Slashdot Mirror

At the time of his arrest, Dmitry Sklyarov was a 27-year-old Russian citizen, Ph.D. student, cryptographer and father of two small children (a 2-1/2 year old son, and a 3-month-old daughter).

Dmitry helped create the Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR) software for his Russian employer Elcomsoft. According to the company's website, the software permits eBook owners to translate from Adobe's secure eBook format into the more common Portable Document Format (PDF). The software only works on legitimately purchased eBooks. It has been used by blind people to read otherwise-inaccessible PDF user's manuals, and by people who want to move an eBook from one computer to another (just like anyone can move a music CD from the home player to a portable or car).

Dmitry was arrested July 17, 2001 in Las Vegas, NV, at the behest of Adobe Systems, according to the DOJ complaint, and charged with distributing a product designed to circumvent copyright protection measures (the AEBPR). He was eventually released on $50,000 bail and restricted to California. In December 2001, was permitted to return home to Russia with his family. Charges have not been dropped, and he remains subject to prosecution in the US.

Although Dmitry is home now, the case against Elcomsoft is continuing (to the detriment of the company), Dmitry's actions in Russia are controlled by a US court, and DMCA is still the law (to the detriment of everyone). This site will carry updates as they come...

Source: http://www.freesklyarov.org/ (for those who don't remember 2001's Defcon incident)

No kidding.

And he wasn't even protesting.

I've not given Adobe a single dime in a decade*. First it was their overpricing themselves out of all but the students-and-pirates market. Then it was about using their corporate power to influence our government against the valid rights of individuals who were speaking out about data security and the freedom to read.

I'm sure some cash went from Canon or Apple to these jackasses, when I bought hardware that bundled their teaser products (which I don't use). I regret even that level of support for Adobe.

Also Free Dmitry Sklyarov!
http://www.freesklyarov.org/

Let me say this bluntly: nothing that Adobe does is compelling to me as a developer, except to reiterate my outrage that corporations openly assume and exercise the power to suppress legal speech about legal activities.

Anyone else than me who started thinking of Dmitri Sklyarov after reading this story?

Damn. Now I'm going to have to be careful to run traceroute before uploading anything to a server, just in case it goes via the US and some future law change makes uploading pictures of kittens illegal retrospectively. No way do I want my pictures sitting in a US government owned database, especially with their attitude towards applying US law to foreigners.

And nothing came of it.

You can't be tried for a law that doesn't exist. IANAL, but if it wasn't against the law when you did it, you can't be arrested for it. Ignorance of the law is one thing, but ignorance of a non-existant law is quite another.

Tell that to this guy.

But what if they aren't being abused and never will be?

It's been the tendency for law enforcement to expand up to the maximum limits of any law or technology. See forfeiture laws for a good example. Or how about Patriot act abuses. Originally meant to stop terrorism, but currently being used for quick-and-easy drug busts.

It's not a question of if they will be abused, it's a question of when. That's why this is the time to put limits in place. Once the genie is out of the bottle, that's that.

At least that's how I interpret it.

A company can contract to China where they pay workers less than our minimum wage. It would be illegal here, but not there. So they move the work to China. Or Mexico. Effectively bypassing an American law.

But it's different for people. For example, an American cannot go to Amsterdam, then come home and test positive and keep their job. Or even better yet, read up on Dmitry Sklyarov. A Russian citizen that broke an American law on Russian soil. Then had the bad fortune to come here. And get arrested for it!

watch how much the attendance goes up for the next con due to the added publicity

One of the biggest reasons to like the Gimp is the Gimp devs won't have you jailed and arrested, while Adobe just might. http://www.freesklyarov.org/

The same thing that happened to Dmitry Sklyarov when he entered the USA after breaking Adobe's Ebook protection...

Jail time, then public outrage & finally a sentance that lets "the criminal" free while dissuading anyone else from attempting the same act.

How soon the masses forget:

http://www.freesklyarov.org/

Forgot the IANAL disclaimer, and here are some links to the case against Dymtry Skylarov:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1454489.stm
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/02/17 47248&mode=flat&tid=103
http://www.freesklyarov.org/
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-270082.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-270440.html?legacy=c net

By offering ebook-cracking software for sale to Americans in America, he was breaking American law[1]. That someone who was breaking American law was arrested when he came to America is not entirely surprising.

