Slashdot Mirror
Earth to Media: This kid is still in jail
When reporters were threatened with law enforcement pressure and jail during the Watergate and Pentagon Papers cases, whole forests were felled in the pre-digital age with stories, books, even movies about courageous reporters fighting for the First Amendment against government oppression. Not a single reporter was jailed in those cases, not even for an hour, even though many broke federal and other laws in gathering the information they reported.
You won't see any discussion of Dmitri Sklyarov on Washington talk shows, the evening news, or the cover of the weekly newsmagazines. But he is stuck in jail.
He was arrested by the FBI two weeks ago for writing and selling a program that allegedly violates the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, just after giving a lecture detailing alleged weaknesses in Adobe's electronic book software.
There is hardly a single serious lawyer or constitutional scholar who doesn't see the dangers of this twisted use of the DMCA. "The DMCA outlaws technologies designed to circumvent other technologies that protect copyrighted material," wrote Lawrence Lessig in the New York Times this week. "It is law protecting software code protecting copyright. The trouble, however, is that technologies that protect copyrighted material are never as subtle as the law of copyright. Copyright law permits fair use of copyrighted material; technologies that protect copyrighted material need not. Copyright law protects for a limited time; technologies have no such limit."
Thus, cautions Lessig, a law professor at Stanford, when the DMCA protects technology that in turns protects copyrighted material, it can -- as in the Sklyarov case -- offer protection that is much broader than copyright law was meant to be. It criminalizes what would be legal under existing copyright law, including certain kinds of criticism and speech and research. This law is a top-to-bottom creation of entertainment companies working with their hired lawyers and lobbyists to curb the flow of information online for profit. It was not enacted in the public interest, or even in the best interests of copyright. Lessig and others have pointed out that Sklyarov's software violated no one's copyright, even if it runs afoul of the DMCA.
In the Sklyarov case, there are several noxious consequences. His arrest chills criticism of software, and of new technologies and the powerful companies that create them. It also undermines security -- one of the very things the DMCA is supposed to protect. How can weaknesses and flaws in security and encryption programs be discovered if they can't be shared, discussed or explored?
Example: a staple feature of newspaper reporters in big cities is to go to local airports annually and test security procedures by carrying toy guns, knives or unloaded weapons into terminals. Although they could technically be charged under federal laws prohibiting such behavior, they are not. These reporters are never prosecuted. That's because courts have repeatedly ruled that the reporters are carrying out activities that are protected by the First Amendment -- they are stretching or even breaking regulations on behalf of the public welfare. Within limits (most public safety grounds) courts have protected this kind of activity. Just because Sklyarov is a hacker doesn't mean he's not acting as a journalist, or entitled to journalistic protections.
This is a corporate perversion of the original intent of copyright law, meant to protect authors for a limited time so that they would have some financial incentive to generate ideas, which then entered the public domain so that they could receive the widest possible distribution. It was never the intention of the authors of American copyright law to sell ideas and intellectual property to greedy corporations in perpetuity, especially at the expense of free speech and the ability to criticize powerful institutions.
In April, Princeton Professor Edward Felten, an encryption researcher, received a letter from record industry lawyers warning him that a paper he was about to present at a hacker conference -- the paper described the weaknesses of an encryption system -- could subject him to criminal actions under the DMCA. Felten withdrew the paper, and is now the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the DMCA on First Amendment grounds.
None of this helps Sklyarov, who remains in jail. Were he a reporter for the Washington Post or New York Times challenging claims of Microsoft or Adobe or Disney, you can only imagine the media furor, and the pressure being brought to bear on politicians and federal officials to get him out. It would certainly be loud enough to help ensure his release while lawyers get to slug out what ought clearly to be a civil, not a criminal, issue.
The failure to connect his case with their own rights and traditions is a colossal media blunder, short-sighted and self-destructive. If the DMCA stands, and people like Dmitri Sklyarov are tossed into jail because they criticized the code, claims or procedures of powerful corporations or institutions based on research these institutions believe should remain private and proprietary, then the entertainment lobby will have done the unthinkable. They will have permanently altered the First Amendment and the protection it has always accorded free, controversial and offensive speech. And the Net will become a very different kind of place, not only for coders and hackers but for any person who loves the unique freedom it has offered for nearly a generation.
Until then it's the law! Break it and to jail you go.
I find it hard to believe that you are so surprised by this. This case covers several things that the media is scared to talk about these days.
First, he's a programmer -- the media hates to discuss anything even moderately technical, in the fear that it wil alienate their audience. Also, many TV news stories are just seconds in length, not nearly enough time to explain the case.
Secondly, there are serious issues where many media outlets are owned by or are organizations that have fought hard to have heavy control over their copyrighted material.
That's not to say the case hasn't been discussed at all. Robin Gross of the EFF went on NPR's Science Friday program to discuss the case (not sure if she really said the right things or not, though), and NPR had at least one previous story on the subject.
This case does remind me how little the media in this country cares about the rest of the world. Foreigners have been tried and executed in this country. Our media didn't say a thing, while the overseas media went nuts.
The US media is very strange. I recall when the Chandra Levy story first started rolling. The national news broadcasters were saying ``The story on everyone's lips,'' when in fact it was just what was being discussed on the local news in New York. Nobody else cared up until then.
The trick might be to get this case on the local news in New York
--
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
The American public has a limited attention span for complicated stuff. It was not until a Democratic congress started impeachment hearings that Nixon's misdeeds came to the average American's attention, despite all the special prosecutors and etc. which had previously been appointed. If it can't be turned into a 5 second sound bite, the American public isn't interested in it.
