The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz

source: The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz

Being a redditor, and being just an avid internet consumer, led me to follow what happened to Aaron Schwartz, and going into this film I was already disgusted by what the DA had done during his investigation and prosecution. Therefore my expectation for this film were minimal; I just wanted to be informed about the aspects of the case that were did not pop up in the shallow articles on the net. And in that aspect the film doesn't fail. Brian Knappenberger reveals the case against Schwartz chronologically, so as each piece of Schwartz's case was pushed against him we cut to reaction or an interview with a family member or friend who was there for these revelations. The feeling in the film is one of frustration, exhaustion and anger; Schwartz's family seem particularly distraught by the whole experience, and this is conveyed well through the talking head format. Knappenberger structures the documentary in black and white terms though. Schwartz is given this messiah like platform in the film, each talking head that speaks about his youth sing nothing but his praises. He is given no flaws at any stage; genius, family man, best friend one could have, etc. This created a sense of disconnection, and I felt that in showing the loss of a "great man" we are supposed to be more outrage than the loss of a "human". The documentary's black side; the villains, the betrayals etc. I would also consider a distraction. Quinn Norton is given a particularly difficult time and coming away from the film she easily became a lightning rod for people's anger. A conversation I had a few days after watching the film focused mainly on how stupid she was, and only briefly spoke about the structures of society that allowed Schwartz's to end up this situation. Splicing the film with homemade footage and only speaking from personal experience about the events that transpired, also made the structure feel shallow. Exposing exactly what went on seems like a secondary objective for Knappenberger, and can't understand why this is. After the film do I feel like I know more about the Aaron Schwartz case? A little bit more. If this is a biographical documentary do I feel like I know Schwart more? Nope. This feels like something emotionally cathartic than an actual informational film.

"Should I kill myself, or have a cup of coffee?" ― Albert Camus. "But in the end one needs more courage to live than to kill himself." ― Albert Camus. "A man devoid of hope and conscious of being so has ceased to belong to the future." ― Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. "Sometimes even to live is an act of courage." ― Seneca "If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide." ― Mahatma Gandhi. "When he endures nothing but endless miseries-- What pleasure is there in living the day after day, Edging slowly back and forth toward death? Anyone who warms their heart with the glow Of flickering hope is worth nothing at all. The noble man should either live with honor or die with honor. That's all there is to be said." ― Sophocles, Sophocles II: Ajax/Women of Trachis/Electra/Philoctetes

I thought this documentary provided great insight into Aaron Swartz and into the broader government and civil issues. I don't believe that this film intended to "martyr" Aaron Swartz at all and I don't recall where the film mentioned that Aaron's suicide was blamed on anything. The film does illustrate the situation that Aaron got into - and I doubt Aaron would have blamed anyone but himself - the pressure of which would have been a factor in suicide. But being in a state where you would consider taking your own life is usually the sum of a variety of factors anyway. I also felt that this film tried to be balanced. It did introduce a former government legal rep who's opinion was that the indictment was legally appropriate, whether or not the public agreed with it. The film also highlighted several times where it had sought interviews with government representatives and was declined. Fundamentally, this film is about the right and the duty of the citizen to question government and change laws within a democracy. It also highlights the various options for responding to current laws - acquiescence, legislative pressure, or law breaking - and the costs of each.

what is the price for freedom ...apparently aaron was right...and its priceless ! Information is power ...... But like all power, there are those who want to keep it to themselves. The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage is being digitized and locked up by private organizations. Should we tap somebody's phone ? Should we film them ? Should we turn somebody against them and get them to testify against these other people? That's how federal agents and prosecutors think to solve a problem. A Must Must watch !!