Now, I'll grant you that it's not a good law, but at the time of his arrest, selling this kind of circumvention software was a crime in the US, and offering it for sale to Americans inside America---regardless of whether that selling was over the web or not---meant that he was breaking an American law.

Sklyarov's case isn't about over-reaching jurisdiction---he was arrested in the US for breaking a US law in the US---it's about bad laws . Muddying the waters by confusing the two just helps divert attention away from (possible or real) problems due to each of these (different) phenomena.

[1] It's questionable whether Dmitry was actually in violation of any US laws, since it is claimed that he had nothing to do with the distribution of the program inside the US. Nevertheless, that is what he was arrested for and charged with, so he was indeed arrested for and charged with committing a crime (distribution of circumvention software) against US law in the US (Washington State-based server, US clients). That he may well have been innocent of those charges does not make them "overreaching their jurisdiction" any more than any other innocent man in the US being charged with a crime involves overreaching jurisdiction.

The Communications Decency of 1996 act is extremly obvious - it banned a lot of stuff nadwhen it was struck down there was much rejoicing (more info http://www.epic.org/free_speech/CDA/here).

The famous crypto ban, which prohibited the export of strong crypto. Again, code is speech (crypto software is what the Bernstein cort aftually ruled was protected speech. http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_export/Bernstein _case/.

Thirdly, software patents. Software is code, is instructions, is speech. See the Bernstein courts' ruling if you don't believe me.

Finally, the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) is obscene. It bans some software - which is speech. the case of Dmitry Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/ URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov> )is an example of this.

The Communications Decency of 1996 act is extremly obvious - it banned a lot of stuff nadwhen it was styruck down there was much rejoicing (more info http://www.epic.org/free_speech/CDA/here).

The famous crypto ban, which prohibited the export of strong crypto. Again, code is speech (crypto software is what the Bernstein cort aftually ruled was protected speech. http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_export/Bernstein _case/.

Thirdly, software patents. Software is code, is instructions, is speech. See the Bernstein courts' ruling if you don't believe me.

Finally, the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) is obscene. It bans some software - which is speech. the case of Dmitry Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/ URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov> )is an example of this. CDS DMCA

Remember Skylarov ? Adobe vs Elcomsoft... That is the law my friend !

• The Canadian version of this law will be enforced in the same way, and
  
• whether this might cause the organizers of these events to change the venue in future years.

Adobe also helped put Dmitry Sklyarov in jail. Adobe is not an organization we ought to do business with because they treat people so badly. Bad laws don't deserve respect either, and I realize that Adobe is not a legislative body. However, the damage Adobe helped bring on is real, and their actions against Sklyarov show us that they're willing and able to wield that power against others. We should hold in contempt those that would stump for and use the power bad laws give them to stifle our freedoms.

Don't forget Adobe's opinion on closed formats (eBook) and the attempts of people to make interoperable tools. The last time someone tried it, he ended up being arrested.

Yeah. That approach worked great for Dmitri Skylarov.

Your answer is here. http://www.freesklyarov.org/

I don't know what software Adobe has written regarding this, but the way I figure it, that is irrelevant. The DMCA is not what stops Adobe from providing their users with the kind of access to Nikon raw images that their Nikon-using Photoshop users may want, although I experience a good schadenfreude laugh at Adobe's expense when I read people make the argument that Adobe is somehow disadvantaged by the DMCA here.

Adobe can use some of the money from distributing proprietary software (ill-gotten gain, in my opinion) to negotiate a binary-only proprietary copy of a Nikon library to link to Photoshop which would allow Photoshop users to decrypt the Nikon raw white balance segment that is encrypted.

