|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 16 2013 @ 11:37 PM EST |
IIRC, MIT has a "reasonable use" type clause restricting use
of campus resources.
Wherever "reasonable use" falls, the type of load that knocks
JSTOR's servers over so that JSTOR had to block the MIT IP
subblock is not within its scope.
And so, he used MIT's network in violation of the
terms...with real harm done to third parties.
From what I read, he had used multiple computers, which
discredits his claim that seizing the one computer on
discovery would have stopped him.
To compare it to your example, the equivalent case would be
bringing in trucks until you've knocked half the branches off
the trees.
That said, the response was grossly excessive.
I would say that this should have been a civil case, with
JSTOR (for the server downtime) and MIT (for loss of access
to JSTOR's services) being the injured parties.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|