Slashdot Mirror

And exactly where did you get this information from? I do not remember anybody mentioned sales here, not does DOJ complaint on arrest mention it. I think you are full of it.

Duh. Where have you been? Search Skylarov on the slashdot front page and read the +5 insightful comments on any one of the many resulting slashdot stories. We've established this thoroughly. How can you still think that Skylarov broke the DMCA?

Umm, are you kidding? Reading +5 insightful comments is not the way to get the right information. Take a moment to read the complaint.

Dude... read up on the charges. They have nothing to do with the speech, and were committed while he was in Russia.

Uhhhh, Yeah. Tell it to Max Butler (aka Max Vision). He did the same thing for the bind worm, releasing a worm that fixed the hole. He's now doing 18 months with three years of probation, plus $60k in restitution.

Read here if you're still thinking of releasing this creature into the wild.

And what is this evidence precisely? Evidently you know something the rest of us don't.

The specific evidence is in the complaint, that he is an employee of Elcomsoft, and that he is listed on the products as the copyright holder.

Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime. A person who aids or advises another in committing a crime may be guilty of aiding and abetting, and may be criminally liable for the acts of the other person, as well.

Actually, now that I see that he is listed as the copyright holder, he might actually lose this case after all. On this point though I would defer to any legal experts, as I'm not very familiar with what constitutes conspiracy or aiding and abetting. I'm also not very familiar with exactly how much evidence it takes to get an arrest warrant. But I think as a non-lawyer I am knowledgable enough to say that there is some evidence that he was involved in a conspiracy (blah blah blah).

http://www.usaondca.com/press/html/2001_07_17_skly arov.html/P

-Renard

(Revving up Adobe PR machine...)

These are the key points that will be developed in the FAQ below:

• Adobe's goal is the receive assurance from Elcomsoft that they will not sell or distribute their illegal digital lock pick.
• To protect the intellectual property of eBook authors and publishers, Adobe asked the Department of Justice to help stop the sale of this security cracking code.
• Adobe welcomes the input of "White Hat" security experts that inform us of possible security weaknesses. Dmitri Sklyarov was not arrested for presenting a scholarly paper.
• The Department of Justice made the decision to arrest Sklyarov.

Adobe's goal in the Elcomsoft case is to help protect the copyrighted works of authors, artists, developers and publishers. Adobe reported this suspected eBook authors' copyright violation to the U.S. Attorney's office. Based on the information gathered in the investigation (see affidavit ), the U.S. Government chose to take legal action to stop the sale of the for-profit security cracking code, and unilaterally decided to arrest Dmitry Sklyarov.

Elcomsoft found a security weakness and made no effort to communicate what it found to Adobe. Instead, the company distributed a software product for profit that can be used to compromise copyrighted works in the United States, violating U.S. law. Adobe took every measure likely to be successful to get Elcomsoft to cease and desist. Adobe's legal department sent letters to Elcomsoft, their ISP and their credit card clearing house used to offer these products for sale. Adobe forwarded the case to the U.S. Attorney's office only after Elcomsoft failed to respond and/or cease and desist. Our goal has been to stop the sale of the program in the U.S.

Contrary to some reports, the issue is not that Adobe alerted the U.S. government about an expert exposing security weaknesses. In fact, Adobe encourages its customers and the software community, including White Hat security experts, to provide feedback on the performance of its software in order to make improvements. Adobe's concern is that a "digital lock pick" is being distributed to enable others to compromise the copyrighted works of authors, artists, developers and publishers, which is why Adobe alerted the U.S. Attorney's office.

Corporate

Q: How are your customers, the publishing community, responding to this?
A: The Electronic Frontier Foundation considers themselves a leading civil liberties organization that works to protect right in the digital world. We are in constant communication with our customers who are also concerned about issues of privacy and protection of digital property. There is strong support from the publishing community, as evidenced by the statement from the American Association of Publishers. While the laws to enforce the protection of digital media are in their infancy, we believe they are based on the same principles as traditional media--protect the copyrights of authors, artists, developers and publishers while balancing the right to fair use.

Q: What's going on with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)?
A: We are engaged in discussions with the EFF to work together to address this situation. We believe a mutual frank discussion of how best to resolve the current issues will benefit Adobe and EFF.

Q: As a result of this case, what is Adobe doing to strengthen the security of its products?

Not exactly, according to the Original Complaint, they arrested Dmitry because he is the copyright owner of the Elcomsoft's warez. So he probably has some financial interest in the distribution of the software.

I still think that it's completely ridicolous to arrest him though, as by this logic any random stockholder of Microsoft could be arrested for anything Microsoft does as they do own a bit of Microsoft. Come to think of it, maybe it's time to arrest Adobe's stockholders that visit Russia because they are selling eBooks which do not allow making the mandatory backup.

Encryption research is legal. However, publishing this research can be considered trafficing. Nice, huh?

(This is BTW the core issue in the Felten case)

From the complaint it sounds like the russian is charged under the DMCA because he wrote the Adobe eBook unprotector, sold by his russian employer.

Adobe contacted FBI, which performed the arrest.

The complaint can be found here and the US DOJ press release about the case is here

Adobe contacted FBI, which performed the arrest.

The complaint can be found here and the US DOJ press release about the case is here

I should have changed the subject title of the parent of this post. My bad, sorry!

Press release:
http://www.usaondca.com/press/html/2001_07_17_skly arov.html

Complaint
http://www.usaondca.com/press/assets/applets/2001_ 07_17_sklyarov.pdf

I should have changed the subject title of the parent of this post. My bad, sorry!

Press release:
http://www.usaondca.com/press/html/2001_07_17_skly arov.html

Complaint
http://www.usaondca.com/press/assets/applets/2001_ 07_17_sklyarov.pdf

From the US States Attorney's Office of Northern District of California, you can read both their press release and the complaint (including the signature of the FBI agent seeking the arrest warrant).

Press release:
http://www.usaondca.com/press/html/2001_07_17_skly arov.html

Complaint
http://www.usaondca.com/press/assets/applets/2001_ 07_17_sklyarov.pdf

From the US States Attorney's Office of Northern District of California, you can read both their press release and the complaint (including the signature of the FBI agent seeking the arrest warrant).

Press release:
http://www.usaondca.com/press/html/2001_07_17_skly arov.html

Complaint
http://www.usaondca.com/press/assets/applets/2001_ 07_17_sklyarov.pdf