Slashdot Mirror
Still in DMCA Prison
Let's go over the Sklyarov situation. Sklyarov is still in jail. In fact, he's still in Las Vegas, where he is being held without even a bail hearing, much less bail. The excuse given for not having a bail hearing when he was arrested on July 16 was that he was being immediately transferred to San Jose and would get a hearing there. Anyway, a recap of the protests: San Jose, more San Jose, New York, Seattle, Chicago writeup and Chicago pictures, Moscow writeup and Moscow photo and news coverage: New York Times, Business2.com. Wired has Washington's viewpoint - Representative Coble says "there have been very few complaints from intellectual property holders". Well, duh. Linuxplanet has an opinion piece exploring the Digital Millennium Rape Act. Finally EFF has written a letter to U.S. Attorney Mueller, asking for the U.S. to drop the charges against Sklyarov. It seems pretty doubtful that he will, since he won't want to be seen as soft on crime during his Senate confirmation hearings.
Adobe wants to have it both ways -- "we really don't want anybody to go to jail" ("we really don't want the bad publicity") as well as "screw 'em -- he made is look bad!" Adobe's got to reap what they sow.
Boycott Adobe -- this boycot ends when Dmitri is free
Indeed, the distribution "tax" emposed by the corporate feudal empire on CDs bears remarkable likeness to the "tea tax" emposed by the King on the americas.
Isn't this why we have a "right to bear arms"?
Isn't this e-book stuff, DeCSS, et al. just a digital weapon in the hands of american patriots (with the great bonus of being non-lethal).
Subject: AAP Website: Security problem ?
To: root@publishers.org,
lclark@publishers.org
CC: jane_isay@harcourtbrace.com
Hello,
I just noted
http://www.publishers.org/home/abouta/freedom.htm
According to this web page you (the AAP) have a "freedom to
read comitee" which is said to "promote understanding and appreciation
of the right of free expression."
Given your other recent publications, namely this
http://www.publishers.org/home/press/index.htm
Press Release you
- are a staunch opponent of free expression, applaud throwing a young
computer scientist into jail for reporting about and presenting parts
of his PhD thesis about a security topic (for free, that is)
- are actively engaged in numerous law suits against academics and
press trying to limit their freedom of experssion - thereby doing
your best to stifle free expression and
- even support a company (Adobe Systems) that invents and sells
technology specifically designed to prevent blind and reading
impaired people from reading books (Adobes EBooks contain a flag to
forbid the book in question to be read aloud; this flag ist solely
targeted at screen reading software employed by blind people)
I can not imagine that this page (and this alleged commitee
of yours) is genuine. Therefore you probably have been hacked, and
a clever hacker put up this page to smear your name and
to give you a bad reputation (similar to those of the dreaded
ACLU or the notorious ALA).
So you better check the security of your web site and
make improvements. Maybe you can get qualified advice about
this from the highly qualified security experts that work
for close friends from Adobe Systems.
Regards
insert my name
You can get the crime figures from the UK Home Office online. In the year in question, the method for measuring violent crime was switched, and the new method clearly shows a larger number than the old method. The graph jumps substantially. It doesn't prove a thing, except for how unreliable "proof by statistics" is.
That aside, my run-ins with the public suggest it is easier to explain to them that a russian who (questionably) committed a crime in another country and who came here only to give a speech about how it was done is in jail here seems easier for people to grasp than copyright issues. I suggest we focus on that instead.
~ Signal 11
We are the geeks. We are the administrators, the scientists, the engineers, the technicians.
We keep the modern world running. We have the power to make a statement.
Other workers have work slowdowns, sickouts, and slowdowns. Why don't we?
We have the power to bring down the internet, stop the email, interupt phone service, turn off power grids, and many other things. and we should do it.
On August 1st, shut down the US. Give Congress, the President, and the Corporations something to think about.
Posted anonymously to keep from being arrested in Amerika
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
Who is responsible? If you asked Adobe's CEO, he would say: "I'm just doing what the shareholders want me to do; I have to maximize the return on their investment. DMCA may be ugly, but it sure is good for the profit prospects of us IP companies. My owners tell me to maximize profit, that's what I'm being paid for, and that's what I do."
And he's right: the ultimate culpability lies with the owners. The buck stops with the shareholders, nowhere else. Ultimately, owners are responsible for what is perpetrated in their names and with their money.
Do you own Adobe stock? Have you checked the holdings of the funds in your retirement accounts lately? Maybe you yourself are responsible for this mess?
--
They are doing that already. Here in MN, oral sex between consenting (even married) adults is illegal, and the penalty is higher than that for prostitution. Still, the police does not have undercover operations in single bars with offers for oral sex. Plenty of undercover operations with offers for sex for sale though.
--
The whole point of the article was to show the absurd philosophy behind the DMCA, namely that potential guilt = actual guilt (otherwise known as "guilty until proven innocent," which last I checked was unconstitutional) for what it really is.
I do admit to taking issue with the article's promoting the horrid misconception that only men can commit rape, however; the subjects of the DMRA should have been anyone with a set of genitals, or a mouth or rectum (if you consider forced anal or oral sex to be forms of rape, which most do).
----------
I will not be buying any US products while the DMCA remains in force.
>>>>truth; beauty; unix.<<<<
On the positive side, it's just $9.95 (for 1000 characters), is delivered to your recipient's address rather than just showing up in that day's mail, and you can send it over the net. However, telegrams of today are not what they were in the fifties. Apparently, Western Union just prints your message out on telegram stationery and sends it next-day on Airborne Express. And if you're sending it to a congressperson, they may regularly get several telegrams a day anyhow.
I've never sent or received a telegram -- this is all gleaned from Western Union's site. But that's the thing, although just about everyone knows what a telegram is, they're quite rare in this country these days (even in Washington, D.C. when compared to a generation or two ago). They used to be common before affordable long-distance calling, but now they're a surprising curiosity. Most people in the US under the age of forty or fifty have probably never gotten a telegram in their life. So this looks like a possible way to register your opinion with some impact without ever having to leave your computer.
Anyone have experience sending or getting telegrams with WU's current system?
If you want to know how far the government is willing to go to "protect" us from these cyber-criminals, check out the Kevin Mitnick case. He was held in pre-trial detention for four years without a bail hearing.
I know it's l4m3 to talk about Kevin Mitnick and I'll get modded down for it, but even if you're with the "He stole millions of dollars by copying source code" camp you still have to agree that being held without a bail hearing for four years is a bit fishy.
Now it's starting to happen to a legitimate software developer. Who's next...
--
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
Best Educated? Dream on....
Personally, as someone who is opposed to gun control, I find this argument reprehensible and useless. I couldn't care less in this day and age about having guns to fight off a fascist government that doesn't exist in this country. I care about defending myself against criminals and THAT is the correct argument to make.
And given the circumstances, what has Adobe done beyond issuing a press release to secure Sklyarov's release? Have their lawyers contacted the DOJ? I doubt it and I doubt it would do any good if they did.
The next best opportunity may be protests at Robert Mueller's confirmation hearings. Hopefully someone at EFF will be asked to testify if the noise outside is loud enough...
NULL
and I do not know if it exists in United States law.
Along with the Creationist debate, this gun problem seems to be a typical American nonsense. And they are similar at least in a point, both base their claims in an ancient text written in a complete different context. Both groups will also invent all kinds of rationalizations and outright lies to mantain their faces (see the source of the statistic quoted out of context here, originating this debate: the figures are the result of a method change - url in a comment bellow).
I really have laugh when a gun nut say he/she has weapons to defend their homes from the evil government (and in Waco we all have seem how well guns will defend your home when the evil government wants in).