Blame the media all you like, but they just give the American public what they want, for the most part -- bland, non-threatening, unintellectual "news" that doesn't challenge the status quo and that can be summarized in a 5-second sound bite.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
There's no such thing as a low-risk stock. You ought to see my 401(k). It's a blood bath. Not a single stock fund offered by my 401(k) has made money this year -- not even the most conservative ones.
The thing about government bonds (which is what the SS fund is invested in) is that while they don't yield a whole lot, at least they don't lose money.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
"We're thinking a modest fine and several years' probation..."
One can only hope.
You mean like NPR? Many people don't understand why I don't like NPR. Not only are they state sponsered, which is bad enough, but their bias is not the same as mine.
But regardless, if anybody out there has any *real* info on WHY the media isn't covering the case of Dmitry Skylarov or the DMCA, please inform us; I'm sure the /. community would like to know.
I see two reasons. First, the intricacies of copyright law, especially when combined with technology, are too subtle for sound-bites. I realize a statement like this is almost a cliche, but it's true. Too much valuable airtime/column inches would have to be wasted educating the reader on the DMCA, encryption, the rights of foreign nations etc. Easier to stick with warehouse fires and monster truck rallies.
Second (mentioned in another post already) is that most media outlets are affiliated with some organization that has an interest in the DMCA. Tough to get a critical article past your editor when s/he knows they'll get a call from the executive office about it later.
The stories of heroic journalists, well, that's different. It improves the image of journalism and the organizations that support them. And there's no need to report subtleties - just yell 'Cover-up!' at the top of your voice and everyone will be on your side.
Making these tools illegal won't stop people from violating copyright law.
Copyright law doesn't even stop most people from violating copyright law. Just because massive software piracy outfits are now violating TWO laws means that they'll stop? Give me a break.
The DMCA does not help a company defend it's copyrights at all. What it does is give them COPY CONTROL. With the simplest "encryption" algorithm you can now 100% put a stop to reverse engineering, totally eliminating your competitors if you happen to have created an industry standard protocol.
Think of it as patenting the most ridiculously easy algorithm without actually requiring a patent or an original idea. IIRC, Real Networks won a case based on the DMCA because they set 1 bit in their packet headers that means "ENCRYPTED", even though the rest of the packet is identitical to the unencrypted form.
It is meant to squelch competition. Be it from individuals in research, open source hackers, or other proprietary software giants. Retail piracy outfits (like the ones in China) will be affected in no way whatsoever by the DMCA. Everyone else will.
Plus, they have the best web site in the UK. Bar none.
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
The reason this isn't being reported as the travesty it truly is is that the public doesn't really understand copyright issues or the DMCA, and they don't really care either. The public would hear this story and think "So, a hacker(sic) got arrested for hacking a product. He was arrested under federal law, and he's now in jail. I hated it when my files were deleted by the virus, so these laws are a good thing."
There is a well-known book out called 'For God, Country, and Coca Cola' which published the formula years ago.
No one went to jail, the sun came up the next day, and the sky did not fall on our heads.
To compare something as far-fetched as the possible imprisonment of someone publishing a formula which is already out there to the real imprisonment of Dmitry is irresponsible.
How can you somehow justify the fact that he is locked away as some sort of reward for his behaviour by contructing this 'equivalent' scenario which is not even vaguely related?
It's down to #3! Make sure you vote the other top stories down while you're at it.
1. welcome to the modern police state. You, Mr. Katz, bitch and whine about wanting all these different laws in your articles and display an adoration for the power of the State. Well, this is the State showing it's muscle, get used to it.
2. the media and the Feds consider computing geeks to be DANGEROUS. you should know this by now. Crypto, the Net, copyright law, they hate or fear us for it all, and this is just the beginning.
3. there is no 3. plz stop ruining slashdot for me, go write for Salon.
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Someone surmised on the list that he's not even had contact with the Russian consulate, much less a decent bail hearing. So has anyone else tried to contact the Russian Embassy on his behalf to try to get an alternate press coverage (since the press seems to ignore geeks and keep it to geek humor, maybe a statement by the Russian Government will get the mainstream media's attention)?
--
You know, you gotta get up real early if you want to get outta bed... (Groucho Marx)
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
they tried this w/other people held in jail for whatever reason. No one gives a shit about people in jail. If I saw an advertisement to let "John Smith Out of Prison" I would skip over it, annoyed that they made me turn another page in the paper.
I pay $1.00+ for a newspaper only to see someone who supposedly is a criminal? Get real.
Your own sig stands in ironic contrast to your point. You start first, mister Galt.
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
> Get Dmitri to go on a hunger strike or something
How noble of you. Maybe if he killed himself he might be even more useful as a martyr.
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
Exhibit 1: on the control of perceptions by major media outlets.
> Didn't you people ever watch the x files.. people disappear all the time
QED
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
When was the last time you saw any press coverage of anything like this? CNN didnt give squat about Kevin Mitnick, and they could care less about Dimitri.
It's sad, but the best way is for everyone to write a letter to the editors column and ask why there is no coverage about Dimitri.
Letters to the editor if written without profanity, have to be published in the paper (at least around here they do)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Sorry, I don't speak or read Russian, so I can't check.
But I was wondering if it is a big story in Russia. It certanly is a big story in the internet "underground".
Currently more people seem concerned with the "imminent collapse" (yawn) of the internet due to the code red worm than the release of Dimitry.
I would hope that this is a big story over there, if it is it increases the likelyhood that the story will eventually "leak" back to the west.
Well, at least we can hope.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Perhaps, but I think that is unlikely. Apply Occam's Razor to the situation; is it more likely that the big media companies are conspiring all the way down to the editorial and reporter level to prevent Joe Public from reading about the case in the morning paper, or is it more likely that Joe Reporter and Joe Editor in general do not know much about technology and law issues (not to mention does Joe Law-Column-Writer knows about the technology issues involved?) to be able to understand the nuances of the story?
