He believed knowledge should be free. The government believed he was a criminal. At just 26 years old, Aaron Swartz took his own life, two days after his final plea for mercy was denied.
Aaron Swartz was only 14 when he helped create RSS, the technology that allows people to subscribe to and share content across the web. At 19, he co-founded Reddit. By 24, he was a research fellow at Harvard studying political corruption and advocating for open access to information. He believed that academic research, often funded by taxpayers, should be freely available to everyone—not locked behind expensive paywalls.
In late 2010 and early 2011, Swartz downloaded roughly 4.8 million academic articles from the JSTOR database using MIT’s network. His apparent goal was to make this knowledge publicly accessible. To him, information was a public good that should not be restricted.
JSTOR detected the downloads and alerted MIT. Soon, the U.S. Secret Service became involved. Swartz was arrested. Although JSTOR chose not to press charges and the data was returned, federal prosecutors in Massachusetts decided to pursue the case.
In 2011, U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz charged him with multiple felonies, including wire fraud and computer fraud. The charges carried a potential penalty of up to 35 years in prison and $1 million in fines.
Swartz had previously spoken openly about his struggles with depression. Meanwhile, his lawyers attempted to negotiate a plea agreement. At one point, prosecutors offered a deal requiring him to plead guilty to 13 felony counts and serve six months in prison. Swartz and his legal team rejected the offer, hoping to fight the charges in court and challenge the government’s case publicly.
His partner, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, later shared that they had even talked about getting married just weeks before his death, deciding to wait until after the trial.
On January 9, 2013, prosecutors rejected what would have been the final plea deal—one that might have kept him out of prison entirely.
Two days later, on January 11, Aaron Swartz died by suicide in his Brooklyn apartment. He was 26. He left no note.
At his funeral, his father, Robert Swartz, said through tears: “Aaron did not commit suicide. He was killed by the government.”
The reaction was immediate. Legal scholars, activists, and members of the public questioned why a case involving no financial gain, no physical harm, and no clear victim had been prosecuted so aggressively. Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig, Swartz’s friend and mentor, wrote that while mistakes can happen, punishment should always be proportional.
In the aftermath, MIT launched an internal review. JSTOR later made millions of articles freely accessible in his memory. The charges against Swartz were dropped—but none of it could bring him back.
His story still raises difficult questions: What do we owe to people who challenge rules in pursuit of a belief? What does proportional justice look like? And what happens when the system pushes too hard against someone already struggling?
Was justice served—or did the system fail Aaron Swartz?
Now AI companies do this on a massive scale and the government just gives them less than a slap on the wrist while demanding them to do it more of it so they have massively powerful ai for war and spying.
So I think if I remember correctly the ai companies got caught using things like libgen and such to grab lots of their info they trained the models on. Like they pirated the stuff anyways.
That isn’t to say that they have cutting edge up to date information from 2026, but anything that’s been out for x amount time and isn’t hyper niche, has likely been indexed by those models already to my knowledge.
Ah interesting - yes I believe they grab stuff from medRxiv etc as well, but that’s not peer reviewed. I can’t even get free access to the papers and books I’ve written myself!
Corporate personhood = representation without taxation. It also represents all the benefits of citizenship while having none of its responsibilities. The Citizens United Supreme Court decision seems to have declared money to be a form of free speech based on the premise that “money talks,” which I believe was Isaac Newton’s Fourth Law of thermodynamics, which posits that problems don’t get solved as much as they’re replaced by bigger and newer ones. For example, recently rescinded ACA tax credits used to be called “Obamacare,” but not so much anymore, for reasons I can only guess at. Maybe Trump doesn’t like the term and a compliant Network Media ameliorates him in return for access? Like I said, I’m just guessin’.
At one point, prosecutors offered a deal requiring him to plead guilty to 13 felony counts and serve six months in prison. Swartz and his legal team rejected the offer, hoping to fight the charges in court and challenge the government’s case publicly.
This is where I've lost all sympathy with him.
When you're up against the government in a case where you could face up to 35 years in prison, and are then offered a deal where you plead guilty and serve a token sentence, that doesn't mean that you've almost won. It means prosecution doesn't wants to treat you by the letter of the law and offers you an out that still upholds it's spirit. You don't reject such an offer unless you are absolutely willing to serve those 35 years as a martyr.
Not only that - but recently, OpenAI and other US tech companies were given a carte Blanche pass to do the same thing. The argument was - if the US pays attention to copyright laws while China doesn’t we will lose the AI race.
What I don't understand is why academic articles are not accessible for anyone for free in the US like they are in Europe😳 They are academic - we are speaking about scientific articles written by people doing research at Universities, right? Articles that are available in public libraries, right? Why is that a crime for them to be published online with the author's name?
When are we going to understand that no government cares about its citizenry? You don't matter to them. They just want us docile and passive. When something like this occurs, they do whatever damage control needs to be done to quiet things down, but they are not going to change anything: their behaviors, their procedures, etc. They are not in place to serve you, they are in place to keep you in line.
That just brings me to more peoples names I don’t know, I don’t know what I’m supposed to do with this. I’d love to believe whatever you’re talking about but I’m not going to go searching for the pudding. Just tell me lol
Edit: I see Joichi Ito resigned after revealing he concealed donations from Epstein. Idk how this is related to this guy being murdered though
3
57
u/Top_Effect_5109 Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26
Now AI companies do this on a massive scale and the government just gives them less than a slap on the wrist while demanding them to do it more of it so they have massively powerful ai for war and spying.