Aaron Swartz! Proof that our Government Penalizes Intellectual Property Infringement Too Heavily

Question 2: Do you feel the government shares all or some of the responsibility for Aaron Swartz’s suicide because of their pursuit of a severe penalty? Do you think penalties for intellectual property infringement are too severe, or do they accurately reflect the damage that can be done by stealing intellectual property? 

 

• Aaron Swartz, Internet Mogul and Advocate, committed suicide after learning he was facing a 1 million dollar fine and 35 years in prison for Intellectual Property Infringement.

• The Government is at partial fault for Swartz’s Death. 

• Penalties for Intellectual Property Infringement are too severe when put into comparison with the possible harm done by infringing these properties.

·

In the past 30 years our nation has seen an array of technological advances and one of those is the ability to access most any information online. The existence and accessibility of information on the web has led the way to great arguments. Many open web advocates fight for any information on the web to be accessible to anyone online. However many sites and sources are restricted by a paywall which only allows for certain members, who have paid, to gain access to its resources.

Open Access Advocate Aaron Swartz Committed Suicide After Being Caught Illegally Downloading Files

Aaron Swartz was an Internet activist and technological pioneer. Swartz dropped out of high school at the age of fourteen and helped to make the RSS Syndication framework, which allowed for easier following of media online. Swartz later co-created the site Reddit; a social networking and entertainment site that is user generated. Swartz was an advocate of an open-access Internet. In his book The Guerilla Open Access Manifesto, Swartz spoke about the publishers putting scientists work behind paywalls to feed the companies greediness. 

In January of 2011 Swartz was arrested trying to advocate for his beliefs of open access to all web users. MIT police made the arrest after they found Swartz downloading the academic journals that were published at MIT and the database JSTOR, which is protected by a paywall. Swartz’s intention with the information was unknown, however he was still faced with felony charges with a possible sentence of thirty-five years in prison and a one million dollar fine.

“On January 11, 2013, a little over two years after his arrest and as prosecutors subpoenaed friends of his for the upcoming trial, Swartz hung himself in his Brooklyn apartment, leaving no suicide note”

The Government Played a Seemingly Large Role in Swartz’ Self Inflicted Death

The Government is partially to blame for the death of Aaron Swartz. Swartz was a known open access advocate who was fighting for what he believed. The government, knowing that Swartz was mentally unstable and depressed, decided to face him with outlandish charges that carried too heavy of a punishment in many peoples mind. Though Swartz had broken the law by hacking through a paywall and illegally downloading documents, he did no more than just that. Swartz did not show any intention of distribution of the documents. His intentions were severely unclear and to charge him with felony charges that carry a thirty-five year prison sentence sparked a lot of controversy considering this is the believed reason of his suicide. It is believed that U.S. Attorney, Carmen Ortiz, who prosecuted Swartz, took a very hard-line and close-minded approach to the prosecution. Both JSTOR, the service in which Swartz hacked and downloaded from, and MIT did not take action against Swartz. Swartz’s crime was seemingly victimless and did not cause any financial damper on either JSTOR or MIT. With that being considered a lesser offense seemed in order and appropriate but Ortiz thought otherwise and had the ultimate decision.  The stress of the charges and financial hammering that the federal case brought was too much for one suffering from depression to handle.

Penalties for Intellectual Property Infringement Can be Too Severe for Certain Cases

As shown in the Swartz case, penalties can be seemingly harsh for Intellectual Property Infringement. As most any case the prosecutor decides what to charge the accused with; fines can range from $750 to $30,000 and sentencing can be up to 5 years in prison per work stolen and or used illegally.  Where these penalties turn too severe varies case to case. Many feel that if the accused have not harmed the companies that they have stolen from then there is no need for such harsh punishment. Swartz caused no damage to the public or the companies by downloading their files and he was charged with a fine that would’ve bankrupted him and a sentence that would’ve had him grow old in prison. Should such penalties only apply to the accused that harmed the companies they stole from? It is only just to not overly charge and punish the accused.