Also, consider an editor's take on the issue; even if the editor does understand the technology and law nuances, does he think that his audience will understand well enough to make a story worthwhile or newsworthy?
The bottom line is that YOU, the audience, need to start writing more letters-to-the-editor and op-ed submissions to make the editors and reporters realize the importance of the issue instead of laying back and producing conspiracy theories as to why the issue has not appeared in mainstream media.
I can cite all sorts of foreign (to Americans) news, including civil wars in Central and South America, kidnappings of American citizens abroad, etc. that never even make it to the "World Summary" columns of your major newspapers because the editors do not seem to think that it is newsworthy. There are stories about it; you can go to the Voice of America and read a lot of the wire copy that the major media outlets certainly get as well, but the bottom line is it is deemed "un-newsworthy" for Joe Public.
In the russian guys case, is he a US citizen? If not he may not be thought of to have any rights in the US.
Persoanlly I think that this is bull crap, but there are large companies involved here and the goverment. Didn't you people ever watch the x files.. people disappear all the time. IN a few months it will be who was that guy?
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Only 'flamers' flame!
Here's a theory. Perhaps there is a connection to the fact that the media, especially broadcast media, is owned by the companies that paid for the DMCA? Do you really think Disney-owned ABC is going to come out against the DMCA? Do you really think AOL/Time/Warner, with membership in the RIAA the MPAA and the DVD-CCA, is going to come out against the DMCA? Maybe your local paper (which almost certainly is not locally owned) is slightly more likely to be critical of the DMCA. But more than likely they have their eye on eBook style protections for their own content.
Remember, the DMCA is a law written by and for media companies! A few articles have gotten out. The NYTimes for example has covered it. But the vast majority of the media has not. If you ever needed a clearer example of self-censorship, you probably won't find one.
Wow. Because men aren't capable of fidelity unless their wives beat them into it?
Damn, and I thought *I* had a low opinion of these schmucks.
Seriously, how on earth can their wives be faulted for the husbands behavior? Are these not grown men?
rark!
So if they left their husbands, their husbands would no longer be interested in 19 year old girls? I doubt it.
And from personal observation, I doubt that the threat of having a wife leave is enough to get a guy to stop going after other women.
I don't think it's adultery that is the problem here, anyway -- it's grown men in positions of power using those positions of power to go after half grown girls, and then lying about it.
rark!
I would say no, because the Tipper Gore business was, in a sense, protecting us from ourselves (or so they'd have us believe). The PMRC was about letting parents know explicitely that albums contained whatever language was deemed offensive, and was, in a way, a strike back to the relatively new-at-the-time political correctness. It was about maintaining the appearance of values while not limiting the speech itself.
The DMCA isn't even vaguely in the same vein. It's not trying to help anyone be more aware parents, or anything like that. It's about money and power, not just power.
As a teen in the eighties, I always viewed one of the "explicit lyrics" stickers as a shopping tag, telling me what was likely to irritate adults around me, and went straight for the album. You couldn't get in trouble with the law for having an album with unacceptable words. That's certainly not the case with the DMCA and related laws, though. So while I think it's a decent connection, I don't think the DMCA laws are any sort of outgrowth of the PMRC efforts.
I still disagree. Free speech doesn't mean anyone has to listen nor does it refer to market availability. It means certain words won't get you thrown in jail. I'm not a huge fan of PMRC; parents should know what their kid listens to if for no other reason than to at least know what their kid likes.
However, you can't honestly argue that what Wal Mart chooses to sell or not sell equates to stifling of expression. Whether someone in a small Wal Mart-only town can conveniently purchase an album with explicit lyrics is irrelevant to free speech. The fact remains it is not illegal for them to do so, nor illegal for the artist to produce the work.
have an affair with Judge Marilyn Patel...
Tonight! - On Springer!
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
You just forgot the first rule, reporters want to make themselves look good. Calling a "Hacker" a reporter would put a negative light on all reporters, thus not making them look good.
I'm saying this from the viewpoint that most reporters probably had in the case, I personally believe 2600 was in the right and all.
They're not, though. Mr. Taco sold slashdot, for a seven digit sum.
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
I live near DC. Funny thing is, we've been putting up with those stories for a couple of weeks longer than the rest of the country.
Funny thing: my wife noticed this morning that there actually is 'new' news on the intern. It seems something 'new' pops up every time the media attention starts to die down.
And while I'm OT... CourtTV is having a special tonight to answer the question: "Should politicians not date interns?" Well no f***ing s**t!! These guys are married. OF COURSE they shouldn't be dating. Of course, I blame the women *cough* Hillary *cough* who stand by these shmucks time and time and time again.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
The ACLU: Where 90% of the Bill of Rights Matters
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
One murder and no rapes? Guess you get your statistics from the same place that college campuses get their statistics on rape and assaults.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Hmm, just called them and it's USD$92,000.00 ... Money that will most likely be much-better spent both on Dmitry's defense, and in helping the EFF battle the DMCA.
... looks like that's an expensive luxury. :-(
I remember that to make a public statement Terry Gilliam took out a full-page ad in Variety
I'm submitting the story and writing letters to the local papers here though.
o/~ Join us now and share the software
o/~ Join us now and share the software
You have no idea what the hell you are talking about. I feel dirty responding to this. I don't know whether I just got trolled or not, but I'll bite.
1 oz. citrate caffeine
1 oz. vanilla
2½ oz. flavoring *
4 oz. fluid extract of coca
3 oz. citric acid
1 qt. lime juice
30 lbs. sugar
2½ gal. water
caramel
* orange, lemon, nutmeg, cinnamon, coriander, neroli oils, alcohol
Oh God, They're breaking down the door!!!!