Aaron Swartz was an internet hacker and activist who committed suicide under pressure from a U.S. government attempt to prosecute him for a crime (stealing data) where he meant no harm and sought to make no money. I certainly agree that the legal case against Swartz was absurdly overcooked; but the film throws up a number of interesting issues about theories of government in general, and the techno-utopian world-view that Schwarz subscribed to. Technological advance can make previous ways of doing things obsolete, and measures of control superfluous and/or unnecessary. They threaten vested interests (or, more probably, they threaten to replace an old elite whose interests are vested in the old technology with a new one unencumbered by attachment to the past). One can believe these changes are good in themselves; one can believe the death of the old control structures is an added bonus; one can believe that the changes are good precisely because they lead to the end of the old control structures. And this way of thinking (in the context of technologies for the storage and dissemination of data) leads to the idea that 'data wants to be free'; and that any attempt to restrict data availability is a form of human rights violation. This leads to some strange positions. For example, academic journals have existed, in some cases for hundreds of years, because publication has been intrinsically difficult. Now, it's easier, the traditional model may be obsolete, and of course, the publishers fight changes that threaten to end their cosy oligopoly. And yet, for an academic journal publisher to seek to defend their copyrighted material is not evil (unless one believes in the complete abolition of intellectual property, which is a different kind of argument). Being on the wrong side of history is ultimately a practical matter, not a moral one. And new models of publishing still come at a cost and still have to be paid for - data is not free (in that other sense of freedom) and in a world with differential ability to pay, that means it cannot be universally free in the other sense either. And as a scientist, supportive of the principle of open access, I find myself in agreement with most of Swartz's positions; and yet alienated by his friends and collaborators, who insist that the government should not have prosecuted Schwarz at all, basically because he was right and they were wrong. One really doesn't need a very advanced theory of power to see that this is a naive way of looking at the world, or an advanced theory of psychology to consider it an arrogant one. The world needs its Aaron Swartz's, and a wise and humane government would not seek to hand down excessive sentences on such people merely to assert its own right to make the rules. But the world also needs people to (mostly) obey the law, and while there may be many decisions of government that people might justly object to on grounds of conscience, Swartz's objections to copyright law lie mainly in the fact that it prevented him from doing cool and interesting things. I find myself in support of most of Swartz's specific views, yet sometimes I feel as scared of libertarians of left (like Swartz) and right as I am of the big government they oppose, whose optimism is invigorating yet in some senses selfish, with their apparent belief that government's worst crime is acting to prevent brilliant and privileged people from reaching the height of their potential. Whatever, it's a documentary that certainly makes you think, but one should screen the views of Scwartz's acolytes before swallowing them in their entirety.

On January 11th 2013 Aaron Swartz, an Internet activist who was facing a maximum of 50 years jail time and $1 million fine for the crime of illegally downloading academic journals, committed suicide. I was in the midst of the initial outcry and mourning on reddit.com, a website that lists him as a co-founder. I regret that I had no idea who he was, what he did, or why he died. Although the unfathomable idea of the weight of the punishment was understandable, it seemed like it meant more than that. It wasn't until I saw this documentary, Brian Knappenberger's The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz, where I finally found out more about him. It is a film that treats Aaron with a bittersweet fondness, as if he is a true one-of-a-kind lost forever, though there are many like him. Instead of trying to pretend that it isn't emotionally involved with him, it embraces that aspect and tries to wrap you around with it, beginning his story with charming home video footage that conveniently displays his intelligence and personality. The documentary details how he was a prodigy in the world of programming and took the heads of influential Internet companies by surprise with his age. However, bored and frustrated with college classes, he instead took an interest in activism against the crippling protection laws against important academic information. He offered the data on openlibrary, which offers free books, and actively fought SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act, which threatened the end of many of the Internet's most popular websites and freedoms. It lead him to hacking the information himself but he was eventually arrested with an exaggerated punishment in a 'head-on-stake' effort by the government to threaten others from following his footsteps. The Internet's Own Boy is a politically motivated documentary that promotes the civil liberties that Swartz stood for, and it makes a compelling argument why it's in the right. As the film frequently states, if a law is unjust then the most important thing you can do is to fight it. It's a deliberately heavy-handed rallying call, one against government policies as a single injustice can spark a war, and it's quite effective, providing convincing evidence of the benefits of what Aaron did as the medical journals he's made available have already saved lives. Above all it's about the tragic figure of Aaron, with the documentary almost trying to make him out a martyr, and that weight looms over the events all the way leading to when they talk about his death. The biggest focuses out of Aaron are on the people around him, including his brothers, mother, girlfriends and colleagues, and the more animated and emotional people make for involving interviewees to watch. Their passion for the cause and Aaron really shine through, especially when they're particularly broken up about it, of which Knappenberger captures in candid intimate moments. What really binds the documentary together is its intense soundtrack which always brings a heart-in-throat tension about the poignant inevitability without breaching sentimentality. It's great to have a documentary about the Internet that really works, as last years We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks and TPB AFK: The Pirate Bay Away From Keyboard weren't satisfying enough for some. It's a film to match the contemporary yet sinister energy of The Social Network, and makes a story that would otherwise be overly dry engaging and enlightening. The Internet's Own Boy premiered at the Sundance Film Festival and is now currently legally online in full on YouTube. It's certainly worth watching as one of the best documentaries of the year so far and it will most likely stay that way. Read more @ The Awards Circuit (http://www.awardscircuit.com)

