Hey all,

Had some thoughts...

A friend of mine just started http://kopimism.org/ please improve the site,
it's open source. For those seeking a way to engage with moral and ethical
grounds of sharing information (especially through copying), you may be
interested in Kopimism (and related concepts), which is more of a
philosophy than a religion (though all is open to interpretation and
forking). An interesting aspect of Kopimism is kopimist practice, so it
doesn't have to be all theory.

Second, I agree with the assessment that Aaron's JSTOR action was not
technically civil disobedience, but for this reason: Aaron did not leverage
his identity and use a public statement to make it clear his downloading of
those articles (specifically) was a political act, a practice well worn by
the Electronic Disturbance Theatre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Disturbance_Theatre. However,
there are some who contend an act need not be public for it to be (a)
morally right and even (b) civil disobedience. I agree with the possibility
for argument (a), especially in this case and with respect to the Guerilla
Open Access manifesto. Argument (b) is apparently articulated by Stephen
Elimann who is referenced in the Civil Disobedience Wikipedia article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience#cite_note-21,
but unfortunately the cited work is locked behind a JSTOR pay wall:
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1122838?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101684941997
 (#icanhazpdf?).

Back to identity. This is something I noticed especially around the rise of
Anonymous (and similar groups) as well as some Occupy movement actions.
Civil Disobedience can require leveraging the privilege of public identity
(for those who have it and are willing to take the risks) in order to, for
instance, find support from the general public and the media especially in
the face of corporate, government and legal consequences. Unfortunately,
it's my opinion that folks have been encouraged to engage in political
actions surreptitiously and anonymously when, instead (in some
circumstances), they can act publicly with explicit political motivation,
some times in coordination with a larger community. The PayPal DDOS is a
specific example:
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/sixteen-individuals-arrested-in-the-united-states-for-alleged-roles-in-cyber-attacks
 and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/dec/06/student-convicted-anonymous-cyber-attacks
.

// Matt

p.s. A very odd result from the article above is a mandate around the
convicted Christopher Weatherhead's public identity: "The hacker is banned
from using internet chat relays or posting online under the pseudonym Nerdo
or any other name but his own."


On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Joseph Dempsey <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not sure Aaron really was engaged in civil disobedience, strictly
> speaking.
>
> He walked a fine legal line in the PACER case, and accomplished his goal
> without charges. Maybe JSTOR was PACER 2.0, and he misstepped on the law
> (badly).
>
> A good way to honor Aaron memory is to continue his mission, and to reform
> those things which cut his work short:
>
>    1. Organize support for Congresswoman Lofgren's reform of the CFAA
>    2. Push hard for open access in academic journals across the board
>    3. Reform the plea bargain system
>    4. Stop due process abuses like indefinite
>    detention, warrant-less wiretapping, etc.
>
> SFC could make a major contribution to all these.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Janet Hawtin <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On 20 January 2013 14:18, Patrick Gibbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > about Aaron and breaking unjust laws, not specifically about the
>> > download-disobedience campaign, in case conceptual background is useful:
>> >
>> http://mutualgift.net/2013/01/13/breaking-unjust-laws-and-aaron-swartzs-killing/
>> >
>> > ~ Patrick
>>
>> How do you tackle the NDAA so that civil disobedience is a healthy
>> part of democratic ecology and not deemed 'enemy of the state'. Much
>> of the space for change in the public interest seems to be
>> contested/eroded? The kinds of actions police seem to think are
>> justified in responding to occupy protests can be violent and extreme
>> with no systemic check or responsibility. Reform of the justice and
>> policing systems need to be resolved or campaigned for before worrying
>> about what flavour of wrong to use to describe active advocacy or
>> 'applied sociology'?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss

Reply via email to