Nikon and Adobe both walk away getting what they want: Nikon's encryption is no less "secure" than it was before (how this works can be hidden from hidden from everyone, including Adobe), and Adobe gets to supply plug-and-play functionality to their users. Meanwhile, and more importantly, their users are left without their software freedom, and no ability to easily deal with Nikon raw images in other programs. Those users are paying their money in exchange for a loss of their software freedom and complete control over their images. If Adobe complains about not wanting to ship software under its name without full and complete source code to that program so they can inspect, modify, and even share it should the need arise, I'll get another schadenfreude chuckle at Adobe's expense because I want software freedom too. The only difference is I don't want to hoarde it from others.

Both Adobe and Nikon are treating their customers like dirt and it's always a good time to remind Adobe that it was wrong to have Sklyarov arrested, detained, and subject to an "agreement"..

To me, these are all excellent reasons to avoid or stop doing business with both Adobe and Nikon. Run the GIMP, use some other brand of camera that will give you the unencumbered raw functionality you want, and retain full control over your photos. The dcraw website hosts a list of cameras it will work with. Surely some camera on that list will meet one's needs without going to Nikon.

And now they're worried that someone will use the U.S.'s draconian anti-human-rights laws against them--in fact the exact same part of the exact same law which stops which people from doing cryptoanalysis (even for 5-year-olds) on US soil (or apparently anywhere as US laws are universal except the constitution which only applies to citzens as was found in the Skylarov case that Adobe initiated).

So I wonder if Adobe feels there's a lesson to be learned here... In other news, Dmitry chuckles softly.

but I think Adobe and Dreamweaver make a good match

Look at the main assets of the two companies:

• Macromedia:
  • Flash: the (closed, proprietary, non-semantic, visual) interactive `movie' format for the WWW along with various (proprietary) design software packages (Flash, FreeHand, Generator)
  • Shockwave: another proprietary format similar to Macromedia Flash produced by their Director design package
  • Dreamweaver : the non-(X)HTML/CSS-compliant so-called `WYSIWYG' `webpage' design software
• Adobe:
  • Acrobat Reader, Acrobat Standard and Acrobat Pro : software to read and write Adobe's (partly) proprietary, non-transparent, visual, non-semantic Portable Document Format for documents on the WWW with built-in, DRM and `security' (see Skylarov, &c)
  • E-book format: see PDF but worse as it is more `secure' with built-in time-limits &c and I think it won't allow authors to make their works transparent (as well as its being an attempt to take over the book market)
  • Photoshop : proprietary graphics design softwarenot really directly relevant to the WWW although it does, I believe produce proprietary image formats which might be used on the WWW (Also see Macromedia's Fireworks that I forgot to mention earlier which uses proprietary extensions ot open formats and is a similar product.)

They obviously believe they can be a better force to destroy the WWW and HTML (and the W3C) with their proprietary, untransparent formats and "plugins" if they work together (possibly making their WWW-destroying formats work better together or even merge).

Look at the main assets of the two companies:

• Macromedia:
  • Flash: the (closed, proprietary, non-semantic, visual) interactive `movie' format for the WWW along with various (proprietary) design software packages (Flash, FreeHand, Generator)
  • Shockwave: another proprietary format similar to Macromedia Flash produced by their Director design package
  • Dreamweaver : the non-(X)HTML/CSS-compliant so-called `WYSIWYG' `webpage' design software
• Adobe:
  • Acrobat Reader, Acrobat Standard and Acrobat Pro : software to read and write Adobe's (partly) proprietary, non-transparent, visual, non-semantic Portable Document Format for documents on the WWW with built-in, DRM and `security' (see Skylarov, &c)
  • E-book format: see PDF but worse as it is more `secure' with built-in time-limits &c and I think it won't allow authors to make their works transparent (as well as its being an attempt to take over the book market)
  • Photoshop : proprietary graphics design softwarenot really directly relevant to the WWW although it does, I believe produce proprietary image formats which might be used on the WWW (Also see Macromedia's Fireworks that I forgot to mention earlier which uses proprietary extensions ot open formats and is a similar product.)

They obviously believe they can be a better force to destroy the WWW and HTML (and the W3C) with their proprietary, untransparent formats and "plugins" if they work together (possibly making their WWW-destroying formats work better together or even merge).

"Adobe certainly will be inserting their SVG magic into the Macromedia environment. "

What, exactly, makes you so sure? You got a portal to the future you're not telling us about?

