MIT Report Defends College But Raises Uneasy Questions on Aaron Swartz Case

Hacktivist's Partner Blasts Internal Probe as 'Whitewash'

By Doni Bloomfield

Published July 30, 2013.
  • Print
  • Share Share

An internal report from the Massachusetts Institute for Technology claims it did nothing wrong in the case of Aaron Swartz, the co-founder of Reddit and internet activist who committed suicide this January — but criticized administrators for displaying a disappointing failure of “leadership.”

Aaron Swartz
Aaron Swartz

The review, led by an MIT alumnus, an MIT professor, and an independent lawyer, sought to investigate MIT’s role in the arrest, prosecution, and ultimate suicide of Swartz, tracing events from Swartz’s illegal downloads on MIT’s network in 2010 through Swartz’s death early this year. It was released Tuesday morning.

The authors suggest that “the world looks to MIT to be at the forefront” on internet activism and open access to information. But in the Swartz case, “the world didn’t see leadership,” it said. “Not meeting, accepting, and embracing the responsibility of leadership can bring disappointment.”

The investigation revealed the scale of Swartz’s illegal downloading activity, which grew so extensive that J-Stor, the academic database service he downloaded from, shut down MIT’s access for three days.

The report demonstrates the lengths to which MIT sought to remain absolutely neutral in the case, taking the “position that U.S. v. Swartz was simply a lawsuit to which it was not a party.” MIT, of course, did not argue in Swartz’s defense, either. The report sharply questions this purported neutraility and even quotes one of Swartz’s friends: “Neutrality on these cases is an incoherent stance. It’s not the right choice for a tough leader or a moral leader.”

MIT did not pursue federal involvement in the case, but it turned over extensive documentation of Swartz’s activities to authorities before being issued a subpoena, the report notes. The U.S. Attorney’s Office then pursued an aggressive prosecution of Swartz and this, along with other factors, likely contributed to his suicide this January.

Administrators privately informed the prosecutor’s office that MIT did not seek jail time for Swartz but didn’t oppose it, either.

MIT President Rafael Reif, writing to the university in the wake of the report’s release, reiterated that the report “makes clear that MIT did not ‘target’ Aaron Swartz, [nor] seek federal prosecution, punishment or jail time, and [MIT] did not oppose a plea bargain.”

Reif defended MIT’s actions, but he wrote that he “read the report with a tremendous sense of sorrow…. Even those of us who never knew him mourn the loss of someone so young and so brilliant.” In closing, he said, “I ask us to remember him and to come together as a community to discuss, deliberate, learn and act.”

Swartz’s father, Robert Swartz, who occasionally consults for MIT, told the New York Times that he was satisfied with the report but disheartened by MIT’s actions. “MIT claimed it was neutral,” he said, “and it was not — and besides, [it] should have advocated on Aaron’s behalf.”

Aaron Swartz’s partner, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, was less forgiving. “MIT’s behavior throughout the case was reprehensible,” she said in a statement, “and this report is quite frankly a whitewash.”

To Steinebrickener-Kauffman, MIT’s behavior was anything but neutral, as it supplied the prosecution with evidence it refused the defense, and it failed to take the morally correct approach of defending Swartz, which J-Stor did.

“Aaron would be alive today if MIT had acted as J-Stor did,” Steinebrickener-Kauffman said.


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • Mazel tov to Idina Menzel on making Variety "Power of Women" cover! http://jd.fo/f3Mms
  • "How much should I expect him and/or ask him to participate? Is it enough to have one parent reciting the prayers and observing the holidays?" What do you think?
  • New York and Montreal have been at odds for far too long. Stop the bagel wars, sign our bagel peace treaty!
  • Really, can you blame them?
  • “How I Stopped Hating Women of the Wall and Started Talking to My Mother.” Will you see it?
  • Taglit-Birthright Israel is redefining who they consider "Jewish" after a 17% drop in registration from 2011-2013. Is the "propaganda tag" keeping young people away?
  • Happy birthday William Shakespeare! Turns out, the Bard knew quite a bit about Jews.
  • Would you get to know racists on a first-name basis if you thought it might help you prevent them from going on rampages, like the recent shooting in Kansas City?
  • "You wouldn’t send someone for a math test without teaching them math." Why is sex ed still so taboo among religious Jews?
  • Russia's playing the "Jew card"...again.
  • "Israel should deal with this discrimination against Americans on its own merits... not simply as a bargaining chip for easy entry to the U.S." Do you agree?
  • For Moroccan Jews, the end of Passover means Mimouna. Terbhou ou Tse'dou! (good luck) How do you celebrate?
  • Calling all Marx Brothers fans!
  • What's it like to run the Palestine International Marathon as a Jew?
  • Does Israel have a racism problem?
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.