I am also amazed by poorly trained civilians thinking they can defend themselves from criminals for whom guns are everyday professional tools.
As for "if guns are banned only criminals will have guns", it makes a neat slogan but also a neat instance of double-talk. The whole point of the exercise is to make sure only criminals have guns! So, when the police spot a gun they don't need any other clue, they know they are in front of a criminal.
I have read the same figures elsewhere. It was in a BBC site sometime last month, I think.
But what is not clear to me is the relation between the gun-banning law and this number. You see, if you ban guns doesn't possessing a gun become a "gun related-crime"?
If so, and if gun-possession crimes are included in the mighty 40% increase (making all this wonderfully circular), we are just seeing a FUD campaign, cortesy of our ever present friends, the gun-nuts.
Last I checked, Adobe wanted Sklyarov freed. What good is punishing *them* going to do?
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Maybe that's why Adobe wants the charges dropped. It's likely they wanted the decrypting software removed from the market, but didn't want to see him arrested for it. At least that's how I see it.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Be that as it may, the statistic you question does appear to be in reference to guns being used in offenses:
While not beyond the realm of possibility that one might cook the statistics by including gun possession and misdefining possession as "use," were that the case I think we would be hearing about it from the pro-gun control side of the issue, loudly. It would, in fact, be an outright lie to use the word "used" in conjunction with mere passive possession, so while I don't comletely rule out your scenerio for pro-gun people cooking the stats, I do consider it to be very, very unlikely in this particular case.
I don't know exactly where I come down on this debate, except to say that the more I watch my own government in action in Washington, particularly with respect to the DMCA and Dmitry, the less inclined I am to trust their motives in taking away my right to own a firearm. On the other hand, living in downtown Chicago I don't have such a right anyway (handguns are illegal in the city, and other firearms strongly discouraged)[1], so any arguments pro- or con- are necessarilly rather theoretical from my standpoint.
[1]Of course, only the police and the criminals (by definition
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
China, as an aggressive and imperialist nuclear state, realizes this, and does not like missile defense since it will make thier aggression harder.
A missile shield will do nothing against a nuke in the back of a van, parked on a certain Pennsylvania Ave.
--
Delphis
Delphis
>We should strike, or perform some equivalant
>that cripples the software and internet
>infrastructure that runs this economy.
You first.
There are far too many hungry geeks out there that have gotten laid off ready to take whatever job they can find.
I imagine most companies would have no problem with this - fire the strikers that got hired during a job-seeker's market and hire qualified staff at half the price.
Most of the people *I* know are quietly and dilligently doing their jobs and praying the market turns around so we CAN have that power again.
-l
>Granted, I would have /. withdrawls, but still.
Yeah, but it'd come up just like *THAT* for me!
-l
Not that I'm that crazy about the Bush administration, but the DMCA passed with flying colors on President Clinton's watch. Neither party appears to be a great friend of civil liberties online.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Good points - I wish /. would follow through with them by canning the weekly movie reviews. They've never seemed particularly germane to the site's content in general, other than "geeks watch movies". Time to put your money where your mouth is.
Of course, Big Content might be happy to have all those pesky hackers ignoring it - it's a lot easier to sell Britney Spears when there's no one paying attention to point out how much crap it is. If your biggest critics decide to just remove themselves from mainstream society, haven't the MPAA, RIAA, etc. already won?
I think these issues are ripe for an almost Abolitionist approach - whenever an average citizen hears what these laws are about, they're almost unerringly convinced that they are bad laws and should be repealed. If we can get the word out to enough people, the DMCA is going to be a household name that is almost universally abhorred. Only then will things really begin to change.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
"1 if by land, 0 if by sea" :)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Maybe if we could get a young, pretty Federal intern to break the DMCA the press would pay attention...
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
One such Senator was Orrin Hatch, who's been quoted as saying that the law is definitely not working out the way he expected it to.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
That's true, but in reality how many cops really consider all the constitutional aspects of the law when they're enforcing it? They mostly want to not get shot by some lunatic/thug today. Police departments and the FBI aren't exactly favorable conditions for employees to question their duties and the ethics of the laws they enforce, you know - Agent Mulder wouldn't have lasted one season in the real FBI.
Not that this justifies the "just following orders" excuse at all, but I think you will find very few law enforcement personnel willing to thoroughly consider the constitutionality of their orders, especially in a case like this that is already a pretty ephemeral issue of fair use and encryption technology. The police probably know not to shoot peaceful protestors just because the Chief said to, but expecting them to decide for themselves the enforceability of the DMCA is a bit much.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Actually, any connection between Hitler and some idea invokes Godwin's law :)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
What a clever way to get away with terrorizing the community, without ever having to actually defend the Constitutionality of the law that makes it possible (DMCA) in court. Lose the case after doing the damage, without ever getting The Supremes involved.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
No. They aren't "some of the most highly..." etc. They are paid considerably less than management. Actually, the average pay of high-tech workers has constantly been overestimated, because the funny-money stock was being computed in as a part of their wages. When the stock collapsed, they had an extensive retroactive pay cut.
That's rather beside the point, however. Most of the money is from the corporate coffers, and isn't a part of anybody's salary. But management gets to spend it as it chooses "for the benefit of the company". But this is always interpreted to mean "for the benefit of the management", which is in some ways the benefit of the company, and in others is quite divergent. And it also depends on how you define the company. If the company is all of the people who work for it, then management is usually direlect in its duties.
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Why do you believe that Adobe wants the charges dropped? Just because they say so? What effective actions toward that end have they taken?
I'm sorry. I feel that the crocodile tears were just that, and no more to be believed. Have they offered to pay for the defense? Have they offered to meet whatever bond is demanded? They set him up, so unless they take effective action to redress their wrong, I won't believe their public speech is anything other than a PR ploy.
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Here you go.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Sorry, but "I was only following orders" didn't cut it at the Nazi war crimes trials and doesn't cut it now.
Exactly. IIRC all police dept. Oaths of Service include language to the effect that make it the job of the officers to not only enforce Constitutional laws, but it is their duty to refuse to enforce an illegal law, and their duty to refuse orders to the contrary. I don't know what oath FBI agents take, but it should be very much inline with the rest of law enforcement in this country.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
You're still free to say it under your own name. It's not /.'s fault you're a coward and won't waste your precious karma (Which, I hate to inform you, is not good for anything. You will not impress your friends, women, make you money, and if it gives you a warm feeling inside, you've got to much of a need for acceptance by your peers).
Plus the fact that you're free to post anonymously if you so chose says something to. I think maybe you're mistaking a lack of freedom for a lack of backbone and a screwed up sense of how karma can benefit you. (Hint: It Can't.)
For a good time call www.sawkie.com
Looks like the Bush administration is wanting to copy China's approach to things: first by making a weapons program that has no point in being in place (missile shield et al.), secondly by trampling on human-rights issues in favour of corporate America (Dmitry vs Adobe/USA) and do nothing to realistically reduce planetary pollution on the USA side (Kyoto). Maybe I am over generalizing, but this is the image that is getting given by the news coming out of the USA and just as the Dmitry case is bad for Adobe, it doesn't help Bush much either.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
These posts call for an invocation of Godwin's Law. Can we go back to talking about Sklyarov & the DMCA?
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
I don't blame the technology that collects my personal data (web bugs, cookes, databases). I blame the people who use this technology for dishonorable purposes. Cookies can be used to track my surfing habits without my knowledge, and they can retain my preferences and login information so I don't have to relogin to Slashdot every time I visit.
