Swartz was a member of the team that came with up Rich Site Summary (RSS) 1.0 which allows users to read content off websites without visiting them. Swartz also had a hand in developing the Python framework web.py and the architecture for Open Library. Swartz stood for all the good things in life. He fought for freedom on the internet, but took out his own freedom when things looked to get out of hand. The court case was too much for Swartz, he was known to be depressed at times in the past. He disliked the fact that JSTOR charged people to access their website and remunerated publishers rather than the authors. Like I said, his heart was in the right place, but not strong enough to fight to the end. In a statement published by JSTOR, they claim to have settled the case with Swartz when he returned all the articles in June 2011. So, was it just the MIT that was pushing it although they were just a gateway to JSTOR archives?