In light of the recent prosecution and tragic death of Aaron Swartz, it is my belief an formal examination of the current legal processes is required. But first, the events leading to the current moral turmoil must be reviewed. After illegally downloading millions of articles from a digital library (JSTOR) with the intent to distribute them online, computer programmer and political activist Aaron Swartz was caught and arrested by MIT authorities. Under the “Computer Fraud and Abuse Act” Aaron Swartz was federally charged with numerous counts of Wire Fraud, Computer Fraud, and Unlawfully Obtaining Information from a Protected Computer, Recklessly Damaging a Protected Computer” (“United states of,”2011).hese charges carried the potential of over 30 years in prison. Despite the State dropping its charges of “breaking and entering with the intent to commit a felony” and JSTOR expressing no interest in charging Aaron Schwartz and MIT “Neutrality”, the federal prosecution by Carmen Ortiz continued to push for a heavy prosecution. Shortly following the rejection of a possible plea agreement by Ortiz, Swartz committed suicide by hanging. Immediately a public out lash immerged against MIT and the Federal Prosecution. The Hacktivist group Anonymous, subsequently conducted a series of cyber-attacks against MIT and the Department of Justice for its involvement. I have provided a timeline of the claimed attacks by Anonymous associate with the Aaron Swartz case. Please note that the tribute was posted on MIT’s external website the day following Aaron Swartz’s death. Anonymous therefore hacked the world’s most prestigious technological institutes within a day of Aaron Swartz’s death. Additionally they were able to control a government webs... ... middle of paper ... ...ons he was charged millions of dollars and up to 35 years in prison. It is my belief that the Computer and Abuse act is too broad and outdated to properly address the criminal sanctions of ever evolving technological advancements. Additionally in light of the presence political hactivists groups like Anonymous, any misuse of justice requires established oversight. It is a sad day when the government loses sight of justice and has to be reminded by politically motivated hackers. It is my hope that we reflect upon these events and identify the necessary changes needed to be made. As Professor Simon detailed the Prosecutorial complex which was demonstrated in the Aaron Swartz case, diminishes due process. Although it is common to suggest our legal system needs less bureaucratic tape, I believe we must ensure the proper restraints are placed on prosecutorial powers.
In the largest hacking and data breach scheme to be prosecuted in the United States, Dmitriy Smilianets, a Russian national, has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Mr. Smilianets, along with four others were alleged to have perpetrated the crimes which resulted in more than 160 million credit card numbers being stolen and damages exceeding $300 million dollars.
Computer misuse Act has been enacted after some cyber attacks, for instance the hacking attack against British Telecom commited by Robert Schifreen and Stephen Gold, between 1984 and 1985, using conventional devices such as a personal computer, to surfing in the BT network after obtain the user and password of an IT engineer. They had access to the personal mail box of some members of royal family. They were fined respectively with 750 and 600 pounds after being processed. Thus the law in the UK has been revised and for instance,since 2006,crimes such as attempt or achieve unauthorised access to a computer or network to alter information, or to write and circulate a computer virus ,worm and trojan horse are punishable with a maximum of 10 years in prison.
Technology affects all areas of society, forcing changes in a range of laws. Advances in computer technology have resulted in a new brand of cyber crimes such as computer fraud, computer hacking, email spam, pornography (especially when it relates to children) and stalking online. But it doesn’t just limit itself to computer related crimes. The new wave of digital recording devices create issues with privacy and new medical technology brings up moral issues in relation to cloning, genetic engineering and prolonging life (and also euthanasia).
In the case of Jordan Belfort, the penalties and the sentence he was sentenced to serve does not seem justifiable for the result of his actions. But, unfortunately for such white collar crimes, it is very difficult to create a set standard for such punishment. I have come to the conclusion that lamentably a prison sentence will not make up for the financial downfall that Belfort’s action created in the lives of those mislead investors. And although he is required to pay back restitution to his alleged victims, when it comes to the victims more than likely they will never regain the amount of money they lost, and much less their stress and hardship they might have endured due to their unfortunate loss.