In the same way, copy protection circumvention devices can be used for making legitimate backups and shifting the data to other devices and operating systems, or they can be used for piracy. Don't blame the tool, blame the person who uses the tool.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
It's worse than that - they know they are writing and passing laws that stifle our freedoms and violate the Constitution, but they either don't care or actively oppose freedom for us little people.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
No I mean the law can be tried with other cases, no use making this kid a experiment, best to get him out as quickly as possible, even if it doesn't lead to an overturning of DMCA, such can be done in the civil courts. :)
Yes, but it can be tried in civil court aka DeCSS, without having to risk someone spending years in jail.
You're totally correct - the article makes a ridiculous comparison, and trivialises the abhorrent crime of rape.
For example, a FAR better analogy to have used would be selling tape recorders with a 'Record' button, say.
I've posted on this before - your idea while nice simply is not effective. If every single /. reader took your advice and never bought another CD, DVD, or movie ticket, you know what would happen? Nothing, they would never even notice the 1% "slump" in sales (if it were even that much). I myself have only been to two movies in the past year, have bought no CD's and only about two DVD's, yet the industry doesn't seem to be hurting for money.
Instead we need to focus resources where it will get noticed. I write my reps in the house and senate (on paper). I donate money to the EFF to help fight the legal battles that are the ONLY WAY we will ever see the DMCA go away (no matter how much sales dropped the music industry would still cling to the DMCA - it's just how they think). If you want to stop buying DVD's and send that money the the EFF then fine, just don't pretend that simply not purchasing a DVD is really doing anything to help.
Your idea also hurts artists and other people who are just caught in the middle. While the people who run these industries may be robber-baron evil, the workers are not. So, focus your efforts on areas where fighting is really effective!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
>It seems pretty doubtful that he will, since he won't want to be seen as soft on crime during his Senate confirmation hearings.
This is quite possibly one of the most cynical things I've heard in months. Give me a break, the guy is interested in upholding the LAW, as is Ashcroft. You haven't noticed the difference since El Reno left? Come on now...
Do you suppose impeachment for deriliction of duty would get their attention? This is what irks me most of all. Most of the members of congress are lawyers, for crying out loud. They obviously are not reading the stuff their voting on.
As long as we keep up the pressure on Adobe, the more they and other content provides will think before they try to exercise their DMCA "rights" again. Until Adobe actively supports the repeal of the DMCA, they are an enemy of the Constitution of the United States, and should be treated as such.
Source of your 40% figure, please?
Guns have never been as common in Britain as they are in the US. A criminal would have no expectation that their victim would be armed.
--
--
E_NOSIG
If you don't want someone arrested, why would you call the FBI and accuse them [Skylarov] of a felony?
--
--
E_NOSIG
I'm constantly amazed at how willing some people are to cut off their nose to spite their face.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
And also passed by a Republican controlled Congress. Isn't bi-partisanship a wonderful thing?
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
They have limited resources. Not only should they pick and choose which laws to enforce, they have no option but to do so.
This response makes me think that the author is a Timothy McVey in training. Heck what's a few children if they rest of you get my point. Heck what's a few billion if the rest of you get my point.
What the author has forgotten is that most americans have zero tolerance for civil disobedience. They have even less tolerance for acts of vandalism and terrorism. And fundimentally, if the author isn't willing to shoot someone to make a point then he's just ranting anyway.
The Patriots who threw tea overboard in Boston Harbor were willing to risk everything they had to make a point about taxation from the crown. Are Slashdotees willing to make the same commitment? I think not.
It wouldn't matter anyway because in truth unless you have the makings of a committed and well funded five or seven million man army you couldn't force change on the U.S. even if you want to.
If you really want to change DCMA then you need to be involved politically and you need to take a page from activists belonging to breast cancer research, AIDS research, and homosexuals. Fundimentally this is the way to affect change in the United States. Anything else can be viewed as acts of sedition and would be dispised by the rest of your countrymen.
Beware the wood elf!!!
It will not free Sklyarov now, but it will make people think twice about pulling something like this in the future. ADOBE still remains on my "do not purchase list", perhaps forever.
Also, organize concerted efforts to let your local radio and television stations know about this. Have several friends call their "news tips" desk. Point out how the U.S. is volating Sklyarov's rights and creating an international incident all because the record & movie companies want to make you pay every time you listen to, or view, one of their products. The Supreme Court has said if you own it you can use it any way you want.
Hmmm. That article makes no such statement.
Are you sure you saw it there? If so, it's since been edited.
mefus
--
um, er... eh -- *click*
mefus
In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
totally disturbed by someone quoting thomas jefferson and picard in the same post? i realize it was his sig but, c'mon... gag...
...dave
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
Right. Adler is clearly a fuckwit. It's worth pointing out that to obtain personal information about me by breaking encryption, you'd also have to hack into computers, thereby breaking many laws already on the books, which just makes the DMCA look irrelevant, as well being an unconsititutional, consumer-screwing, freedom-killing POS.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
It does prevent you from using encryption-cracking technology to access a copyrighted database floating around on a CD somewhere, but I can't imagine why that would ever be the case. I challenge you to come up with any circumstance where the DMCA would stop you from doing anything harmful that would be legal without the DMCA.
Anyone who even pretends to value freedom is under the burden of demonstrating, for any given law, that it can actually prevent or punish something that causes palpable harm to others, that it does not unduly limit the freedom of those not causing such harm through such actions, and that the law does not restrict an overly broad class of activity. The DMCA fails miserably on every count.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Maybe they're trying the same as with the swiss boy a year or so ago (the 10 year old who was charged with sexually abusing his sister)? They fucked up, but they don't want to admit it, so instead they intentionally fuck up again on a technicality and then 'have to' let him go...
bla
Several of the links provided earlier were from newspapers. Here's the local paper's take on the matter (of course, since "local"=="Las Vegas", it follows that there'd be an article here):
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Jul-18-Wed-2001 /news/16563325.html
Can't say, as most TV news is slanted so far to the left I don't waste my time with it. Local TV news might've covered it, but I couldn't say one way or the other. (Actually, someone else posted a link to KTNV's website in one of the other Sklyarov threads here on /., so I guess the local TV news media have covered the matter.) The only TV news program I follow with any regularity is Fox News Sunday, and their website indicates they didn't cover this issue.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Sorry, but "I was only following orders" didn't cut it at the Nazi war crimes trials and doesn't cut it now.
Separation of powers has a purpose; legislatures can (in theory) prevent bad laws from passive, executives can (in theory) prevent bad laws from being enforced, and judiciaries can (in theory) prevent anyone from being convicted under bad laws.
None of them gets to use the "look what you made me do" excuse.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
In AAP's case, they're for free speech, but against free beer. It's only ironic if you confuse the two meanings of 'free'. Or if you find it necessary to put everyone into only two groups: agree with us, or disagree with us.
--
Join DMCA-minnesota: DMCA-minnesota-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Heck, if you're closer to Mpls. than Chicago, join. If you live in Duluth, Mankato, Moorhead or Albert Lea, join. You don't have to drive all the way to the cities to change the minds of people around you. The protest groups are sources for information and materials. Signs, fliers, postcards, letters... Hold a one-person sympathy protest in Emily, MN. Put fliers on all the cabin doors in Lutsen. Change people's minds.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
The FBI and the DOJ are going to be unwitting accomplices in the death of the DMCA. Civil Rights meets Human Rights meets censorship meets international law = fucking firestorm.
Many have simultaneously expressed great regret that Dmitry has to sit in prison, and fear that the anti-DMCA sentiments will whither once he is released. This ambivalence is not dangerous unless it is self-fulfilling. Releasing Dmitry does not prevent another corp from having their rent-a-cops (FBI) from arresting another programmer.
