What Aaron Swartz Was Really Up Against
Prosecutorial overreach (whether you think the underlying conduct was a crime or not), the nuts and bolts of what really happens in a court, tribalism and its effects on popular culture, and most importantly, clearing up of misunderstandings about a very serious mental health issue. All written by a fantastic writer who knows well all of these subject matters. Go read it already.
Not knowing Mr. Swartz personally, I know his ‘Ilk’ and style! All printed material should be Free, not controlled by the few, for dollars for themselves or their organizations! Of course I know there is a need for Security, but controlled security works better than exclusive security! if the ‘legal’ beagles had their way, nobody could print, change, do a play or a movie without the original permission from the artist, author, etc.
Grid lock could and does happen, censorship is ramped, when the Media is controlled by Whomever!
For example; Person A takes a picture of Subject B, Person A uses the image for advertizing, Subject B wants paid because its B’s image! Person A states A owns picture, Subject B agrees but states A may own the photograph but not the image! Can’t happen; Ask Case Study on Celebrity Photo’s!Report
First, AT&T notified its customers by e-mail. That was free, leading to a “cost” so far of zero. But then AT&T decided to follow-up the e-mail notification with paper letter notification, and the postage and paper costs amounted to about $73,000. Auernheimer’s 41-month sentence was based in substantial part on that $73,000 in loss, and he was also ordered to pay restitution in that amount.
This reminds me a lot of the Phelps’s tactics in Synder vs. Phelps: on appeal they filed a large number of completely unnecessary documents, to increase the court costs they’d be awarded if they won.Report
Indeed. And since Phelps and his clan are Lawyers who represent themselves, it’s money they got to keep.
There’s a pretty solid case to be made that Phelps and the WBC are more trolls than honest bigots, and that profiting from ill-advised lawsuits filed by their targets is the primary reason for their protests.Report
The real question that I have is:
How long is it going be, now that adequate information is readily available to all, before such common misconceptions finally come unwound?
Been going on for awhile now . . .Report
Thanks for the link, Burt. The stuff on depression is powerful (and accurately reflects my own thankfully-limited experiences of it in myself, and friends/family).
And this bit deserves a reprint for anyone disinclined to read the whole piece:
Report
Two forces are at work here and neither are prosecutor overreach. AT&T has an enormous lobbying presence and has shown itself capable of screwing anyone who gets in its way. Then there’s the inertia of the existing body of law which has not adapted to the Internet.
The Internet was designed on the honour code. Back in the heyday of the Beatles, there was another Apple Store on Baker Street in London, where “beautiful people could buy beautiful things” Predictably, it was a financial disaster. People just took things and didn’t pay for them. Finally, the Beatles just gave everything away. The looters descended upon the place in droves.
And the Beatles were among the very last to license their music for the download market. Who else is holding out? Maybe Led Zeppelin?
What’s the practical difference between Aaron Swartz, scraping JSTOR with a website copier and the folks who looted the Apple Boutique? When I configure Apache on a big site, I routinely set up a module to detect web scraping and blacklist the IP of the scraper. I mean, really, if it’s worth taking, isn’t it worth some token payment for it? I go to very considerable trouble to obtain permissions for the images I use around here: I consider borrowing without permission to be theft. The HREF tag was created to allow footnoting from one scientific paper to another, not for some jackass to hoist up someone else’s work for everyone else’s benefit.
JSTOR solved a problem, one for which the Internet itself was designed. Plenty of good people have put up money to make it work. It’s a great force for good in the world, a repository for scholars and scientists. All they ask is a token fee, much less than the cost of subscription to the equivalent scientific journals in the Dead Tree Edition. Is that really too much to ask, to support a nonprofit institution? JSTOR do host older material for free.
Kicking up dust because Aaron Swartz once wrote the spec for RSS is irrelevant. At what cost comes information worth having? It’s somewhat higher than free.Report
“[T]he Beatles were among the very last to license their music for the download market.”
Although that was due more to epic butthurt than resistance to digital downloads.Report
Then why are you giving so much of it away for free?
I mean, it’s bad enough to leave the barn door open and expect the cows to stay inside.\
But corporations steal your data all the time.
… not that you’ll know if you don’t look.Report
Who is this mythical “I” who’s giving things away for free?Report
I’ll lay money that it’s you.
Let’s see:
Ya got facebook?
Kindle?
Verizon?
… do I need to go on, or have i won yet?Report
Uh, no. I have a bastion Facebook account, not under my name of course. I do not have a Kindle. Nor do I use Verizon carrier service. I know who and what comes in and out of my router and I know iptables cold.Report
Well, shucks. Guess I lose then.
How much info do you figure your medical insurance company is keeping on you?
How about the doctors?
When I head in to get treated, I sign a document saying that they’re allowed to do research on any sample they get from me, without my consent.Report
… or canvassers. that’s always a good way to raise money for a political campaign. Sell the data you get from canvassing… you know, the easy stuff. Number of satellite dishes, that kinda crap.Report
Thank you for reminding me to link to Popehat more frequently, even though I read it every day.Report
Those guys make me mad.
Because they’re such good writers and they usually keep such a good focus and clear vision on the law. And when they want to be, they’re really funny.
I’m mad because I fear I fall short of the standards they set.Report
You just need a better hat.Report
I’m just happy I’m not the only person here who reads Popehat religiously.Report