Adobe *loves* the idea of lock-in. Remember, this is the company that had someone *arrested* for reverse-engineering Adobe's eBook format just so people could view and make backups of their files. (See http://www.freesklyarov.org/ for details.)

So given the choice between something like SVG, which Adobe doesn't totally control, and Flash, which (assuming this goes through) Adobe will own, lock, stock, and barrel, I strongly suspect they will go for the latter.

Money follows the path of least resistance.

Adobe sued Sklyarov. Adobe are supposed to 'evil'. Now let's see if they sue the people who leaked the information. Like this another company that we know.

> If this sort of thing is allowed to continue, how long before I can be convicted under some foreign dictatorship's censorship laws for something I said a thousand miles away? How about asking: How long since russian citizen Sklyarov was arrested when visiting US for breaking US law (DMCA) while in Russia. Now, this is not quite the same thing, but it surely has its place in the discussion about one nations laws being applied to actions committed in another nation. Google for Sklyarov or start reading the Free Sklyarov webpage

http://www.freesklyarov.org/Dmitry helped create the Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR) software for his Russian employer Elcomsoft. According to the company's website, the software permits eBook owners to translate from Adobe's secure eBook format into the more common Portable Document Format (PDF). The software only works on legitimately purchased eBooks. It has been used by blind people to read otherwise-inaccessible PDF user's manuals, and by people who want to move an eBook from one computer to another (just like anyone can move a music CD from the home player to a portable or car).

Dmitry was arrested July 17, 2001 in Las Vegas, NV, at the behest of Adobe Systems, according to the DOJ complaint, and charged with distributing a product designed to circumvent copyright protection measures (the AEBPR). He was eventually released on $50,000 bail and restricted to California. In December 2001, was permitted to return home to Russia with his family. Charges have not been dropped, and he remains subject to prosecution in the US.

Although Dmitry is home now, the case against Elcomsoft is continuing (to the detriment of the company), Dmitry's actions in Russia are controlled by a US court, and DMCA is still the law (to the detriment of everyone).

Expect the helicopters shortly.

I almost hope they do sue me. First it would look hilarious to have a Slashdot thread as the single piece of evidence. Second, How they manage to enforce the US' DMCA laws outside of the US (I'm never travelling there anyway - I saw what they did to Dmitri). And third, MPlayer does NOT use DeCSS at all.

But yeah, I did laugh. Good reply. :)

Has everybody forgotten that Adobe put Dmitri Sklyarov in Jail for reverse engineering one of its file formats?

Has the entire upper management at Adobe been sacked?

Don't sell your soul to an evil company for a "neat job" - your efforts are better spent at companies that "Don't be evil".

If you're new here, brush up.

Sklyarov

Actually I think that it he had written/helped write that software and by being in the US he was now subject to the US laws.

http://www.freesklyarov.org/ has some more info on that paticular case.

Are we supposed to hate Adobe?

Remember, however, that Elcomsoft are associated with spammers

Actually, this may not be as horrible as everyone makes it out to be.

I disagree. This isn't limited to just Microsoft. Take a look

• Microsoft pushes technological solutions to protect data (DRM) with "trusted computing" via "secure BIOS".
• RIAA pushes for DMCA-like laws that prevent circumvention of the aforementioned technological solutions by making it unlawful to do so. The RIAA has demonstrated that it is will not hesitate to use these tools to their advantage.
• The RIAA is using propaganda campaigns to indoctrine our youth and to gloss over the many concerns that we have for our civil liberties. Take, for example, the RIAA's blurring of the distinction between copyright infringement and theft.

So, you see, there's end-to-end lockout being put in place. If you happen to be smart enough to see through the bullshit, you can't do what you want because the technology stops you. If you happen to be smart enough to circumvent the technology, you can't tell others unless you want to risk going to jail. And even if you were some kind of law-savvy uber-hacker, do you have enough money to survive the SLAPP?