Tell people Dmitry's story, celebrate his eventual release, and use it as a reminder when you start to think you don't have to get the DMCA repealed. Until it is repealed, there is still work to do.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
I had a few people like you walk past me on Monday. "No, I don't want to read about why you're protesting." What, is your brain too full? Simply don't have the time to learn about injustice and erosion of the US constitution?
I admit, putting fliers on cabin doors might be less effective than knocking on them and talking to the occupants; but face it: if it is the wrong time to tell you about how the DOJ is arresting innocent foriegn nationals while you walk to and from lunch, or while you are at your cabin, or while you are at a bar... When is the right time? When you sit in front of the TV and have it fed to you?
I don't know what to do about people like you, but I'm determined to find out. In the mean time, I'll talk to the people whose brains aren't full yet.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
Declan's article reads a little like propaganda, but I have no issues with being manipulated by it's message: our elected representatives have issued a challenge to the American people. They want to hear that we're upset about losing our rights to free speech and fair use. Like petulant Gods, they are toying with our lives to see if we will offer sacrifices, request forgiveness, or openly defy them in our evolution as a democracy. Only defiance will get the DMCA to go away. Any other course of action will doom us to greater injustice as they extend the boundaries of their unconstitutional behavior.
Americans do not think about copyright, Americans would rather not think about people in prison. Americans have a tendency to think circularly: people arrested must be criminals. All laws passed by congress are legitimate. We have an uphill battle convincing them that Dmitry has done nothing wrong, and that the DMCA is unconstitutional.
Don't accept "the Supreme Court will handle it." Who says they will? Why wait for the justice system? Once a sufficient number of Americans are informed about the existence of the DMCA and the erosion of their rights, we can make congress uphold their oaths and protect the constitiution like they should have done in the beginning.
The system is being challenged in court. Fine. But that is not justification for twiddling our thumbs in the mean time. Action now makes it easier for the judges to strike down the DMCA. Action now makes it easier for shy, right-thinking congress people to speak out about what a travesty the DMCA is.
Tell 3 people today about the DMCA. Join a protest next week, and tell 1,000. Make people think, encourage people to reason.
Free Dmitry.
Repeal the DMCA.
Why wait?
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
>
> - Thomas Jefferson
> And ill probably be arrested for quoting him.
Naah, you only get arrested if you quote him like this:
"Gur Gerr bs Yvoregl zhfg, sebz gvzr gb gvzr, or jngrerq jvgu gur oybbq bs cngevbgf."
- Gubznf Wrssrefba
Which reminds me, it's time to update my .sig file.
"Now that crypto is outlawed, only outlaws quote Wrssrefba."
The upcoming senate hearings for confirmation of the new FBI director and regarding the apparent malfeasance of the FBI ( and incompetence ) should provide an opportunity for us to lobby our congresscritters to seek information on why Dimitri is being held without bail etc. This is a real-time example of the FBI not following constitutional guidelines in its daily operations.
Z
enough is too much
Habeus Corpus is a writ/paper issued by a court to bring a prisoner before a judge to determine if the detention is allowed/permitted. The writ of Habeus Corpus is guaranteed by the Constitution of the U.S.
Yeah. Tell that to the Cuban refugees still detained in Atlanta for the last 20-some years who can't get a writ of habeus corpus because the U.S. pretends they havn't actually entered the U.S. And get this... they can't even get a deportation hearing.
Um, last time I checked, the New York Times (linked to from the main article) and Boston globe (one of these links you're criticizing) are real newspapers- They just also happen to have a copy of the content online.
Representative Coble says "there have been very few complaints from intellectual property holders".
This is the sickest thing I have heard in a long time. Does this man care nothing for the public interest? We need to use him as the poster boy of a big media lapdog in Congress.
Mr. Coble: I am an intellectual property holder. I write copyrighted software. I detest the DMCA almost as much as I detest corrupt politician like you who sell government backed censorship to the big media special interests without even realizing or caring about the public interest. The fact that you equate "intellectual property holders" as someone different than the legions of citizens who are shocked by the draconian law is a testimony to what is wrong with copyright law. Copyright has become a joke because fools like you in power can only think about the interests of the large monied publishing companies that fund your reelection campaigns. The only good thing that will come out of the DMCA is some humor value at watching you learn how futile your pathetic law is.
And kevlar doesn't protect cops against being shot in the face, or your front door deadbolt from acetylene torches. Your non-existent point?
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
But this time its the FBI pointing the guns and taking him away...so its legal. So how much of his vaunted spirtuality (the the article linked in the parent) bothering him now that he's holding a non-US citizen for committing a crime in a country where his company is the illegal one?
http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
Geektavist's don't need the cash, since they (we) control the flow of cash they (we) can deprive the use of it. Think about it, Adobe won't be doing any business if all of the sudden all of their bank accounts show a negative balance or if the electric company doesn't recieve a payment. Geektavist's can even go further and shut down the systems they depend on to make all that cash. Something as simple as shutting down the phone lines or black holing their company would do the trick.
They'd (we'd) rather the politicians see the light on their own but if a few interuptions are needed then so be it. Of course there are the morality issues, but after a while of injustice people will find the moral reasons.
Boston write-up and pictures, Wired article on the protests, On-line petition, IDG story, CNN copy of the original Reuters story (better late than never!), ironic page on the AAP website (the AAP issued a press release defending Adobe and the DMCA).
[
Dear Senator _____, Recently, Dmitry Sklyarov was arrested and jailed in Las Vegas for distributing a software program. This software is allegedly illegal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Although I strongly oppose the DMCA, I had neglected to write any letters to my elected officials until now. I had falsely believed that violations of the DMCA would be settled in civil court. Only now do I realize what a truly chilling effect the DMCA has on our freedoms. I am very saddened that a foreign visitor with a wife and child can be thrown into jail for what is essentially a thought crime.
Mr. Sklyarov was doing a presentation at a convention on software he had written for his employer in Russia. This software would decrypt e-books created with software by Adobe Systems Inc. Fair uses of these e-books were limited by Adobe's software. The Adobe software limits abilities to print, share, and quote these books. Mr. Sklyarov's decryption software is not illegal in Russia. The software can only be used by someone that lawfully purchases an e-book. If I purchased an Adobe e-book, I could use Mr. Sklyarov's software to transfer this e-book to a handheld computer so I could read it on the road. I could use the software to input the text into a screen-reader for a deaf family member. I could use the software to quote passages for an academic paper. Although some may disagree with me, I believe that these fair uses are within my legal rights.
Copyright infringement is wrong. Mr. Sklyarov is not charged with copyright infringement. He is charged with distribution of software that, in addition to allowing fair use by legitimate consumers, might be used by others to infringe on copyrights. It is ridiculous that this alleged "crime" could result in a five-year prison sentence.
Currently, the office in charge of prosecuting Mr. Sklyarov (the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California) is headed by Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. Mueller is President Bush's nominee for director of the FBI. Mr. Mueller has shown a special interest in computer-related cases. Please consider how Mr. Mueller handles the case of Dmitry Sklyarov when voting on the nomination. If you have a chance to ask questions during the nomination hearings, please bring up the Sklyarov case.
I do not know how Mr. Sklyarov's case will turn out. Adobe has already dropped support of Mr. Sklyarov's prosecution. Hopefully he will be released and allowed to return to his family in Russia. I find it ironic that someone from Russia can come to America and be arrested for a thought crime. I consider the DCMA an affront to the freedom of all Americans and hope that you and your colleagues will have the wisdom to repeal it.
