sociotech

4 ms·

1.
by sociotech 14y ago
A rule (called prosecutorial immunity ) without which it would be almost impossible for the criminal law to function. Would you prosecute Bernie Madoff knowing he could tie you up in court, personally, with millions of dollars' worth of la
2.
by sociotech 14y ago
You should look more closely at the history. RSS (at least, the branch of it that people use), CC, and Reddit would have exactly the same form they have today - exactly! - without Aaron's involvement.
3.
by sociotech 14y ago
It reads like a parody of journalism.
4.
by sociotech 14y ago
I don't know anything about the Smith case, and I am not saying you (and Cullen) are wrong to draw the comparison and ask questions about it. However, it is very difficult to make this kind of backseat-driver judgment. I'm not arguing that
5.
by sociotech 14y ago
I saw that too and read the Standard Law Review article. He is not credited it in. He may have helped a law student write a Python script, which she then used. The article does mention that a Python script was used to collect some data.
6.
by sociotech 14y ago
What exactly is Boyle's argument? He rehashes the now-typical hagiography. Then he seems to argue that should influence legal policy. This is wrong for two reasons. One, the hagiography is factually wrong, no matter how generously anyone us
7.
by sociotech 14y ago
"Crime" often relies on "pre-crime." The legal definition of "burglary" is breaking into a building with an intent to steal or commit another serious crime. Prosecutors have to decide whether they think they can prove "burglary" or can only
8.
by sociotech 14y ago
Google: site: http://www.justice.gov "if convicted, * faces" 57,700 results. There are many things to criticize about the universe, but the standard form language on US Attorneys' press releases is probably not the biggest thing we should
9.
by sociotech 14y ago
I just read this linked article and think it is excellent and very thoughtful. It is much more human than any of Lessig or Doctorow's self-serving comments, and it fits with my recollection of the history. I mean, people are right that all
10.
by sociotech 14y ago
"This makes me wonder whether your senses have been dulled by taking too much of that standard practice for granted." Yes, that is totally fair. I have been thinking hard recently about the role of gradual change vs. radical change. I agree
11.
by sociotech 14y ago
Bingo. I've been trying not to say petty things out of respect for recently departed people and his family, with whom I sympathize for this terrible, terrible thing. But the radical loss of perspective here is just jarring, and the case is
12.
by sociotech 14y ago
But that's ridiculous. The only thing that made this case big news was his death. It's worth reading over old HN threads on the criminal case. The consensus was pretty close to my position now, which is that prosecutorial discretion worked
13.
by sociotech 14y ago
Look, I guess you have no reason to believe me, but this is just not how the US government works. There's no staffer in the Administrative Office of the courts who's upset at Aaron and tells the United States Attorney for the District of Ma
14.
by sociotech 14y ago
The alleged crime WAS NOT merely violating the terms of service of a website. People really need to study the law before critiquing it.
15.
by sociotech 14y ago
If the government couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to distribute the public-domain part of the archive, he would have won the largest part of his case, or at least received a very minimal sentence (with no prison ti
16.
by sociotech 14y ago
If you think US Attys prosecute people because they organize peacefully against copyright laws, you're living in a different world from the real one.
17.
by sociotech 14y ago
"If it were only a '6 month low security setting' being discussed, why wouldn't Aaron have been told of this?" He was told. If you can even imagine that he wasn't, you need better news sources. This kind of anti-reality nonsense sounds an a
18.
by sociotech 14y ago
No, no. Some of the articles were in the public domain, but not all of them. (The precise ratio could have been a relevant fact at sentencing for some of the charges, because it would speak to the monetary value of what his actions threaten
19.
by sociotech 14y ago
Well, it's not true either way. But that too is very rare. There's just too much risk with it, and it's not how most nontechies think. Look what actually happened in this case: Ortiz's husband issued an ill-thought-out, insensitive statemen
20.
by sociotech 14y ago
Maybe. It's the administrative system we've got, though, and we should be talking about how to reform the whole thing. Note how much Orin Kerr recently agreed with the points I made days ago here on this subject.
21.
by sociotech 14y ago
To a center-left lawyer like me, this piece sparks the same concerns and the same dismissiveness that I feel when I read Tea Party rants.
22.
by sociotech 14y ago
This "TOS" stuff is another red herring. Even the EFF said the new proposed change in that law wouldn't have stopped the charges in this case. This case was about more than doing something that JSTOR told users not to do. Yes, it involved t
23.
by sociotech 14y ago
Archive.org has the whole docket. It used to be a reference on his Wikipedia page, but it looks like it's not there anymore. You can find it in the history.
24.
by sociotech 14y ago
I haven't looked into the details, but "new technology" means something different to the public than it means to us. Publicizing a valuable database sounds like it's in their mandate.
25.
by sociotech 14y ago
"Can I be prosecuted and sent to prison for it?" Probably not, but even if so, this is where prosecutorial discretion comes in. This is what people aren't understanding. If you avoid a channel ban, or sign up as "Mickey Mouse" to get free
26.
by sociotech 14y ago
Reading about this case, I've seen lots of people called "shills" for the US Atty's office or the DOJ. You probably won't (and maybe shouldn't) take my word for it, but that's just not how these organizations work. It isn't even close. Peop
27.
by sociotech 14y ago
I'm a reformed programmer who's now a lawyer (with a pretty high profile, but no connection to the US Atty's office), and I have another account that is more easily tied to my real-life identity. I'm not on HN a lot, but I know the communit
28.
by sociotech 14y ago
The "assistant" US Attorneys are lawyers, not what you'd think of as "assistants." The "US Attorney" is a politically appointed senior executive, while the "Assistant US Attorneys" are career staff lawyers. The "US Attorney" signs most fili
29.
by sociotech 14y ago
I agree that that's the right question. The intended "victims" were journals and JSTOR. I'm glad JSTOR didn't lean heavily on the prosecution, but they're not the only party who has a stake in this, and it's routine for government not to be
30.
by sociotech 14y ago
It really isn't. Talk to some lawyers. It's exactly what happens in criminal cases like this, and that's not obviously a bad thing. I'm glad lots of people are asking questions about the plea system, but it's worth getting informed before r

More ›