Aaron Swartz believed it was unjust to lock up research papers behind paywalls when most of that research was paid for with tax dollars.

I don't see how you can seriously compare him to someone hacking Paypal and defacing people's websites for fun. Well, unless you're just trying to argue in bad faith, that is.

People commit crimes because they believe it's morally right all the time. That doesn't mean it's not a crime, and the fact that Swartz committed multiple series crimes has never been disputed. It's simply a question of whether you think it was a justifiable crime or not.

So if you don't think Swartz's crimes were justified, you're just talking about two people who both committed crimes. You don't need to be arguing in bad faith to think that they're comparable even if their motives were different.