Sincerely,
Matt Shook
I have been writing, faxing, and phoning my representatives in the senate and house regularly. Such as this one on its way to the mailbox...
Dear Senator Corzine:
I am writing to you to urge you to vote against the confirmation of Robert S. Muller, III for director of the FBI.
As of today, Wednesday, July 25, 2001, Mr. Muller continues to hold Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov prisoner in a Las Vegas jail after his arrest on July 16 on charges of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Since then, the complaint against Dmitry by Adobe Systems, Inc. has been withdrawn. However, Dmitry is still being held as a political prisoner in the United States, away from his home and family, without even been given his right to bail.
The arrest of Dmitry is questionable itself. He has been charged with writing a program that violated the DMCA while in Russia. He had committed no illegal actions in the United States. As Americans, we would be appalled if an American was being held unjustly in a Russian jail. Why are we allowing the same thing to happen to a Russian on our soil?
With all the recent press coverage of the problems inside the FBI, do we really want to have someone that is willing to unjustly hold a foreign national as its leader? Please reject Robert S. Muller, III's confirmation for director of the FBI.
But we can do something. We can start our own Anti-FUD campaign and target everything.
Start writing letters to the editor with subjects such as:
US Government holds foreign visitor hostage.
Internet filters prevent learning about breast cancer.
Your children can't succeed in school.
New CDs won't play on your older CD player.
Etc, etc. You can bend the truth, sensationalize, whatever it takes to get the point accross. But stay professional, or you'll look like those "scary hackers".
I challenge all readers of Slashdot to take an hour a month to write to their governmental representatives and local newspapers.
Yes.... but where is a collecion of these links?
The anti-DMCA people are unwilling to get arrested in mass, unable to get funds to send people to the hill. About all they have is (some) time and the ability to collect info and sort it.
Play to the strenghts....pages of info with links that can be used in letters to send to he congress-critters. Play to the lazy factors, generate some boilerplate text (in a PDF???) so all they have to do is print the letter, sign it and send it.
Alas, the anti-DMCA people are too lazy to do it, and, well, I don't care enough to do it mmyself. (I've got other issues I'm doing the same kind of thing for.....the DMCA is a fight, but I've cosen others to fight)
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
I went looking for a collection of 'congresscritters quotes' on the DMCA. Why? As I remember on The Reg, one of the 'big' supporters who spoke on record about how wonderful this protection would be for the digital age, has later said that he's changed his mind.
:-(
Such statements of "Whoops" are powerful, yet the anti-DMCAers have not taken the time to collect them
Or, am I not looking in the correct places?
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
"Another led to guilty pleas from individuals who were selling copyrighted software over the Internet via a Web site called "software-inc.com," and led to what is believed to be the first-ever criminal forfeiture of a Web site in an intellectual-property case."
The above clip could be applied as written to every company that sells software on the 'net. All hail the unbiased press.
-------------------------
-------------------------
As easy as herding cats!
Boston Globe:
Adobe shifts, urges hacker's release
CBS News:
Hacker Held Under New Law
ABC News:
Russian programmer arrested at hacker convention for alleged violation of copyright law
MSNBC:
Adobe seeks release of Russian programmer arrested at Def Con
New York Times:
U.S. Arrests Russian Cryptographer as Copyright Violator
Arrest Raises Stakes in Battle Over Copyright
Protesters Target FBI Nominee Over Russian Arrest
Adobe Opposes Prosecution in Hacking Case
Those all seem pretty mainstream to me.
--
Free Mac Mini
Sir, are you implying that if the opportunity arose, that I would not be willing to give my life in the defense of principles I hold dear? For shame Sir, For shame. Perhaps you are the one who would shirk your responsibility to eternal vigilance, and by implying that I am a coward, you validate your own cowardace.
Hey, the russians are already doing capitalism better than we are, who put the first paying customer in space? Maybe now they can do freedom better too ;-)
-Thomas Jefferson
And ill probably be arrested for quoting him.
Yeah. And just scanning the headlines, I'm already wondering whose side the media's on. Four of those five outlets are referring to Skylarov as a "hacker". And what has the media spent the last twenty years doing to that word? Looked at in that light, it doesn't look very much like they're trying to induce sympathy, does it?
-RickHunter
Idea: If Slashdot is partially about "stuff the matters" how about letting the Slashdot readers voice a public, collective opinion?
When stories like this one come around, where having an opinion bloc to point to can sway others, why not let the collective voice of Slashdot readers be in public view? Say a poll attached to the article, and keep the results out there in front for folks to use as fodder as necessary. We'll all know a bit better where the crowd sits on the issue too. And folks could easily opt-out of the system if they choose.
Bad idea?
Evan - needs to hit preview before submitting
First, from the U.S. Constitution, Article I Section 9:
"The Privilege of the writ of habeas ccorpus shall not be suspended, unless, when in cases of reballion or invasion, the public safety may require it."[Emphasis added]
Notice that it says nothing about applying only to citizens.
A writ of habeas corpus is a court order demanding that the person of the imprisoned be brought before the court, and that the authority who holds him justify itself, usually by filing charges. Habeas corpus is latin for "give us the body!" The privilege of the writ has only been suspended once in US history, by Abraham Lincoln during the civil war. It doesn't say in the constitution who may suspend it, but legal scholars up until that point had always assumed that it was up to congress, for two reasons:
1) Under British common law, from which much of US law is taken, only parliament may suspend the privilege of the writ
2) The above quote is in Article I, which details the congress.
Hope this helps ease the confusion.
\
I don't think so. Not in my case.
Yes, but let's say you publish a paper on how to break a popular encryption algorithm used by the russian government.. THEN let's say you travel to russia to deliver a speach on how to break the encryption algorithm. Would you not expect consequences?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here.. While I agree that the law is stupid and it's a shame someone has to be a martyr for it, he had to have had SOME idea of what he was getting in to when he came to the US to deliver a speech on how to circumvent copyright protection.
*I'd* certainly expect to be arrested/harrassed/martyred if I went around giving lectures on how to make crystal meth in your bathtub, whether I agree that it's right to teach drug making or not.
Shayne
Today I didn't even have to use my AK; I got to say it was a good day -- Icecube
Doesn't Habeas Corpus just mean that they have to tell him what he's accused of? He's accused of violating the DMCA. I don't see where Habeas Corpus would enter into it then.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
I would love to see Mueller drop the charges as much as anyone else here, but there is a problem with that.
In order for the DMCA to be revoked someone has to be brought up on it and appeal to the supreme court. In order for our due process to figure out that a law is unjust, a person must be charged (and most likely held) under that unjust law.
The problem with this is that it is not Dmitry's battle to fight. He is Russian. It is the responsibility of Americans to fight for the freedom of Americans, not Russians or anyone else.
TechTV had a whole show devoted to it a night or two ago on Dvorak's show. I'd say this issue is beginning to see the light of day at least a little.
G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
To Paraphrase "K" from Men in Black: People, individually are smart. People, as a group are dumb and panicky. Call the DCMA "communist". Shout it from the highest building. Get a few respectable people who understand how bad the DCMA is, someone who the huddled masses can relate to, and they'll believe it. Former Prez Jimmy Carter for example. It's isn't a communist law (just the opposite - good for business, screws the people), but every red-necked red blooded American who hears the word "DCMA = Commie" will be against it.
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
I don't think so. Not in my case.
I do think that I would go to a high degree of pain for the cause, but in this case there may be better avenues. Eating this much crap to just hopefully get a little press is a little much. I personally would bow out and focus my time and energy on a more controlled campaign.
