That's just it. The response wasn't at all disproportionate.
That's why, before aaronsw killed himself, the highest-rated comment on HN about Aaron being arrested and starting a legal fund was, to paraphrase: You broke it; You bought it.
Nothing about the evidence of what he did has changed significantly since. Substantially the same charges are on the books, pretty much the same evidence, the same political manifesto on display.
The only difference between then and now is that Aaron broke his own neck and a bunch of armchair lawyers and legislators magically popped out of the woodwork of HN (where were they before he killed himself?).
Is that what this has turned into? It's now OK to invade and do what you want on a computer network, as long as the security is feeble enough?
The response of the prosecutors was right in line with the law as it stands. Although it's surprising that MIT refused to buy off on a plea deal with no jail time, it's hardly new for a victim to want someone to "smell concrete" to think over what they did.
There's a lot that can be done in response to this such as Kerr's suggestions about modifying CFAA to make it much more difficult to fall into felony provisions, increased awareness of the crippling effects of depression, and more.
But acting like the prosecutors were on some special kind of witch hunt for Aaron is silly (read Kerr if you haven't already). Why wouldn't a reasonable person have expected that the law applies as equally to the rich white kid from HN as it did to the "computer hackers" who came before him in the decades that CFAA has been on the books?
That's why, before aaronsw killed himself, the highest-rated comment on HN about Aaron being arrested and starting a legal fund was, to paraphrase: You broke it; You bought it.
Nothing about the evidence of what he did has changed significantly since. Substantially the same charges are on the books, pretty much the same evidence, the same political manifesto on display.
The only difference between then and now is that Aaron broke his own neck and a bunch of armchair lawyers and legislators magically popped out of the woodwork of HN (where were they before he killed himself?).
Is that what this has turned into? It's now OK to invade and do what you want on a computer network, as long as the security is feeble enough?
The response of the prosecutors was right in line with the law as it stands. Although it's surprising that MIT refused to buy off on a plea deal with no jail time, it's hardly new for a victim to want someone to "smell concrete" to think over what they did.
There's a lot that can be done in response to this such as Kerr's suggestions about modifying CFAA to make it much more difficult to fall into felony provisions, increased awareness of the crippling effects of depression, and more.
But acting like the prosecutors were on some special kind of witch hunt for Aaron is silly (read Kerr if you haven't already). Why wouldn't a reasonable person have expected that the law applies as equally to the rich white kid from HN as it did to the "computer hackers" who came before him in the decades that CFAA has been on the books?