Could someone who knows about such matters comment on whether this is the usual consequence for what he did, or if it's likely that he's been given "preferencial" treatment for his political activism?
See http://blog.simplejustice.us/2011/07/20/swartz-caught-in-a-c... for some analysis from someone who doesn't support what Swartz did, but nevertheless sees this as a vindictive prosecution.
But what struck me as partularly stupid about what Swartz did (besides the fact that the data will probably be released anyway, in due course, without the need for "activism") is that he installed stealth code on a computer in a Federal Court Law Library. Of all places he chose a federal building, and a Federal Court Law Library. This just sounds idiotic.
And the irony of it all, at least to me, is I just downloaded his Superceded Indictment for free from archive.org. It appears others are succeeding in making court documents publicly available without installing stealth code on federally-owned computers. Maybe they do not have everything in PACER yet, but I think it's only a matter of time. Courts are perhaps a little slow to change with new technology but despite their budget constraints they are definitely making progress. And publicresource.org seems to be getting bulk data with the blessing of the courts and without installing any stealth scripts on Law Library computers.
If one really wanted to engage in some sort of activism to free up (what should be free) legal documents, maybe a better focus is Lexis-Nexis. A true monopoly, founded on a dubious intepretation of copyright law. Can you copyright court decisions? They managed to do it. And the founder is on the Forbes list.
But even so, is it really that hard to believe that the feds have their own agenda and are acting on their own for this one? I realize I have no proof to back up my assertion that this is all them, but it's not outside the realm of possibility, that's for sure.