You absofuckinglutely would not get thrown in jail for publishing a recipe. As long as it was you screwing around in your kitchen and you came up with how it was done there is no way in hell anyone could sue you, much less bring criminal charges against you.
If on the other hand you worked for coca-cola, were made privy to the recipe then published it you could face CIVIL charges. No one has ever gone to jail for anything like this ever, it's something out of a Kafka novel and I keep hearing these wet fart noises from bleating sheep saying "but he broke the law". Who gives a damn if he broke a law? It's a stupid law, and people have an obligation to break stupid laws. It's movement towards making the stupid law go away.
I just realized they left one important clause out of the DMCA. They should have made it illegal to criticize the DMCA in public.
Actually no you wouldn't. The coca cola secret formula was published in the book "Big Secrets: The Uncensored Truth About All Sorts of Stuff You Are Never Supposed to Know", by William Poundstone, along with the blend of 11 secret herbs & spices, and other 'secrets'.
Wow did the BBC actually kill someone? Cool can you provide a link to where the BBC actually used a gun to threaten or kill someone that would be an interesting read.
BTW both the PBS and the NPR get federal funding.
War is necrophilia.
If that is your position, then you should advocate that Adobe et al advance it through the only honest approach -- an amendment to the U. S. Constitution which would make such a "different kind of law" (copyright protection decoupled from the public interest and having no time limit) legal.
/.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
Er, the same way you protect the economic value of small portable objects in a world of nimble fingers -- 1)take reasonable security precautions and 2)prosecute the specific individuals who are caught stealing (not those who might steal, not those who possess the ability to steal, nor even those who teach the fine art of prestidigitation... those who do steal).
This ain't quantum physics, folks.
/.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
Yes I would - If there was a series of speakers, heck - even one speaker (hell, I would volunteer to speak!) - I would be willing to attend.
If such a thing ever occurs, I propose that we do an actual march/walk to the site where the rally would be held - say over the course of 10-20 miles. Hold the rally for a couple of days - camp out if need be.
I am tired of all this shit - I want my rights - all of them!
What the hell, people? Why aren't more people replying to this comment? Do any of you really care? WTF??!!
I have written my congressmen about this issue - I will be participating in the Saturday meet in Phoenix (missed last saturday, and can't get off work for today's meet - but I will be there this weekend!).
What does it take?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Sorry Katz. A germane defense of the hacker, but your analogies are falling short in modern times.
When you mention the Post and the NY Times in the Vietnam and Watergate eras, it's a false analogy. Today, so many of the large news agencies are owned by corporations with huge interests in government contracts (e.g., NBC and General Electric). The military-industrial complex has become the military-industrial-media complex.
Also, you mention imagining the Washington Post not reporting on Microsoft. Well, recently they have due to the anti-trust case. But they are in legal agreements with MSNBC (peruse the MSNBC site to see how many articles are from Newsweek and the Washington Post (Newsweek is owned by the Post)).
My point? The press ain't what it used to be. The best example: go register an account for Netscape mail then visit the CNN.com site. Know what you'll see at the top of the screen?
Welcome, username
The times, they are a changing.
----------------------------------
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
I read a disheartening story the other day in the NY Times Magazine about American John Tobin who is being (wrongly) held as a spy in Russia. It is weird because he has been held for months and I have heard nothing about him. In addition to the Dmitry case, the media has not covered this story. I guess they are too busy following Gary Condit around. The trial of John Tobin was very well covered in Russia where it had OJ Simpson-like popularity.
As a solution to both problems, I propose that the US and Russia have a good, old fashioned, prisoner exchange. Current coverage is also available from the NY Times.
I commend your action; the EFF will get a cut of my rebate as well. However, I should point out that there is no "social security fund". Social security benefits are paid out of payroll taxes, and excess payroll taxes are spent on general expenditures; with the baby boomers nearing retirement this pyramid scheme is about to collapse. It is extremely important (especially for those in the average Slashdot demographic) that we move from a pay-as-you-go system to a system where you can accumulate actual assets instead of promises from the government to tax the hell out of future generations.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
While they do occasionally run stories that do not interest the public, we can't always expect them to do that. I'm sure they do not care about chandra levy either (although they have a sick fascination with the kennedys).
Unfortunately, even though I hate protests, I think they are the way to go. Get Dmitri to go on a hunger strike or something. I hate to say this, but it's true ... this guy getting arrested is *exactly* the kind of ammunition we need to fight the DMCA.
Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone
Hey, I never said anything about conspiricy. I agree with you .. I just dont think a newspaper will see it as newsworthy, nor help their cause (or their parents) in any fashion.
.. lets say .. hrm, 50. The idea that the 40 or so editors (assuming one editor for each paper, although its more likely that papers owned by the same company go with the same big stories) would have to be 'on side' is not really a big number. In fact, they probably think what you're thinking when they are dealing with pressure from above on plugging certain stories and not running with others. So I don't think you have to be a huge conspiricy theorist to aknowledge that public awareness for 80% of people probably consists of a relatively small number of publications, and consequently a relatively small number of editors who'd rather fly with the voice from above than risk job security and shake the boat.
I read this story on page 20 of my local daily. I don't believe anyone who says their local newspaper didn't mention it. But remember, if it's on page 20, public awareness is 1% of what it would be if it was first page. It never reaches a critical mass public awareness. And who decides first page? Editor. And how many large circulation papers are there in the States? Let's say
If newspapers found out tommorow that crack-cocaine was the cure for cancer, do you really believe that'd be the story you'd see in the paper, considering the government spends 20 billion dollars are a year trying to keep it off the streets?