That being said, just to add my little opinion to the thread, I think what the authorities are doing here is just plain horrible. They're ignoring the constitution on one hand, while referencing and hiding behind it on the other.
More race stuff in one place,
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
I'm sure that our congressional representatives get dozens of snail mail and email messages a day, and they have numerous interns hired to answer the letters with canned responses.
To really get your point across, try replacing their home page with a doctored version with the caption "We're tired of taking it up the ass by the DMCA" or something similar.
I'm pretty sure that they would take notice of the situation.
Microsoft was the true source of the Red Worm virus in an attempt to remind the Whitehouse who REALLY is the world super power.
Luckily their planned attack went through the same beta testing and forethought as the rest of their software.
But why are we playing by their rules? If we really want to be heard, we should use our abilities to make ourselves heard. America needs the developers, techies, and computer savvy people who oppose the DMCA to function as a country, to remain economically viable, and to remain internationally competetive.
Personally, I think we should show the nation just how much power they've inadvertantly given us. We should strike, or perform some equivalant that cripples the software and internet infrastructure that runs this economy. We should make a statement that shows that unless America listens to the very people who have created this Digital World, we're not going to give it to them anymore.
Sure, we'll get initially labeled as "evil hackers" and social miscreants, but we're educated enough to know that that's the price of freedom. And we're also the only people who can bail the country out of a technical catastrophe. The fact is that America needs us much more than America needs bogus laws that protect the wealthiest of companies. And we're everywhere, in every industry, and influencing every aspect of life.
Like the Patriots who threw tea overboard in Boston Harbor to protest unjust laws, we shall show that without the foundation technology upon which the Nation depends, no law prohibiting it's advancement and the open table research thereof shall survive or be tolerated.
Don't tell us, tell your Senator, then tell the attorney general.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Are you sure that writing and making examples of this particular incident would be productive? I personally thing that fighting this on a case by case basis is not the best use of my time or yours. I think that you are absolutely correct in the first 1/2 that showing that insecurities such as these are harmful to all who would use such services but to go into examples would, in my opinion limit the the effect of the letter to only this particular case where the whole DMCA is to blame. I initially also thought to write the oversight committee for whoever was responsible in the choice of the new FBI director but realized that since this is the law, trying to persuade that committee that this was a bad idea to chose Muller wasn't right as he has just followed the letter of the law. Therefor I again suggest to all of you to write your own senators and representatives as this is a legal issue (besides the no bail hearing thing)
Yep and none of that fancy email stuff either....
Type or handwrite(if you still remember how) to your "friends" on the Hill and express your outrage. Tell them what you think as a voter and as one of the most in demand workers on the planet (its true) on how these laws are not helpful to the US.
A couple of words of caution for those of you in the thros of rage.
Do not swear
Do not threaten to kill them if they do not comply
Do not include c4 or other explosives "to get your point across"
The EFF has moved to targeting the US Attorney on the case. Further action against Adobe, while perhaps deserved, would be fruitless.
We need to move on to the next step in getting Dmitry released, and in continuing to fight the DMCA. If we do this right, we might be able to get the entire law overturned.
(email addr is at acm, not mca)
We are Number One. All others are Number Two, or lower.
(email addr is at acm, not mca)
We are Number One. All others are Number Two, or lower.
--The Sphinx
Cryptnotic
My other first post is car post.
Which is exactly why there are trade unions for more established industries.
It's interesting that geeks and IT professionals seem to have so far only scoffed at the idea of becoming an organized work force. "We're indispensable, we don't have to become unionised".
Yet, the more idiotic IT bills get passed the more important "organization and good PR" seems to become.
When Howard Coble says:
"The law is performing the way we hoped... As far as I know there have been very few complaints from intellectual property holders."
what he means is
"My customers are very happy with their purchase."
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
Don't confuse a 'Geektivist' with a Geek or an IP Pirate.. These are all different critters, and you as a slashdot reader should know better.
air and light and time and space
..Yep.. In a round-a-bout way thats what I meant. Corporate law is made purely by profit motive.. And what your talking about (in terms of inconvenience) is a form of profit motive. If I paid $200 bucks for a fancy new digital music player, and then find out that it won't play anything but Celine Dion music, I'd be pissed.. Lost money is a negative profit motive, but it's still a profit motive.
The problem here is that there is no profit motive in being right. The funny thing is, the way you get profit motive on this side of the argument is to crack protection, pirate mass quantities of 'intellectual property' and sell it for a profit. Since this is *not* whats happening, there is no cash-payback for fighting the DMCA. The distribution industries have *mucho* profit motive to do what they do, and all you get for all your effort is the same rights you had ten years ago.
air and light and time and space
But in the world of Washington politics, geektivists are woefully outnumbered by the natives who populate and influence confirmation hearings: Corporate, nonprofit and trade association lobbyists.
'Geektivist's' simply don't have the cash to compete with corporate lobbyist. There is no money in being morally right. Money buys laws.
air and light and time and space
Let's go over the Sklyarov situation.
Haven't we been doing this the past two weeks? Its getting as bad as the napster articles. Can we move on please? Its a tragedy, but I'm finished reading about it over and over.
--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Yes, I'm making the bizarre counterintuitive suggestion that movements in the British crime statistics since 1997 are not relevant to the question of whether it should be illegal to reverse engineer Adobe's ebook document format.
I may be wrong, but you're going to have to spell this out for me.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
- Analogises the crime of copyright infringement with the crime of rape.
- Analogises the prosecution of people for copyright infringement with the wholesale massacre of Jews.
- Wastes half of its length on a boring anti-gun-control rant utterly unrelated to the topic, and
- Destroys the entire case for freedom of information by claiming that hackers should be seen as analogous to mobs killing each other in Chicago (I am not making this up -- the fool's argument is that if hackers want to break the law they will do no matter what the law, therefore they should be allowed the tools to do so)
Quotes like "It's impossible to favor gun regulations and oppose computer regulations and remain philosophically consistent. " are calculated to get half the reasonable people in this country thinking that the DMCA must be a good thing after all, and the linked article's author is a prick of the worst kind for trying to hijack a genuine issue of liberty for his own half-assed political program. Even Eric Raymond has always had the common sense not to stoop this low.I always wondered whether there was a site out there with worse journalistic standards than Slashdot. Michael's found it, and he's linked to it. Congratulations.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
True, I am just going off of what I've read here, and have not been privy what went on between Adobe and the EFF or FBI. But, since Adobe was in this from the beginning (were the ones who filed the complaint with the Justice Dept in the first place) I find it very hard to believe that they didn't know that this would result in an arrest and prosicution. To turn around now and say "wow, he shouldn't be in jail" smacks of damage control. Maybe they're sincere, but I have my doubts.
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
- Ed the Sock
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
- Ed the Sock
Yes, do you think they don't do this now? Otherwise, they'd be too busy ticketing speeders and not going to stop some murderer or something. Ever hear of the whole "checks and balances" thing? This is part of it. The executive branch (who the police are a part of) do not have to enforce any laws, however, that doesn't relieve them of any responsibility, which is where the judicial branch comes into play.
Even in the judicial branch, you have the right to a trial by a jury. And the jury can acquit based not only based on guilt vs. innocence but also on whether they feel the law is "fair" or not (of course, judges seem to trump this a lot which I think is wrong). You also see judges who acquit based on whether they think the law is right or wrong (with of course the option to appeal, etc)
Perhaps someone should file a Habeus Corpus petiton?
somebody gives you a reality check and you guys think it's irrelevant because it doesn't fit with the geek intellectual picture you would rather imagine is the true world while you're downloading another mp3...too bad for the world that the best hope of overturning the dmca rests with /. users who think if it can't be done from a keyboard, it's too much trouble... :-P
It's not funny till someone gets hurt.