I don't know why the Aaron Swartz story was never on my radar, which is one of the reasons why The Internet's Own Boy was an eye-opener. His is a tragic story, and although the filmmakers secured screen time with (almost) all involved, it's sad that all we have from Swartz is archival webcam interview footage. The movie makes a persuasive case for his being made a high-profile example by the justice system, and there's enough here to leave you either irate or fearful (or both). Whether or not you agree with the man's politics, he made a difference - hell, he was instrumental in getting SOPA struck down, so he deserves our respect for that - and his story brings to light the need for fine-tuning the ancient copyright laws. Either way, this documentary delivers. 7/10

.... and how an out of -'the peoples control'- government can and will destroy those who take a stand for democracy. Here we have Aaron Swartz - a genius capable of reasoning the truth out of the often boggle of information most of us find ourselves lost in. Aaron showed initiative to better society - he was punished for this. Aaron did not commit a crime. The government arrested him and then assigned a crime upon him - speaking the truth is not a crime. So the powers that be came up with one and charged him with it - a total of 13 crimes he never committed. What is the motive behind this criminal act by the US government? This documentary is a must see and is so nicely edited it is difficult not to become emotionally involved. Aaron Swartz was a man of integrity and driven by the quest of knowledge and understanding. Which seems to be considered anti-American by many 'in charge' people in this 21st century!

I've been giving "1" ratings to a lot of recent Hollywood films, but not this one. Here is a real documentary, and it presents and honest and thorough biography of an exceptional individual. I like to bring attention to this approach , Documentary, as opposed to "Based on a true story." I am really sick and tired of the latter and the most recent abomination is American SNIPER, a warped work of fiction which some have compared to an un-animated version of TEAM America: WORLD POLICE. Usually when I see a highly rated movie that I didn't like, I come here and read the reviews sorted by "Hated it' first, so even thought I liked this documentary a lot, I decided to do that for this one. One reviewer said, "I saw nothing in Aaron but an average kid who was way over-hyped as a "prodigy" while doing nothing of real significance." Personally, I have the ability to recognize when someone else is a whole lot smarter than me and Aaron Swartz was one of those people. Watch this biography, and you'll learn a lot. Aaron Swartz was smart enough to see that one powerful Federal prosecutor was about to ruin the rest of his life, and was both gutsy and smart enough to prevent that from happening. Such is life. It's not much different than if he went swimming in the ocean and got eaten by a shark. We live in that kind of a world and always have. Aaron Swartz got more things done for the betterment of our world in his 26 years than a billion of us will do if we live to be centurions. RIP Aaron Swartz, well done.

Orin Kerr, professor and former federal prosecutor, describes the motivation of the government's case as their fear that, as stated in his "Open Access Manifesto", Aaron believed it was a moral imperative to be committed to breaking the law to overcome a law that was unjust, and that, if allowed to succeed in "nullifying" the law, that everyone would have access to the data base and therefore "the toothpaste would be out of the tube" and somehow chaos would ensue, or as he phrases it, "Swartz's side would win". Apparently, free access to scholarly and scientific journals must be restricted to protect the people from themselves. There is also the issue of civil disobedience in general and the ways those in power portray such actions and those who encourage them. As one other reviewer here states, "when you commit an act of criminal civic disobedience, you should do so accepting that you will most likely pay the price for that action". That is true, however, as Gilbert and Sullivan suggested, the punishment should fit the crime, especially when, as in this case, the "crime" is questionable at best. I wonder how the current US administration would view the acts of Gandhi or Mandela were they occurring now and posing a threat to their political status quo and not seen safely through the rear view mirror of history. It wasn't that long ago that many in power in America considered Mandela , in particular, a "terrorist". This excellent documentary is a cautionary tale that all free thinking and well meaning people must see and understand. Secrecy is power and governments will do whatever they can to protect it. As Aaron himself suggested, this is a battle that will never be won, but can never be abandoned. See this film.