JSTOR is an online digital library of academic journals that many universities pay to have access to. Though the intent of Swartz’s actions were never completely unveiled, Swartz was charged two counts of wire fraud and numerous violations relating to the “computer fraud and abuse act.” The accumulation of these charges resulted in a penalty of $1 million dollars along with 35 years in prison. Despite being offered a plea deal to serve a lesser sentence of 6 months in prison, Swartz rejected the offer as he would still be convicted of a felony; this would hinder his future political aspirations. Unfortunately, due to the stress of the investigation, Swartz committed suicide on January 11, 2013, at the age of 26 years old. Analyzing the presented information and evidence, I would argue that the level of charges brought against Swartz were overblown and excessive. The head prosecutor of the case, Stephen Heymann, I believe, was trying to make an example out of Swartz, as hinted at in the film; the government wanted to hinder and make future hacktivist reconsider such actions similar to
Argument B: Aaron Swartz was a computer genius and believes in the freedom of information where everybody is entitled to public records online.
I believe that Anonymous is best defined as being “vigilante heroes”. In today’s modern society, individuals have laptops or cellphones that they use for banking or storing personal information on a regular basis (de Ruiter, 2018, “Introducing”, para. 1) and they believe that their information is safe and secure. They are naive to the potential corrupt individuals or systems (16x9onglobal, 2012, 01:29) that could easily access their data and destroy them financially or professionally (de Ruiter, 2018, “Introducing”, para. 1). Anonymous understands this and is taking action to expose corrupt systems and individuals by turning the art of hacking into force that cannot be ignored (16x9onglobal, 2012, 07:40).
Thesis: Knowledge is protected, and the way we share it is limited, I will explore this with you through the eyes of one individual, Aaron Swartz.
Computers were on the rise (being used more often), and so were computer crimes. How did Congress prosecute these criminals? They didn’t because couldn’t. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act was the solution to intern...
Swartz (2013). A case that has been reported as “he most concerted effort to revise the CFAA came after a U.S. attorney used it to launch a heavy-handed prosecution against internet activist Aaron Swartz for what many considered a minor infraction” (Zetter, 2014, para. 7). In short, Aaron Swartz “was indicted after he gained entry to a closet at MIT and allegedly connected a laptop to the university’s network to download millions of academic papers that were distributed by the JSTOR subscription service” (para. 7). Charges for Swartz’s case reached a maximum of one (1) million dollars in fines and up to thirty-five (35) years in prison (Randall, 2013, para. 2). With the flaws and punishments outline within the CFAA, Swartz was heavily charged. Unfortunately, Swartz committed suicide due to the severity of the charges for a crime that should have received a lesser sentence. Being titled as “outdated,” the CFAA underwent another change and created Arron’s Law. Simply put, “Aaron’s Law removes the phrase ‘exceeds authorized access’ and replaces it with ‘access without authorization,’ which it defines as, ‘to obtain information on a computer that the accesser lacks authorization to obtain” (Randall, 2013, para. 5). Furthermore, Arron’s Law would exclude breaches of terms of service and user “agreements from the law and also narrow the definition of unauthorized access to make a clear distinction between criminal hacking activity and simple acts that exceed authorized access on a minor level” (Zetter, 2014, para. 8). As it is stated, Aaron’s Law sets to clarify statues within the CFAA and protect those from being heavily charged for minor
An astounding event of boundless hacking happened in the mid 2000’s by Albert Gonzalez; incredibly, he orchestrated one of the identity theft schemes in American history (The Fraud Files, 2009). The moral implications of Cuban born Gonzalez’s actions caused undue stress and inconvenience for millions of affected Americans and the businesses he hacked; consequently, his actions landed him I
In this research paper, I will prove that hackers gain power and publicity with crimes they commit through cyber space. And it is easy for even amateur hackers to gain information and money from powerful organization without any detection or suspicion. Hacking is also a costly and destructive force for people in Cyber Space. Cyber Terrorism is such a destructive force that our country lost millions of dollars to hacking terrorists from other countries.
“Anonymous downs government, music industry sites in largest attack ever”. RT. Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV- No’vosti”. 7 March 2012. Web. 27 March 2012
Duquenoy, P., Jones, S., & Blundell, B. (2008). Ethical, legal and professional issues in computing. London: Thomson.
We are living in the era of computers and advanced technology, the types of technology that we have today are the types of technology that I could only dream about decades ago whether it is, GPS, smartphones or the internet. We cannot deny that today’s technology allows us to work more efficiently in many aspects of our lives unfortunately, the same goes to the criminals as well. In this paper, I will identify and explain the three theories that I believe would best explain the crimes of the high-tech offenders using my own ideas along with the researches from credible sources to support the ideas. The three theories that I will be discussing are, Strain Theory, Subcultural Theory and Rational Choice Theory.