[throwaway_yy2Di]

"The article was based on, and linked to, documents that were stolen by Edward J. Snowden..."

"...are suggesting that to share information online is the same as possessing it or even stealing it."

I find the choice of the verb "steal" rather bizarre, particularly given the slant of this article. If leaking information is theft, then the New York Times is a frequent recipient and trafficker of stolen goods. I'm not necessarily criticizing their decision to steal the Pentagon Papers, but I think it would be cool if they returned them.

[talmand]

Probably the difference being whether the information taken is considered newsworthy or not. There's a difference between publicly showing documents that suggest illegal activities by the government and credit card numbers.

If the information can be considered newsworthy then there are several legal protections that kick in that make getting convictions difficult and the government isn't likely to bother. Especially if it would hurt the mutually beneficial relationship between government and the news media.

Brown has done things that put him outside of mainstream news media, many of these actions were quite illegal. He's not in trouble for sharing leaked documents. He's in trouble for sharing credit card numbers and information that can be used for identity theft. I'm pretty sure that type of information is not newsworthy and not for sharing.

If he had scrubbed that information then I would imagine there wouldn't be an issue. That and stop threatening FBI agents.