And, of course, we are the folks who made the law. Big media interests were able to get the DMCA enacted because voters didn't care about it one way or another. There is not a single congressman or senator now in office who thinks his or her reelection hinges on opposing the DMCA or similar legislation. Our representatives can do Big Media's bidding (and collect healthy campaign contributions and other support) without jeopardizing their positions. What do you expect them to do?
For the moment, at least, we still live in something close to a representative republic. Sufficiently irate citizens routinely change government policies and influence important votes. Our only challenge is how to make our case compelling enough to get a groundswell of popular opinion behind it -- people who are mad enough to vote incumbents out of office over this issue. Then we'll see changes.
Intellectual property law is an esoteric enough issue that I don't even know whether this is possible or not. But I do know that we're spending most of our time preaching to the choir. Try explaining the situation to your non-techie friends and family. Write to your representatives, and to the local paper. Above all, vote, and let all the candidates know why you're voting for your choice.
It may be too late to preserve our freedoms; I don't know. But we have to act as if it's not, or it definitely will be too late, very soon.
--
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
If madonna was caught, though, then it would make the major press. hmmmmmmmmmmm....
-----
I want the technology that protects my personal data to be open. Legal security means nothing to people who are already trying to break the law. This is a whitewash to fool the drones. These people know what geeks really think.
You've provided a lot of links - tell me, are the dead tree news outlets saying the same? What about Television - where has the DMCA and the Sklyarov arrest been mentioned? CNN? NBC Nightly News? Or has it been mentioned anywhere other than the internet? Techies and Geeks and people like me get their news online, most of the rest of the world uses newspapers, news magazines, television and radio.
Don't just complain - DO something about it!
One problem: There are enough geeks out there that care about their pay-cheques more than 48 hours of political activism that this wouldn't be superbly effective. Sad, but true.
"Free beer tends to lead to free speech"
Note in particular their agreement that Skylarov should be freed - but Adobe's insistence that DMCA is okay, along with EFF's mushy "while we don't agree on everything" comment. While this is good for Skylarov, EFF needs to be careful not to concede too much to the supporters of the DMCA here - if the objective is to get it overturned or reformed, they should make that emphatically clear!
sulli
RTFJ.
maybe it's a good thing (long term) that he's not being released. at least then some people might see just what a ridiculous thing this act is... and some courts might have a chance to blow the DMCA out of the water.
For those of you who are webmastering (and who isn't, at least on the side), think about placing EFF's blue ribbon on the front page of your site. Besides being really cool, it helps get out the message that the DMCA is curtailing OUR freedom of speech and keeping an innocent man in jail.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
I use Adobe's PDF format and its Acrobat software to publish texts. If I can't get independent review of the software from noted scholars, then I'm going to be trusting my "very valuable" intellectual property to potentially bad software. That sounds bad for writers and artists everywhere. I also hate the copy protection mechanisms because they gum up the works in my office.
"There has been a lot of discussion about circumvention and free speech," Adler said. "But I wonder if those same advocates would be as protective of a piece of technology that helps people obtain their personal information online."
Reading a book sold in a publicly-accessible bookstore is the same as getting someone's personal information??
The DMCA allowed the Internet to grow and by and large the act has worked.
Please, spare me...
To make an example of them.
You know it's perfectly legal for you to purchase an Adobe product at your local store, take it home and open it (without breaking the seal on the software) and then take it back because the license agreement renders it useless for your purposes.
Do this 10 times every day and Adobe might start to get the picture.
The FBI's job is to enforce the law. Not to enforce only good law that makes sense.
I say, enforce the bad law, expose it for what it is, and get it ruled as unconstitutional. Or, get congress to change the law, in light of the bad ways it is required to be enforced.
It's just sad that some poor sod has to sit in jail while this process goes on.
Just keep in mind, the folks who made the law are to blame, not the folks mandated to enforce it.
Above comment is personal opinion. Poster is not a spokesperson.
If the government is making procedural mistakes now, won't those mistakes be possible grounds for getting the trial thrown out later?
I'm also disturbed at how many media outlets characterize Skylarov as a 'hacker' which e isn't. He's a programmer employed by a company, who was assigned the task of developing algorythems for use with a commercial product. The issue seems to be that the tech community still hasn't managed to finde the best bridges to the non-tech community.
It seems to me that the non-tech person's definition of the word "hacker" ( a person who illegally gains access to and sometimes tampers with information in a computer system ) versus the techie definition ( an expert at programming and solving problems with a computer ) has been and is going to be an obstacle in getting the general population to recognize the importance of these issues (DMCA, etc). -note: these are lame webster definitions I admit, but were convenient
When someone is labelled a hacker, to the non-tech person this means the script kiddie who stole his/her credit card number from CD Universe the one and only time they dared to shop online.
I think one potential solution to the dual meaning would be to do with the term "hacker" what the black community has done with the word n*gga. I hereby decree that from now on, it is okay for another computer geek to call me a hacker, but anyone from the non-tech world tries it and they shall be castigated mercilessly.
That way we keep the good meaning (technically proficient), while killing off the bad (script kiddie, cracker, black hat, whatever). Where are the Political Correctness (tm) Police when you need them?
One Bourbon
One Scotch
and One Beer
Actually, by arresting a russian programmer based on an America only law I think a small portion of this kind of technical deficiency has already been set in motion. Look no further than Alan Cox decision to stop attending American based conferences. How many other foreign programmers has the DMCA now isolated American programmers from co-operating with and benefitting from the knowledge of? Too bad the effects of this kind of crippling won't become acutely noticed for a few years down the road as programmers in other countries are able to develop their skills unhindered.
"Isn't this why we have a "right to bear arms"?" actually the right to bear arms was present to enforce the settler's military rights to the new world if I recall junior high history correctly. The main reason north american citizens were passed the right to bear arms was to allow them to defend their then still contested claim to the land, from Britain, Native Americans and other colonies.
Back to Sklyarov: The DMCA obviously violates the first ammendment, but there may be arguments that it violates the second, fourth ("the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers") and eighth ("excessive fines") too.
Regardless of the DMCA, Sklyarov's imprisonment definitely violates the sixth ("an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed", ie. Russia) and the eleventh ("the Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to...Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.")
Not really surprising, though. Quoth the copyright notice:
Hmm.. Time-Warner.. now why does that name sound so familiar?(Do not sign anything.) -- Fell, Planescape: Torment
Who is John Galt?
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan
HAHAHA! That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of! I guess they'll have to confiscate my fingers then when I make a handgun gesture!
"That act was approved with considerable discussion and the members absolutely knew the balances they were advancing. The DMCA allowed the Internet to grow and by and large the act has worked," Holleyman said.
I want a lot of what this guy has been smoking.
When will these ducks get their bills out of their arses and smell something different for a change? The internet grew on its own, and people like you leeched on it, Mr. Robert Holleyman.
-Shaunak.
Post it somewhere anonymous, like freenet (I do hope that _IS_ anon, or I'm in deep shit). Atleast untill someone does something about the DMCA.
-Shaunak.
Imagine there are no IP laws,
It's easy if you try,
No DMCA to fear below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine no politicians,
Screwing our today, Oh ohhh,
You may say, I'm a dreamer,
And you're probably right on that one,
I hope some day you'll assasinate someone,
Either democrat or republican.
-Shaunak.
