United States v. Swartz
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67702
D. Mass.2013Background
- Aaron Swartz was indicted in 2011 for allegedly accessing JSTOR materials via MIT’s network.
- A blanket Protective Order (Nov 2011) barred disclosure of discovery to non-witnesses, citing sensitive, proprietary material.
- Swartz died in Jan 2013; government dismissed all charges shortly after.
- Congress announced a probe into Swartz’s prosecution, prompting requests to modify the Protective Order.
- MIT and JSTOR experienced harassment and threats linked to the case; multiple parties sought redaction and protection.
- The estate, with government and intervenors, sought to disclose discovery to Congress/public with redactions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard to modify protective order under Rule 16(d) | Estate argues good cause supports broader disclosure to Congress. | Government/third parties contend redactions are needed for safety; modification limited. | Good cause balancing allows partial modification with redactions. |
| Public access presumption to discovery materials | Estate emphasizes public’s interest in transparency of Swartz prosecution. | Public access has limited role in pretrial discovery; presumption not extended. | No presumptive right of access to most discovery materials. |
| Redaction of identifying information of individuals | Identifying information aids understanding of investigation. | Identities risk harassment; protecting privacy outweighs public understanding. | Redactions of identifying information approved. |
| Redaction of network-security information | Redacting would hinder understanding of investigation; disclosure necessary. | Protects vulnerabilities of MIT/JSTOR networks; risk of further intrusion. | MIT/JSTOR may review/redact network-security materials prior to disclosure. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bulger, 283 F.R.D. 46 (D. Mass. 2012) (weighing modification against third-party privacy and safety interests)
- United States v. Salemme, 985 F. Supp. 193 (D. Mass. 1997) (privacy interests of third parties may weigh heavily)
- Kravetz, 706 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2013) (no presumption of access for discovery; privacy and confidentiality matter)
- In re Providence Journal Co.,, 293 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2002) (public access to criminal proceedings and materials; limited applicability)
- Public Citizen v. Liggett Group, Inc.,, 858 F.2d 775 (1st Cir. 1988) (protective ordering and balancing in civil discovery context)
- United States v. Kravetz, 706 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2013) (confidentiality in grand jury and related materials)