"Old man yells at systemd"
Puuleeeease. I'm talking about the news here, not what airs during prime time on television. The news will always be shown .. I wasn't saying big brother decides what shows to watch, I was saying what big brother decides what headline to run. And yes, sometimes that headline will be chosen because people eat it up (Elian Gonzalez), but sometimes a headline is run (or isn't, Dmitry) for business purposes. And when business clashes with ethics, thats when you get a 'conspiricy'. Conspiricy is just a dirty word for it .. ironically, the rules of democracy and capitalism encourage 'conspiricies'. Ie, lies or misinformation spread from company (big media) to consumer (you). Don't tell me because you worked at CBS you can confirm there is no big conspiricy ... history is rife with people working for evil, without even being aware of it.
"Old man yells at systemd"
> Really, yours is the most subtly deceptive reasoning because it infers that a "conspiracy" is required to silence dissident voices. In actuality, the people who write for these publications are only there because they have kissed the right asses. If they were any threat to write something rational or honest they would have been sniffed out long ago and had their access to power stripped from them.
:)
Right on, brother! I only wish more people understood that much of the unacceptable pain, persecution, and general discontent people experience in their lifetimes are the result not of evil-by-choice organizations, but rather evil-by-choice people leading ignorant/obendient-by-choice people. I could not have written it better myself. Give the man a prize!
Props to the Noam Chomsky archive there.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Incidentally, I'm a programmer who works on C/C++/CORBA enterprise scale distributed apps, and I'd say I never need to use more than grade 10 math. Actually, my friend, who worked for a company that developed complex financial economics simulation software never had to use math; all math was provided by .. guess what .. mathematicians!
.. it's already there!
Yes, there are obviously some math skills required for programming, but in many many cases (GUI programming, scripting, distributed computing, etc), the math is very simple (object oriented methodology is far more likely to be important coming into a programming job than having to engage in above-high-school level math.) Thus, the argument employers were using, blaming the lack of talent on a lack of math skills seen in domestic potential hires, is clearly false.
Anyhow, if you really felt you could discredit a huge report based on one snarky line, you're a part of the group that doesn't need the system to pull the wool over its eyes
"Old man yells at systemd"
Wondering why the big media outlets havn't advertised the scandal is like wondering why the Army doesn't hand out "War Kills People" brochures. The big media outlets are controled by the content providers, and the content providers want this kid nailed to the wall. It's as simple as that. Sad, wrong, but simple.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Your news comes from big media content providers (think Time Warner AOL). Big media content providers want Dmitry nailed to a wall. You know that story a few days ago on /. about silicon valley using immigrant workers to keep salaries low? The story was actually circulated for publication 2 years ago, but no big paper would pick it up for fear of damaging themselves (they probably did it), and damaging the best story they had in years (the .com boom). News gets censored by media outlets ALL THE TIME. What's frightening is that people still think that news providers only have a slight 'political bias'. Untrue. They practice outright public awareness management. It's sad how controlled everyone's level of awareness is. Visit www.projectcensored.org to see what I'm talking about.
/., cnet), while the rest of the world won't know, so won't care.
At any rate, to answer your original question, anyone in the software biz right now (save for Adobe), and publishing industry want him in jail. The types they want to know about his arrest (he's an example to be made of) will know it from reading the trade sites (like
"Old man yells at systemd"
Perhaps the best way to explain the DMCA to people who are unfamiliar with it is by comparison to historical abuses that are firmly accepted as wrong:
l if fe.htm
b ib le.htm
In 1377, John Wycliffe was brought before the Roman Catholic Church because he had the audacity to declare that the common man had the right to read the bible, which he had translated from the Church's sanctioned latin into English. The position of the Church on common vernacular translation was known from the time of the Spanish inquisition. Spanish bible translators were often beaten, tortured, and burned alive. Spanish clergyman Alfonso de Castro gave the opinion of Church in these words: "the translation of the scriptures into the vernacular tongues, with the reading of them by the vulgar, is the true fountain of all heresies." Wycliffe was lucky to merely be arrested and excommunicated. The church did eventually dig him up and burn his bones, however.
In 2001, cryptography and computer code have replaced latin, while eBooks take the role of the Bible. The "Copyright Industry" and the government agencies like the FBI that march to their drum have replaced the pre-reform Catholic Church as the organization that uses secret languages to control the thoughts of their "audience". After John Wycliffe asserted the right of the people to read, this principle became a central tenent of all church reformers and was strong in the protestant groups that eventually formed the United States of America.
Today, as then, the right of the people to access the thoughts contained in the media they obtain legally, without regard to "technological protection measures", such as latin, object code, cryptography or obfuscation, is inherent in the First Amendment and the fundamental human rights which transcend government.
Conversely, the supposed right to control access to copyrighted works against circumvention, asserted by the DMCA is a false right, and it must be facially rejected because it conflicts inescapably with the right to read. This "right" is completely distinct from the one it was supposedly created to protect, which is the right of authors to authorize the first sale of their works.
Citations:
http://www.whidbey.net/~dcloud/articles/johnwyc
http://www.whidbey.net/~dcloud/articles/spanish
The major news outlets are all owned by the big media companies. CNN is time/warner, ABC is disney, yada yada yada. The big media companies all have their fingers in the news outlets in one way or another and they'll gladly sacrifice their news divisions freedom a little if they can force you to shell over an extra $20.00 to listen to what they're calling music these days.
That's why most of the useful news I get these days comes from Slashdot and not CNN.
but in using your example its not the fact that he was selling xeroxed copies of a stephen king book that got him arested. Its because he designed and built a xerox machine.
If its stupid but it works, its not stupid.
