The hacker group Anonymous is a point of contention in politics. While the group has done some good, it has done just as much harm (if not more). However, the fact that the group has no leader means that Anonymous doesn't necessarily have a political stance on many issues (outside of internet freedom). But the group of hackers seems to be viewed negatively by the government, and having any kind of affiliation with the collective can have long-term consequences.
Such is the case with security and tech reporter Barrett Brown. Brown was arrested in 2012 after an FBI raid. Brown was then accused of working with the hackers who discovered/stole information from the American government that Brown had tweeted. Brown was also suspected of being a spokesman for Anonymous. Brown was originally going to serve more than 100 years because of these charges (among other things).
But two years after the original trial, a court in Dallas shrank Brown's sentence down to 63 months in federal prison, Ars Technica reported. The finalized charges are "transmitting a threat in interstate commerce," "for interfering with the execution of a search warrant" and to being an "accessory after the fact in the unauthorized access to a protected computer."
Brown was originally indicted by the Texas court in 2012 on a number of charges, including stealing credit card numbers and identity theft, but the court eventually dropped them. After 28 months in court, Brown agreed to a plea deal, in which he would plead guilty to the three charges. One critical factor in the case was Brown's supposed relationship with Anonymous. While Brown told the court that he was not a spokesman for Anonymous, according to BoingBoing.net, his connections to the group likely caused the court to perceive his charges in a more negative light.
Brown now faces less than three years of prison time left to serve, as well as a $890,000 restitution payment.
