The Nationally Directed Effort to Take Down Aaron Swartz

The death of Aaron Swartz, co-founder of Reddit, co-author of the specifications for the Web feed format RSS 1.0 (Rich Site Summary), pioneer of open-source, and  Internet activist against the monopoly of information, was sadly, a death that was coerced. Yes, he apparently killed himself, but it's the government--with the assistance of MIT who over-zealously persecuted through prosecution, and pushed him to that point.  Not the first time, I might add.

The issue here is the abusive treatment of citizens, in particular, one citizen who courageously spoke truth to power, Aaron Swartz, by a government bureaucracy intent on intimidating activists. In this case, prosecuting a person accused of a victimless "crime," if it was a crime at all, and threatening a severe sentence--35-years in jail-- in retaliation for, in this case, advocating on behalf of the free flow of information on the Internet.

What was Aaron Swartz's crime? Attempting to liberate taxpayer paid research journals--that already belonged to the public--to the public for free, journals that the "owner" of the records, JSTOR, declined to press charges. Swartz did not seek to profit from the information he liberated, and the writers/researchers had already been compensated for the work, unlike all of corrupt banksters, CEOs, and politicians, who not only go free but are rewarded for intentionally bringing down the global economy.

“..he used an open network connection at MIT, which explicitly allowed free guest access, to download academic research papers that were available for free for any user on that particular network."

According to a good friend of his, Aaron Swartz had a "much broader agenda than the information freedom fights for which he had become known." He was also a "political activist interested in health care, financial corruption, and the drug war."  To sum it up, Aaron's goal was making "life a little less unfair." And for that, he paid the ultimate price.

Here are some of the more unusual aspects in this case:

Two days before Aaron Swartz was arrested, the Secret Service took over the investigation.

"On the morning of January 4, 2011, at approximately 8:00 am, MIT personnel located the netbook being used for the downloads and decided to leave it in place and institute a packet capture of the network traffic to and from the netbook.4 Timeline at 6. This was accomplished using the laptop of Dave Newman, MIT Senior Network Engineer, which was connected to the netbook and intercepted the communications coming to and from it. Id. Later that day, beginning at 11:00 am, the Secret Service assumed control of the investigation."

The top federal prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz and her assistant Stephen Heymann rejected any deal that did not involve a prison sentence.

Aaron Swartz prosecutor 'drove another hacker to suicide in 2008 after he named him in a cyber crime case'

“In his suicide note, James said he had no faith in the justice system, which he believed were trying to tie him to a crime he did not commit.

'I have no faith in the "justice" system. Perhaps my actions today, and this letter, will send a stronger message to the public.

'Either way, I have lost control over this situation, and this is my only way to regain control.

'Remember, it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether I win or lose, and sitting in jail for 20, ten, or even five years for a crime I didn't commit is not me winning. I die free.'

James was the first juvenile put into confinement for a federal cyber crime case.

And last, but certainly not least, from emptywheel, who seems to be breaking most of the news regarding the death of Aaron Swartz, the Department of Justice invoked Aaron Swartz’ manifesto to justify investigative methods.

“And look at the passage from the Manifesto they quote in the brief, which appears in this larger passage.

“There is no justice in following unjust laws. It’s time to come into the light and, in the grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public culture.

We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world. We need to take stuff that’s out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file sharing networks.

In context, much of the manifesto advocates for things that are perfectly legal: sharing documents under Fair Use. Taking information that is out of copyright and making it accessible. Purchasing databases and putting them on the web.

Aside from sharing passwords, about the only thing that might be illegal here (depending on copyright!) is downloading scientific journals and uploading them to file sharing networks.

Precisely what the government accused Swartz of.

But they don’t cite that passage. Rather, they cite the “making copies” passage–something not inherently illegal. As if that justified the investigative tactics they used.

Used as it is in this page-limited brief arguing why their tactics were legal, the citation is really bizarre. But it does seem to admit that the government considers Swartz’ role in the Open Access movement to be as much proof he was a criminal as that he chose to download the documents at MIT and not Harvard.

This is just one more example of how distorted the whole US justice system has become in order to please the elite few who want to retain their power and wealth at any cost.

“For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House — and where even those brought to “justice” never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled “felons.” Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig,

Read more...

Intelligence Gathering Military Drones Stalk American Skies.

EFF posted several thousand pages of new drone license records and a new map (above)
that tracks the location of drone flights across the United States.