The State of Texas executed a foreign national without giving him right to meet with his embassy. This is a right guaranteed to foreign nationals by treaty. The fact that someone could be held without access to their national ambassadorial staff is pitiful enough. The fact that they can be held without due process guaranteed under the Constitution is scandalous.
But the public just doesn't care....
It is fucking depressing.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
1) He has the right to meet with representatives of the Russian Embassy. That has not happened. This is a right guaranteed by treaty.
2) It doesn't matter whether he is a US citizen or not, he has a right to due process.
Look at the hell the U.S. had to go through to get a convicted murderer(Ira Einhorn) extradited from France.
Not exactly apples to apples comparison, is it?
But the Einhorn case could have been sped up if it hadn't been for the idiots in Pennsylvania trying him in absentia. That was a screw up on their part, not France's.
Do you see the difference?
Why should the U.S. afford a foreign national the opportunity to escape?
Why have bail at all then? Anyone could flee from the jurisdiction they are indicted in, can't they? Take his passport.
Sorry, but the constitution just doesn't come into play in this instance.
Why, just because you've said so?
The Supreme Court has said otherwise. They still gave Cuban's the right to due process (it took forever, but they got their day in court) when Castro emptied his jails and sent the felons north. The Supreme Court just told the Immigration Service that they cannot hold foreign nationals without charging them - even when they have served their sentences.
Sounds like due process to me (derived, my dear colleage, from the Constitution).
Foreign nationals should behave themselves in any country they visit.
That is a given, isn't it?
Are you saying that we shouldn't assume he is innocent until proven guilty?
Just because the the U.S. appears to be more liberal with accused criminals than many other countries does not mean that the same liberal treatment can or should be extended to a foreign national.
Right; let's just jettison the Constitution when it becomes a problem.
I hope you're not running for an elected office.
Non citizens should be made fully aware that they neither deserve nor get the same priviledges as a citizen.
And on that point, as with so many others in this thread, you are just dead wrong.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
There's a space in the URL that prevented it from working. Take it out and it works. The story is here.
-- Insert witty one-liner here. --
...let's protest the lack of media coverage!
Everyone get down to your local news affiliate and start protesting the lack of attention.
If enough people do that...the story of the media being protesting the lack of news will itself become news...and thus draw attention to the core issue about which we are protesting a lack of news!
I'm serious! If we tell reporters they are being negligent in hiding the truth that's a challenge I doubt they could resist. As soon as one news organization posts a story, they will all have to me-too or look like toadies to corporate interestes (which they are but they hate it being shown true).
- JoeShmoe
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Instead of writing to your congressman / senator, why doesn't someone try running for that office?
/. populous thinks. Can we send one of our own to the seat of power where real change can be effected?
We do a lot of whining and there are a lot of calls for letters to be written but is anyone truly making the sacrafice of public office?
Why isn't there a well spoken geek that could run for either congressman / senator and address these issues as the voice of our demographic?
We could have a geek get out the vote.
I would like to hear what the
"Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." Sun Tzu
I believe that there is a common set of ideas that "we" support.
These include but are not limited to:
technology
Note that I'm not including much else as this is a very diverse group.
I am of the opinion that a representative should listen to their district or in this case, group (geeks) and properly provide them with a voice.
This person should be one that is charismatic enough to sway opinion yet technical enough to understand issues important to their represented base.
It is not for me to decide what "we" believe, just as it is not up to the representative. It is the represented's responsibility to inform their representative what they believe.
This is much different than the deaf ear our pleas fall on now.
"Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." Sun Tzu
I am responding because this is something I feel quite strongly about.
You are quite correct that most politicians do have a lot of personality and charisma. I have none of this, but there are geeks who do. We find them and call them to the plate. If they run, good, if not, we find someone else.
Political Science and Law are fine backgrounds, but it is not a requirement to run. To risk overgeneralization, geeks like to identify and solve problems and learn new things.
To win office it takes money in order to swing popular opinion. Geeks as a general rule tend to be middle class or above (read as disposable income) and tend to devote themselves to some form of evangelism (OS wars, editor wars, desktop wars, etc.).
Lastly, yes geeks and intelligent people in general are a minority. History shows that minority groups can dramatically influence elections if they vote in significant numbers.
I believe this can be done. Will it be easy. No but it is not impossible.
A geek in a real office will give these issues a place they can be heard and fairly weighed. It will require support from the community as well as the right candidate.
"Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." Sun Tzu
Are you sure he's been in jail for two weeks? I'm a little confused on that point.
To paraphrase Scott Adams, you've had a BLINDING FLASH OF THE OBVIOUS!
I don't know how to tell you this... but maybe if I shout way up into your ivory tower...the popular media aren't going to go running to Vegas and San Jose because this isn't the kind of news story that Joe AOL cares about.
Now quit ranting, strap your soapbox to your back, and go do something about it instead of ranting impotently. You're preaching to the choir here.
Zaphod B
Zaphod B
When duplication is outlawed, only outlaws will have
OK, I wrote 'ole Dennis. If you did too, sound off below!!!
I agree media coverage of the Sklyarov arrest has been a (non-existant) travesty. I have an idea, bear with me for a paragraph here. I noticed over the past few days that a USA Today reporter named Dennis Cauchon has written two stories on First Amendment arrests (although they were buried on the inside pages) here and here. To quote his story, "At the Justice Department's request, a federal judge jailed freelance writer Vanessa Leggett on July 20 on contempt of court charges after she refused to turn over notes, tape recordings and other material she collected while researching a book on the slaying of Doris Angleton in 1997. Angleton was the wife of Robert Angleton, a millionaire ex-bookie who was acquitted in 1998 of hiring his brother to commit the murder."
