Thai Thompson
Professor MacLennan
English 101
28 October 2014
United States of America v. Aaron Swartz
Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?
―Henry David Thoreau Brian Knappenberger, documentarian of The Internet's Own Boy, opens his documentary on Aaron Swartz with this quote by Henry David Thoreau. Brian Knappenberger uses this quote and dramatic sound effects to demonstrate that in our world there are people who obey unjust laws, attempt to obey them until they succeed, and then there is Aaron Swartz someone who transgresses unjust laws immediately. Throughout this documentary Brian Knappenberger cleverly depicts …show more content…
Many people that are interviewed in the documentary, such as Lawrence Lessig who is the founder of Creative Commons, say that Aaron is a “prodigy” and they are astonished “that this [Aaron Swartz] was what the government had to prosecute.” Aaron Swartz was a genius. Brian Knappenberger shows this throughout the documentary by showing home videos of Aaron reading at the age of three and also showing Aaron at age thirteen discussing his opinion and ideas on many different internet websites. As Aaron grew up, he became more interested with the way information and copyright worked in the internet age and started looking at the unjust limitations and laws that corporations and the government had set up. Aaron soon became a modern protestor and fought against profit corporations that were keeping valuable information from the …show more content…
It's unbelievable to hear that a young man trying to improve and better our world was driven to the point of insanity and killed himself because the governemnet went to drastic mesuares to try to control the in “hotbed of hacker activity.” the government found out quickly that they could not control the underdogs. In the document it illistrates Aaron as a underdog who is able to over power the higher figures of authority. For instance, in the documentry it shows Aaron protesting agaisnt the Stop Online Piracy Act and being able to win the imposible and end SOPA. Lawrence Lessig was right when he said, “we are standing in the middle of a time when great injustice is not touched. Architects of the financial meltdown have dinner with the president, regularly. In the middle of that time, the idea that this was what the government had to prosecute it just seems absurd, if it weren't tragic.” It is not right that in our life real criminals of financial meltdowns can have dinner with the president while our government tries to put a young man in jail for years just because he tried to educate the world and make it a better place. So it’s understandable that Knappenberger’s film is one-sided and also interesting that the people who would did not approve of Swartz's decisions seemed to refuse to be interviewed. I do wish that Brian Knappenberger
Professor MacLennan
English 101
28 October 2014
United States of America v. Aaron Swartz
Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?
―Henry David Thoreau Brian Knappenberger, documentarian of The Internet's Own Boy, opens his documentary on Aaron Swartz with this quote by Henry David Thoreau. Brian Knappenberger uses this quote and dramatic sound effects to demonstrate that in our world there are people who obey unjust laws, attempt to obey them until they succeed, and then there is Aaron Swartz someone who transgresses unjust laws immediately. Throughout this documentary Brian Knappenberger cleverly depicts …show more content…
Many people that are interviewed in the documentary, such as Lawrence Lessig who is the founder of Creative Commons, say that Aaron is a “prodigy” and they are astonished “that this [Aaron Swartz] was what the government had to prosecute.” Aaron Swartz was a genius. Brian Knappenberger shows this throughout the documentary by showing home videos of Aaron reading at the age of three and also showing Aaron at age thirteen discussing his opinion and ideas on many different internet websites. As Aaron grew up, he became more interested with the way information and copyright worked in the internet age and started looking at the unjust limitations and laws that corporations and the government had set up. Aaron soon became a modern protestor and fought against profit corporations that were keeping valuable information from the …show more content…
It's unbelievable to hear that a young man trying to improve and better our world was driven to the point of insanity and killed himself because the governemnet went to drastic mesuares to try to control the in “hotbed of hacker activity.” the government found out quickly that they could not control the underdogs. In the document it illistrates Aaron as a underdog who is able to over power the higher figures of authority. For instance, in the documentry it shows Aaron protesting agaisnt the Stop Online Piracy Act and being able to win the imposible and end SOPA. Lawrence Lessig was right when he said, “we are standing in the middle of a time when great injustice is not touched. Architects of the financial meltdown have dinner with the president, regularly. In the middle of that time, the idea that this was what the government had to prosecute it just seems absurd, if it weren't tragic.” It is not right that in our life real criminals of financial meltdowns can have dinner with the president while our government tries to put a young man in jail for years just because he tried to educate the world and make it a better place. So it’s understandable that Knappenberger’s film is one-sided and also interesting that the people who would did not approve of Swartz's decisions seemed to refuse to be interviewed. I do wish that Brian Knappenberger