As an aside, I actually think it's clear that Weev's case is a vastly larger injustice than Aaron Swartz's case.
Swartz clearly violated the law in an act of willing and knowing civil disobedience. The law restricts people from unauthorized access to a network; Swartz and the MIT network admins played a game of cat and mouse as they kept banning him, and he kept finding new ways of gaining access to the network. There's no way to argue Swartz didn't realize that he was gaining unauthorized access to a network. At one point he was hiding his face from security cameras; there's no way to spin that as "oh, he thought he was doing something perfectly allowable!" And once caught, he was offered a reasonable plea deal.
In contrast, Weev...fairly clearly did not gain unauthorized access to a network. It was a publicly available website, and no one ever tried to stop him. His actions were at worse borderline, and yet he ended up with a sentence MUCH higher than Swartz.
I have a lot of sympathy for Swartz (not least because of his tragic suicide), but at the end of the day he knowingly and wilfully violated the law in an act of civil disobedience, and was offered a plea deal of less than a year. Weev probably did not violate the law, and was sentenced to years in prison.
Weev needs and deserves help. I had to cheer a bit when I saw Kerr was going to be helping him.