Seems to me 'ole Dennis might be interested in the current party going on in Dimitri's Las Vegas cell, if only he knew about it. And USA Today might print what 'ole Dennis dug up on the story. So I'm gonna email 'ole Dennis at dcauchon@usatoday.com and give him an earful of URLs. Why don't ya'll email 'ole Dennis, too, and show him what the Slashdot Effect is all about?
Oh please that's a bunch of FUD.
Again, I say: Show me evidence to the contrary, or show me something that discounts my evidence. You say it's a bunch of FUD, but that's it. If you want to argue with someone, you need to learn to back up your points. You clearly haven't learned that.
Why isn't there a well spoken geek that could run for either congressman / senator and address these issues as the voice of our demographic?
/. populous thinks. Can we send one of our own to the seat of power where real change can be effected?
We could have a geek get out the vote.
I would like to hear what the
I think there are several reasons for this, and I'm sure most people will agree with me on at least some of these.
1: Public officials tend to have an outgoing personality and a lot of charisma. Most geeks, unfortunately (and this inclues me), don't.
2: Most public officials have political science or law backgrounds. Few geeks do.
I'd love to see a geek in office, and hey, I'm not a fan of Dubya, but he's about as close as we have come. He's a big computer game fan. I don't know if that's a good or bad thing, but I don't care for him either way.
I don't think it'll be long before a geek does take office, but it will be only one. Remember, as much as we like to think to the contrary, WE ARE THE MINORITY. The general public is stupid. I don't mean that as an insult, but it's just the fact. If you're on this web site, it's unlikely you're part of the "majority" in a lot of ways, and it's unlikely that the "majority" will relate to you.
Interesting, my first experience with, really being part of the minority was when I moved to Mexico. It gives you a great perspective of what blacks and other minorities go through when you move to a country like that. All of a sudden, you're the minority, and people look down on you because of it. I think everyone should have to experience it. It could go a long way to fixing race problems in this country. Sorry, I'm digressing about 180 degrees from the topic, aren't I? Oh well, I hate hitting the backspace key. Live with it.
actually it's very rare that someone gets fucked in the ass in prison. Well except for the gay dudes who like it and do it by choice. Most prisoners are very homophobic and would never do it. Most likely Dmitri is playing cards, lifting weights, or watching cable tv right now...
Really? Do you have experience in this area? I do. My company does a lot of work with prisons, and I guarantee that this does actually happen a great deal. I also have a family member who has a pretty checkered past and has done quite a few years in prison, and though he won't speak about it directly, he made it pretty clear that that stuff still happens. So, I'd like to see your evidence to support your case.
I have evidence. Check here and here if you want a lot of references. Or, try this on Google.
Then tell me that this is a thing of the past.
Why don't people here do what people have been doing for years. Something that, in the information age, is easier than ever. Write your representatives. Your congressman, your senators. They all have web sites and e-mail. E-mail them and tell them what you think about the arrest. Tell them what you think of the DMCA. That's how you influence the laws they make.
Despite what many people think, your representatives aren't just there to serve the interests of lobbyists, though they make a lot of progress because they're persistant. They WANT to get re-elected, and you're the ones that elect them. They know that, and if enough people complain, they're going to do what you want because if enough of us complain, they're going to know their job is in jeapordy.
Remember, we live in a Republic (not a Democracy as everyone is fond of saying, read about the difference). You representatives are elected by YOU. That means that YOU can tell them they suck and if they don't straighten up and fly right, you won't vote for them the next time they're up for re-election.
Just my personal opinion, but I've written my representatives. I've e-mailed the president. They know my view. If enough people do the same, I guarantee you that this stuff, while not responded to personally, goes into a statistics sheet that tells them, at the end of the day, where their supporters stand.
I don't say this unknowing. I have an uncle who was a U.S. senator up untila couple of years ago, and e-mail was used heavily to gauge the opinions of the people in his office, and I'm pretty sure that he was the rule, not the exception. They all have software that makes this stuff (e-mailed opinions) pretty easy to quantify without having to read each and every e-mail in detail.
This is just the same thing, with everyone a few years older.
OK, I wish Sklyarov got more press. But I'm reluctant to blame the alleged biases of the media. I'm afraid the story is actually not as newsworthy as geeks think it is. In the time that Sklyarov has been in jail, how many people were arrested in America? Does anyone know or care? Do you care about Joe Shmoe who was arrested for falsifying meat inspection forms in North Carolina? Maybe it's a big deal to the meat industry, maybe it's unjust, but you don't care. You don't have the bandwidth to know and care about all the people arrested in the US in the last couple of weeks.
Conspiracy theories aside, the media sells to Joe Sixpack. He wants to see the president fucking interns, Tim McVeigh, the Unabomber, riots, wars. And if the media were willing to go all "high-minded" and ignore what their customers want, they still wouldn't show much of Sklyarov. They'd talk about hungry people hurt by welfare reform, medicare, and other issues that seem important to them.
You'd like to make the media show Sklyarov, which would bore the hell out of normal people. Meanwhile, there are a million crackpots with different agendas they'd like the media to cover. None of them are what the consumers want.
Because Human rights are Universal, that is why they are called 'Human Rights' and not 'American rights'.
Article 11 of the UN Charter on Human Rights' says
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
I request that you put pressure on FBI and other Department of Justice authorities to free Dmitry Sklyarov from prison. He has been in prison for over two weeks now, has not been formally charged and to the best of my knowledge hasn't even had his first day in court. He is a Russian national that was arrested for doing the following:
1. The company he works for in Russia Elcomsoft made him create a program that disables the protection on the Adobe eBook file format so that it can be read or printed by legitimate users on their home computers without special Adobe software. Adobe complained to the FBI saying that he violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by creating this software, however that is irrelevant as this act took place in Russia where the creation of such software is perfectly legal under the legal code of the Russian Federation.
