to the judge of six months in a low security setting. While at the same time, his defense counsel would have been free to recommend a sentence of probation. Ultimately, any sentence imposed would have been up to the judge. At no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law.
As federal prosecutors, our mission includes protecting the use of computers and the Internet by enforcing the law as fairly and responsibly as possible. We strive to do our best to fulfill this mission every day.
Linus Torvalds’ comments on Jan 17, 2013
I haven’t bothered to mention the whole sad Aaron Swartz saga, because it’s been covered elsewhere.
But having the involved US attorney then basically lie about it all in a very public statement is something that I find particularly offensive. Compare these two statements – one from July 2011, one from yesterday, and tell me Carmen Ortiz isn’t lying..
Yesterday (as reported by the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere):
“At no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law.”
And July 2011 (as posted by justice.gov itself):
“SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million”
Maybe that official and very public PR thing wasn’t “telling Mr. Swartz’s attorneys”, right? Because in private, Ms Ortiz was probably talking about how she wanted to pay Aaron for his services, and just hug him. Right? Anybody?
Ms Ortiz, just admit you were an ass-hat, and apologize. Instead of this kind of crap. Weasel-wording and misleading about your actions is not making your office look any better.
Here are the sources, so that people can compare them for themselves.
blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/01/17/us-attorney-statement-on-the-prosecution-of-aaron-swartz