Military drones--Predators and the larger, more powerful Reapers, capable of both spying on people and firing missiles at them--used to track terrorists or insurgents--or anyone who happens to be in range--

MQ-9 Reaper (Remotely Piloted Vehicles) operated by
ground controllers. Pre-programmed flight plans allow
other UAVs to operate autonomously

in Afghanistan and America's shadowy counter-terrorism campaigns in Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, the Philippines and the new epicenter of America’s shadow war in East Africa have also been stalking  U.S.skies.  Newly released documents show U.S. remote-controlled warplanes by the Air Force, Marine Corps and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) for the first time thanks to the result of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Of course, the EFF waited over a year and a half for the FAA to release their records, and that's not even half of what they requested from the agency.  That might take another year and a half.

"The records show that the Air Force has been testing out a bunch of different drone types, from the smaller, hand-launched Raven, Puma and Wasp drones designed by Aerovironment in Southern California, to the much larger Predator and Reaper drones responsible for civilian and foreign military deaths abroad. The Marine Corps is also testing drones, though it chose to redact so much of the text from its records that we still don't know much about its programs.

Remember, the U.S. military doesn’t need an FAA license to fly drones-- intelligence gathering systems--over its own military bases but it does need a license to fly in the national airspace.

"A white S.U.V. traveling along a highway adjacent to the base came into the cross hairs in the center of the screen and was tracked as it headed south along the desert road. When the S.U.V. drove out of the picture, the drone began following another car.

“Wait, you guys practice tracking enemies by using civilian cars?” a reporter asked. One Air Force officer responded that this was only a training mission, and then the group was quickly hustled out of the room.

Also the thousands of pages of released records reveal that "law enforcement agencies want to use drones to support a whole host of police work," mainly in the case of drug investigations.  That's right, they'll be scouring the skies looking for pot. Already, several states--Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Texas--are partnering with the federal Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security for drug enforcement purposes. In fact, some states are withholding "some or—in Orange County's case—almost all information about their drone flights—including what type of drone they're flying, where they're flying it, and what they want to use it for—claiming that releasing this information would pose a threat to police work."

Now, it's not all bad, however, keep in mind that positive reasons can serve to mask not so positive reasons for drones.

"Universities and state and local agencies are finding new and creative uses for drones. For example, the Washington State Department of Transportation requested a drone license to help with avalanche control, while the U.S. Department of Energy in Wyoming wanted to use a drone to “monitor fugitive methane emissions.” The University of Michigan requested one license for its “Flying Fish” drone—essentially a buoy that floats on open water but that can reposition itself via flight (check out the picture to the left of the drone with some dolphin)—and another license for its “YellowTail” drone, which is designed to study “persistent solar-powered flight.”

Links:

Air Force May Be Developing Stealth Drones in Secret

"If these robots are real, the Air Force’s drone era is not only not ending — it’s barely begun."

"Operational Risk Analysis of Predator/Reaper Flight Operations in a Corridor between Cannon AFB and Melrose Range (R-5104A)"

Read more...

Under Cover of Darkness: The Trans-Pacific Partnership

Increasingly, corporations are gaining more and more access and influence to legislation that the public and even Congress does not have through groups like  ALEC and trade agreements such as NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, that merged the United States, Canada, and Mexico creating essentially a north American continent of supposedly, "free" trade. "NAFTA contained 900 pages of one-size-fits-all rules to which each nation was required to conform all of its domestic laws - regardless of whether voters and their democratically-elected representatives had previously rejected the very same policies in Congress, state legislatures or city councils." After NAFTA was signed, two-thirds of Canadian families saw a decline in real income while two million peasant farmers were displaced from their land in Mexico, forcing many into trying to gain entrance into the United States, adding to our already growing immigration problem.

Now, there is "NAFTA on steroids," the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) (see links below), "a legally binding trade agreement for advancing transnational corporate tyranny and dismantling domestic democratic accountability" that is not only the largest “free trade agreement” ever negotiated, but also the most secretly negotiated, with "no public oversight, input, or consultations". Only two of its 26 chapters deal with trade, the rest grant unprecedented powers and privileges upon Trans-National Corporations (TNCs)while dismantling regulations and laws without any democratic oversight or input."

Take the intellectual property chapter alone, which would extend copyright provisions, if enacted into law,  from a state/federal jurisdiction to a matter of international agreement, and within that framework, plans on extending endless copyright terms across the globe  The U.S. already has the most extensive copyright terms in the world.  This is increasingly problematic for today's remix culture, intrinsic to the health of our economy. Not only can one face statutory damages, with preset fines of up to $150,000 per infringement, the criminal section of intellectual property chapter indicates an individual could face actual jail time.if it's proven that they had direct or indirect motivation for financial gain  Not to mention, copyright expansion can  be used to silence speech as they often do on websites such as Youtube.

In February 2012, powerful content groups such as the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) and the MPAA (Motion Pictures  Association of America) met in Beverly Hills along with representatives from nine countries including the United States were secretly meeting in a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills. Public interest groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) were shut out, their hotel reservations canceled without their consent. Another public interest group's representatives were kicked out of the hotel.

