"For its part, JSTOR says it worked with Swartz’s lawyers to get the data back[...]"
Interesting way of putting it. I would have said "removing the data from his possession"
Interesting way of putting it. I would have said "removing the data from his possession"
This is part of a standard narrative to treat copyright infringement as theft analogous to theft of "tangible" traditional property. You will also notice terms like "documents were stolen" in the original indictment. Although to be fair to JSTOR, their official statement did not use such (imho) misleading language.
http://about.jstor.org/news-events/news/jstor-statement-misu...
Yay, future!
It's artificial scarcity, but this is hardly new. The number of books in a library was never limited by the cost of paper.