No, Beeper is using Apple's servers without authorization, in the same way that Swartz was accessing web servers without authorizaton.

Not really in the same way. And you forget that what is the most important in a prosecution is the intent.

Beeper intent is to serve both Apple customers and non Apple customers to exchange messages securely. Its goal is interoperability, not stealing, or blindly using resources it doesn't own.

> you forget that what is the most important in a prosecution is the intent

The intent is to sell hacked access to somebody else's servers.

If I sell hacked access to Microsoft's Office 365 servers, I can claim to have any motivations I like. It's still a crime.