Today MIT released the results of its investigation–led by MIT professor Hal Abelson–into the university’s actions in the controversial case of Aaron Swartz, evaluating the facts and ultimately denying wrong-doing. The report suggests that the school didn’t target Mr. Swartz, but it didn’t go out of its way to do a damn thing for him, either.
The report, which is almost 200 pages long, outlines what MIT did when and outlines alternate courses. For example, MIT could have gone to greater lengths to provide documents to the defense, weighed in on prosecution publicly as JSTOR did or taken into account what a shoddy law the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is. Perhaps most painfully, as Lawrence Lessig argues, MIT could’ve cast doubt that Mr. Swartz’s access Read More