I think I wasn't clear enough on this point. I wasn't implying that Aaron's case was directly pressured by businesses, actually I said in my post that in his case the affected parts, i.e. MIT, JSTOR, et al, decided to not push anymore.

When I talked about "businesses" I was referring to the constant pressure they apply for regulators to punish these kind of practices, as the case of Andrew Auernheimer shows, he was also prosecuted for access publicly available information perhaps with the same severity they did with Aaron. Both cases demonstrate a common practice that initiated by the necessity of businesses of cover their backs against these "intrusions", and in both cases also the prosecutors went out of their ways to set an example.

The rumor and innuendo I've seen so far suggests that MIT was more than "possibly pushing for charges."

Though some might see higher learning as a business these days, I still don't view universities in the same light as corporations, so no matter the level of pressure from MIT, I still wouldn't class it as, "pressure from businesses."

MIT isn't just a business, it's a quasi-corporate entity that is a key piece of the military industrial complex. It's a piece of the establishment that's open right up to the point where it's not. There is nothing wrong with that, and it's a true treasure to the U.S., but there is no need to pretend it is anything other than what it is.

People are demonizing JSTOR and making excuses for MIT in this situation, but their perception of who is the big faceless establishment entity here is wholly mistaken.