For example, public interest groups have been warning that the TPP could result in millions of lost jobs. As a letter from Congress to United States Trade Representative Ron Kirk stated, the TPP “will create binding policies on future Congresses in numerous areas,” including “those related to labor, patent and copyright, land use, food, agriculture and product standards, natural resources, the environment, professional licensing, state-owned enterprises and government procurement policies, as well as financial, healthcare, energy, telecommunications and other service sector regulations.”

The next round of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement negotiations will take place from December 3-12 in Auckland, New Zealand, and it will be done with the same level of secrecy as the last 14 rounds in order to grant far-reaching new rights and privileges to the 600 corporations aligned with the TPP at the expense of the tax-paying public. This could affect the health and welfare of billions of people worldwide, so where is the mainstream media?

The following is a list of 35 of the 134 lobbying clients who paid more than $1 million on lobbying in 2011-2012 and reported lobbying a federal agency on the Trans Pacific Partnership.

Links:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: This is What Corporate Governance Looks Like


Why So Secretive? The Trans-Pacific Partnership as Global Corporate Coup

Read more...

Another Effort to Take the Internet Away From the People.

Behind closed doors, in Dallas Texas, trade representatives of big corporations are secretly negotiating a massive trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which includes regulations for the Internet – including intellectual property provisions that could potentially "harm online expression, privacy and innovation on the Internet".

This Agreement may be even worse than ACTA as it could tie the hands legislators and create new, international standards for intellectual property enforcement. Internet users and free expression advocates like EFF aren’t allowed in the room and are forbidden from seeing the text, even though U.S. Trade Representatives claim  they have made “extraordinary efforts” to include public stakeholders in negotiations. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Like ACTA, negotiations exclude the public, while welcoming private industry representatives with open arms.

Last week, 32 legal scholars sent a letter to the office of the USTR demanding transparency in the process. Including the release of the text and demand for real participation from civil society, they demanded the immediate release of “reports on US positions and proposals on intellectual property matters that are currently given only to Industry Trade Advisory Committee members under confidentiality agreements.” This is key because there is nothing that could justify the withholding of such reports that simply outline the U.S. position on intellectual property from the public. This is especially true given the fact that the U.S. government’s proposals could impede Congress from engaging in domestic legal reform of legislation regulating IP.

US Congressman Darrell Issa just released the Trans Pacific Partnership Intellectual Property Rights Chapter on KeepTheWebOPEN.com. Only problem is, it's the old 15-month old version. How stupid do they think we are?

Via Public Citizen:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is being negotiated in secret and the stakes for the 99% couldn't be higher...The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) "free trade" agreement is a stealthy policy being pressed by corporate America, a dream of the 1 percent, that in one blow could:

• offshore millions of jobs,

• free Wall Street and its banksters from oversight,

• reduce Internet freedom,

• ban policies needed to create green jobs and rebuild local economies,

• decrease access to medicine by extending drug company monopolies,

• empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards, such as tobacco control and clean air and water regulations.

Closed-door talks are on-going between the U.S. and Australia, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam; with countries like Japan and China potentially joining later.

600 corporate advisors have access to the text, while the public, Members of Congress, journalists, and civil society are excluded. And so far what we know about what's in there is very scary!

But there's still time to organize to shine a light on the horrors of the TPP and convince our governments to instead pursue policies that benefit the 99% in our countries. Watch this video (you may want to mute) and then take action by signing our petition calling for an end to secrecy in the TPP negotiations.

TPP: Spreading NAFTA to Asia and Chile...Guaranteed to screw you and me.

Read more...

Wiretapping in the Digital Age

Communications coming from outside the US do not come in by radio or wire any more, they come in from optical fiber.

First, the optical fiber is split into two copies; not quite at the same strength but still pretty good quality. One copy goes to the phone switch and the other copy runs through filters that select data based on pre-decided terms based on what the government is looking for.

One difference between the old way of wiretapping and the new way is that cooperation of the phone and/or cable companies is needed because their equipment or cables must be altered to get results.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is currently litigating in San Francisco that AT&T has allegedly set aside a secure room for the National Security Agency (NSA) to wiretap where the signal is split and then the run their half of the cable through filters. The communications of interest is then shipped back to the NSA.

The Bush Administration is trying to get the case dismissed, declaring this action falls under the category of state secrets, or in other words is none of our business. In another similar case the government refuses to identify the carrier.

The corporations, such as AT&T, are caught in the middle, because complying with the government's request flies in the face of protecting the privacy of communication they promise to their customers.

"The courts cannot permit the government to evade responsibility for unconstitutional activities with thin claims of 'state secrets.' Without judicial review, there is no way to stop abuses of power," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "The courts are well equipped to protect state secrets while determining whether the spying is illegal and if so, to put a stop to it."

Read more...