I really don't know since MIT has objected to FOIA requests in Aaron's case. A lot of details are missing. Personally I trust Aaron's lawyers more than MIT's administration.
If by "objected to FOIA requests" you mean "filed a motion, just like JSTOR, proposing the ability review and suggest redactions to the requested documents over a window of five days for the explicit purpose of ensuring the privacy and safety of its employees, especially in light of the threatening communications it has received". MIT never proposed preventing the documents from being released.
> MIT never proposed preventing the documents from being released. I'm not sure you're interested in the actual facts
Ok they blocked and prevented FOIA access to documents until Aug 23. What I posted wasn't inaccurate. If what I posted before weren't facts, maybe you should dispute them instead just making one generalized statement. I've been wrong before, and I don't mind being proven wrong.
http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N29/swartz/MIT-motion.pdf http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N29/swartz.html
But based on your comments in the other threads, I'm not sure you're interested in the actual facts...