--
Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
My mom, an educated but non-technical person, had heard about it. So had my friend who's a social worker for the YWCA. This story has definitely broken out of the "techie bubble".
I am convinced that Adobe bamboozled many people in this case. Here goes: ... As opposed to Adobe vs... and that the government would be reluctant to drop the case.
Adobe pushed for an arrest (which they got)
Dimitry was arrested and Adobe took a slight PR hit
Adobe than said that they do not think that he should be punished. Knowing that the case was now the US vs
However, Adobe still comes out relativley clean because they eventually did the "right thing"
Fluff
If we try and take away Sklyarov's freedom to make a point, how are we better than Adobe and the Feds? Isn't that what they did?
Don't make an unwilling martyr out of Sklyarov. Let him go home!
The U.S. needs to take care of their own problems.
'crow
Most slashdotters would accept the following axioms:
Axiom 1: Corporations and nations need geeks to run their information technology systems, which are vital to national economies.
Axiom 2: Geeks have better understanding of the socio-technological implications of technically-related laws than most lawmakers.
Axiom 3: Virtually no non-technical people have adequate skills to replace geeks if the geeks removed their services.
Accepting these axioms, we find that the most logical method of applying pressure on the government is for geeks to embark on a general strike, such as withholding services over a 48-hour period, or suchlike.
Of course this would require monumental organization and a good PR campaign, but I'll leave that for someone else. I'm just an idea rat.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Its fairly obvious that the US government is not going to listen to us. They made this law and are quite pleased with themselves and how it helps their big businesses. Right now, the party with the most power is Russia. A Russian citizen is being held in a US prison and not being tried, something that is not allowed to happen to an American citizen. Especially since Russia is being all buddy-buddy with China recently, I think they can do a much better job of scaring the sh*t out of the US government than a bunch of hackers can.
"As far as I know there have been very few complaints from intellectual property holders."
--Rep. Howard Coble
"But I wonder if those same advocates would be as protective of a piece of technology that helps people obtain their personal information online."
--Allan Adler
You'd think that if they thought it was such a great and wonderful law they'd be able to defend it on its merrits alone, but I have yet to see that.
Representative Coble says "there have been very few complaints from intellectual property holders". This is not true. I am quite sure that the vast majority of the protesters have at some time or other written something original and are therefor "intellectual property owners".
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
The CHIPs plan to hold illegal sites and post "a warning that the site has been seized by law enforcement" and present a "clear message that cybercrime carries real penalties for offenders."
So now they're trying to seize our domains? Are they going to start taking any sites related to a "cybercrime" purely for the ability to dance around saying "naa naa, we caught you".
Police already seize autos in drug-related arrests but at least they have (somewhat)good reasons to.
Amazing. Considering all the noise Chuck Schumer made about Windows XP yesterday, you'd think this member of the judiciary commitee spend his valuable time on something important like the Sklyarov situation.
healyourchurchwebsite.com - WWJB?
I, also, have been amazed at the lack of media attention concerning this issue. Writing a letter to a local news station sounds like a good start. Perhaps the letter could also be sent to newspapers so they may run it as an op-ed column?
How else could this issue gain more attention? Anyone know of a friend who knows of Dan Rather, Petter Jennings, Barbara Walters... anyone who can bring light on this issue?
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
Not what I have read. What is ironic is while many here proclaim the charges against Dmitry should go on in attempt to find DMCA invalid or unconstitutional, Dmitry may ultimately go free for another reason (i.e.: inability to contact the Russian government) and, thus, DMCA will stand.
This case, for many reasons, is not a good test case. Instead, Dmitry should be freed, especially given Adobe's apparent opposition to his detainment.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
CNN recently posted an interview with U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft who states "[t]he idea you can get away with it ["cybercrime" (this is an undefined term)] here is an idea we must curtail ... There are no free passes in cyberspace." Ashcroft comments he plans to create "Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property (CHIP) units staffed by 77 personnel, including 48 lawyers" modeled after the existing unit in California, currently prosecuting Dmitry Sklyarov, created by FBI Director nominee Robert Mueller "whose nomination is expected to receive little opposition in Congress."
The CHIPs plan to hold illegal sites and post "a warning that the site has been seized by law enforcement" and present a "clear message that cybercrime carries real penalties for offenders."
The article further states that current EFF Executive Director, Shari Steele, addressed a letter to Ashcroft requesting the release of Sklyarov. Ashcroft had no comment regarding his ageny's charges against Sklyarov.
It looks DMCA will soon accrue an army or firm of brand new federal government attorneys under the Bush administration.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
Ok, and you would not mind to be Dmitry and sit in prison during the duration of such a judgment? I doubt it. This man is not even a U.S. citizen, this is our problem --- this is America's problem that must be settled within our borders and subjecting a non-American to the worse attributes (prison) of such a test is a disgust. Yes, DMCA should be tested. But, not with this case. Dmitry needs to return to Russia to his family.
Let DMCA be tested by Americans. This nation we live in is responsible for this damn law; we should be the ones who deal with it; who correct the wrong.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
Does anyone know if the Russian embassy or consulate has been in touch with him? I'm just thinking about the news in recent death-penalty cases that some prisoners were not properly advised of their rights to contact their embassy/consulate. AFAIK, this is a requirement anytime a foreign citizen is arrested, not just in capital cases (can someone confirm this?). One wonders if that would make much difference, but surely it's a potential avenue?
Something which made me sit up and take notice of gun statistics was a right-wing web site (can't remember the name of it now) that I accidentally stumbled across last week. This site happened to mention several countries in which it is now easier to purchase guns than it is in the US. These same countries have vastly lower gun-related crime rates than the US. One of these was my home country.
Well, guess what? I lived there for thirty years in the largest city in the country and am struggling to try and think of anywhere I could go to buy a gun. I've lived in the US for 20 months now and can think of five gun stores within a ten-minute drive of where I live without even trying.
It was quite simply a bare-faced lie by an idiot with no integrity.
[US Gov. point of view]
Here is this "hacker" from "evil" Russia who is creating a tool against the law in the US. It's got something to do with encryption, so it must be bad. However, because we don't really know enough about it to prosecute him, we'll hold him without bail until we figure out what to do. Just like that Mitnick guy a few years back.
[/US Gov. point of view]
They don't know how to really deal with the problem (or even IF there is a problem) so they do what they have done in the past. Arrest someone.
Hacker, there's a need to feel down.
I said, hacker, we'll nail your a-- to the ground.
I said, hacker, 'cause there's a flawed law in town
there's a way to make you unhappy.
Hacker, there's no place you can go.
I said, hacker, trials'll make you short on your dough.
You can fight it, but I'm sure you will find
There's no way you'll beat our law staffs!
It's fun to screw ya with the D-M-C-A!
It's fun to screw ya with the D-M-C-A!
We have good protection, big corporations can enjoy,
We can buy any Congressional ploy!
It's fun to screw you with the D-M-C-A!
It's fun to screw you with the D-M-C-A!
We can get your a-- jailed, copyrights we will seal,
We can do whatever we feel!
Mu*puppy - proof of the effects of boredom, and Altoid dust snorting
There's no wrong way, to eat a Rhesus...
a better article devoted to the kidnapping in which the word family is mentioned 32 times
I find it ironic that the current chairman and former CEO of Adobe was quoted as saying that one of the worst parts of being kidnapped is the forced separation from ones family. Isn't that what he has ( in part ) done to Sklyarov ?
Here is his latest speech on fair use. I'm glad he's actually my rep.
All the Windows users all start your pirated versions of Adobe software at midnight. Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. all glowing in support of Sklyarov. No legal versions, though... I think we can deal without those 5.