I'm not an alarmist, but come on, folks, this is alarming! Microsoft learned the hard way that their behavior isn't beyond the scope of anti-trust regulation, but they also realized that the government is too damn slow to properly stop them. I don't doubt for an instant that they won't use every competitive advantage available to them. Content producers also learned the hard way about fair use with the Betamax decision; don't fool yourself into thinking that they're going to let the Internet slip past them.

• You are free to have an abortion without threats of violence
  
• You are not expected to carry an ID in public
  
• Radio stations are allowed to talk about sexuality
  
• Moore would cringe from things people are saying about government, or people in the government are saying about each other.
  
• Republics were allowed to become separate countries because people there wanted to. Chechnian first war was a sad exceptions. Eventually they were allowed independence and current war is a result of them attacking a neighbor.
  
• You have a right to fair use of your software, music, DVDs and e-books, by reverse-engineering DRM if necessary.
  

Everybody should care because the DMCA is a very effective weapon to stop people from being able to express themselves freely. Just ask Dmitry Sklyarov or revisit the article describing how easy it was to illustrate how much power ISPs posess to stifle legal copying. Your position as stated takes an entirely too narrow view on things; that because one instance eventually did not result in killing a project, your view suggests that we can afford to dismiss the situtation. There is a larger more significant harm going on here that needs to be properly acknowledged and the public needs to be educated on what harm has occurred because of the DMCA.

If you don't like this, you shouldn't use iTunes at all and don't buy their music

I won't, thanks! Oh, and if you don't like Playfair, don't use it either! Software should not be illegal. People in America should not be GOING TO PRISON FOR SPEAKING PUBLICLY about algorithms.

Some things are just absolutely wrong - don't you get that? The music business is of very little importance compared to the sickening law which Apple is invoking to protect their business interests.

1. Other countries do not object. Why should be US an exception?
2. When you commit a crime in other country, you are subject to laws of that country. (In US you may be prosecuted for thing you did outside of US.
3. I read once, that the reason why US does not accept WCC is that US citizens are guaranteed by constution a jury trial - and WCC does not have a jury. Do you believe that it makes WCC somehow inferior when it does not have a jury? The jury had meaning at time, when the average of IQ of 12 jurrors was likely to be high enough. But it has no meaning in 21th century. Do you want to be judged by 12 people educated by CNN and FOX or do you want to have a experienced and well educated layers?

• Publicly burn any Apple hardware you own Mac/Ipod/etc. Try to do this en masse, and call your local news station.
• Write a letter to your congressman. Make sure you mention why the DMCA is a bad law, and why you cannot suport any company which uses it to attack legitimate reverse engineering.
• Do whatever you can to remove Apple software from your workplace. Now that Apple has publicly sided against freedom, OS/X must be considered dead as a development platform. Ditch it immediately!

My point was that you don't need the government to take control of the cable network to have something like that happen. Well, ok, you needed the government to pass the DMCA but now that it's there private companies can do whatever they want. Being sued by a company is also probably worse than dealing with the government as the company may be more intent on causing financial ruin. Yes, it seems many DMCA abuses eventually end, but the chilling effect is huge.

Oh, and as for CSS and protecting property, there's also the region coding, and I can't see that as protecting property. Plus it effectively tries to stop fair use and even all use of DVDs on certain operating systems.

I'm not donating anything else until I get my free Kevin.

Hang on-- if you're waiting for your free Kevin to pay money, it isn't really free, is it?

Besides, I'd easily trade two free Kevins for even one free Skylarov.

I feel sorry for the programmers that worked on Photoshop because i can tell that the decision to implement counterfeit prevention was a management one and if it was me i would be very pissed off that some idiot had demanded that i taint my software with a stupid mechanism that hasnt a chance in hell of working properly. What did they think they would achieve? would criminals suddenly give up because the latest version of photoshop wouldnt let them open money? im no expert but im almost certain that the system wouldnt prevent even one single counterfeiter. To me it says that Adobe management hold a very arrogent view on their products, (well actually ive thought that since Dimitry Sklyarov and this and i just hope that the negative impact it has on the programs performance and price is bloody minimal.

His name was Dmitry Sklyarov.

Why, if only the US government could have someone come to the US and give a talk on the limitations of some of Adobe's security mechanisms.