Aaron Swartz, co-founder of Reddit, digital prodigy and activist, recently committed suicide, just weeks before he was scheduled to go to trial on federal charges for wire fraud, computer fraud and unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer.

In 2010, Swartz reportedly gained illegal access to the JSTOR database at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and downloaded nearly 4.8 million scholarly articles, which is close to the entire JSTOR library, according to The New York Times.

Swartz’s arrest and subsequent suicide sparked a huge controversy on the internet. Many people have argued that by prosecuting, the federal government was overstepping its bounds and trying to make an example out of Swartz.

Swartz, who was only 26 when he took his life, had struggled with depression and thoughts of suicide for much of his adult life. Many of his supporters believe that the stress of his impending trial drove him to suicide, while his friends and families believe that the government essentially killed Swartz by trying so intently to make an example of him.

Since Swartz’s death, federal officials have dropped all charges against him, but that has done very little to alleviate the pain and outrage of his family, friends and supporters.

In the United States legal system, a person is innocent until proven guilty. Thus, even though Swartz was arrested and set to be tried, he was clearly not a felon in any legal sense.

Swartz was indicted in July 2011, but an indictment only means that the prosecution has sufficient evidence to prove that there is a case and that that case can go to trial. An indictment is not a guilty verdict.

However, if Swartz had been tried and convicted, he would have faced up to 35 years in prison and $1 million in fines.

Swartz’s supporters have argued that illegally downloading of the majority of JSTOR’s digital library was not a criminal act, but instead an act of protest against keeping information behind pay walls, since Swartz’s intention was to release those articles online where they could be accessed for free.

Swartz believed that everyone should have access to scholarly works, and that access to such works should be free, unless the copyright fee goes directly to the author. Making people pay for access to scholarly sources means only people who have money can have access to knowledge. This only expands a knowledge gap between the haves and the have-nots.

Swartz’s cause was noble, and his arrest and suicide were tragic. That being said, the job of the federal prosecution should not be underplayed or vilified. Swartz did download articles without paying, which is legally stealing.

On the other hand, 35 years in prison does seem extreme in Swartz’s case since it appears that he acted with little malicious intent. There is nothing to indicate that Swartz sought for personal gain from his actions.

But to simply let Swartz’s high-profile case go undermined the government’s vehement attempts to curtail online piracy, hacking and other computer-based crimes, which are not always done with good intentions.

Aaron Swartz’s suicide was a tragedy and a huge loss to the computer world. Swartz was a remarkable young man who could have gone on to do more revolutionary work.

It seems likely that the stresses of a federal trial could have exacerbated Swartz’s depression, but suicide and depression are complicated issues that often transcend blame.