2. He gave a scholarly dissertation to an audience at a security conference in the United States about the claims that Adobe makes about their eBook product and the actual capabilities of it that he discovered in the creation of his software.
I highly disapprove of the government's involvement in this case and its actions so far. Dmitry Sklyarov has a young wife and two small children that he must provide for back in Russia. He is being treated in a way that the government should never treat a legal visitor, resident alien or citizen of the United States of America. As an American citizen and voter I do not appreciate my government taking such actions which tarnish our country's record on civil liberties and blatantly violate both the text and the spirit of the United States Constitution.
Thank you for your time.
They have a third option: to simply decline to hear the case, and let lower court rulings stand. This is what has happened with all Second Amendment cases for decades: the Supremes, without comment, decline to review the appeal.
But I don't think they would do that for the DMCA; I think they would cheerfully grab the DMCA and rip it up, given a chance, so let's get this to them now.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Everyone knows this is only gonna end in court. My bet is the EFF sues it all the way up to the supreme court, where they do one of two things.
1. Declare the DMCA unconstitutional
2. Declare the 1st ammendment unconstitutional
Any bets onto which one?
I am !amused.
And remember to vote at the bottom. The more votes the better. The more people that see this and read it, the more chance that this won't just get 'lost' in the media. The sooner he gets home to his family the better.
Viacom does however own the network that runs the best news program in America, the Peabody Award winning Daily Show on Comedy Central.
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
Big media in fact criticize big advertizers a lot. A few years ago, NBC _faked_ a report on GM trucks catching fire in crashes, despite the fact that GM is the second biggest advertizer. Nor did the fact that Ford is a huge advertizer result in any lack of coverage of the huge Firestone-Ford tire debacle.
By the way, we have non-profit news sources here, too, including PBS (dull) and NPR (very good). The get most of their money by asking, though, instead of using the gun, as the BBC does.
how to copy and paste. I knew I had read all of this before. Most of the paragraphs look like they were directly copy and pasted out of that new york times article.
Or maybe they just ran the KatzBot on that NYT article. In which case I'm very disappointed in the KatzBot, I didn't see 'Corporate Republic' mentioned or even post-Columbine, maybe the KatzBot is broken.
--BEGIN SIG BLOCK--
I'd rather be trolling for goatse.cx.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
How big is this society you are talking about? All of America? All linux users? Slashdot readers? Russian programmers who break encryption? Unless you are talking about a majority of society, you are not going to see much mainstream press. Does that suck? Yes, it does.
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
msnbc has a story on it here
-=[the machine masters the grim and the dumb]=-
This action could seriously impact the US's ability to attract top programmers from around the world to participate in the development of new technology.
Who would want to face jail time for simply writing a program that's completely legal in your native country?
Praying for the end of your wide-awake nightmare.
An individual could write a virus with encrypted source and make it available for download (for community testing purposes, of course). The individual would hold the copyright on this software.
This piece of software would not be necessarily malicious. Because people can use it for its intended purposes only (testing the integrity of their own system/network), any claims that its malicious nature makes it an illegal work, not protected by copyright law, are invalid.
The malicious nature of something is judged more by its intent than by its extent. Providing a frying pan (or even a car) to a friend who then uses it to kill someone does not make you liable (correct me on the car case if I'm wrong). If a "virus" were designed as a security tool, would it be considered malicious? A strong case could be made against this.
If you want to see free reporting, look to the BBC. Yes all the brits, myself included, hate the fact we have to pay a licence to own a TV, but this means we have a corporation in the UK that does NOT depend on advertising for its revenues. It can report on what needs to be reported. If it annoys people, who cares because they CANNOT lose their revenue.
The BBC is IMHO the best source of news. Unfortunately being a british institution they dont have any report on this, but maybe it is a model the US government should follow. It sure works in the UK as a medium for fair reporting.
Tux Games. Your complete source for native Linux games.
Fair enough, I did a search and came up with nothing. I did the same search now and got 2 items about it. I guess the BBC search engine was being funny when I looked
Tux Games. Your complete source for native Linux games.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
The MEDIA lobbied to get DMCA passed through congress... they know it's a shady law.
After the whole DeCSS thing, the public opinion swayed against the DMCA...
So it makes sense that the media isn't giving a nanosecond towards Dmitri.... they don't want any more bad press about their DMCA.
Once people realize that the DMCA is a violation of our US constitution - people will fight to get rid of it! The media doesn't want to lose their golden sword!
[Connection closed by foreign host]
The reason the media hasn't picked up on this is because the public just isn't interested.
Remember, hacker = bad in the public mind. Who defines who the hackers are? People with money.
Watergate was a popular cause, where the public interest was immediately and obviously involved. Corruption in the white house? Not only is it important, it's good for a zillion headlines.
It is not at all clear that the public at large would object to this arrest. Many will feel that this software has no business being written. Many will support the idea that electronic works should be protected in this fashion.
We see the dangers. But this is the public that eats, sleeps, and breaths mass media culture. They like marching to the beat of the loudest drum. Money allows corporations to beat loud drums.
The media could make an issue out of this, but mass media has the same problem the people at large do. Since their work is often in electronic form, they may see their bottom line threatened as well. That's not going to inspire them. They'll take risks, but it has to be something bigger than a hacker breaking encryption on ebooks. ebooks themselves aren't very big. For them this is just a non-story.
We care because we want to know when the encryption on something is weak. That's a technical concern the general public doesn't have. Corporations don't want to take the effort to be secure, and neither do most other people. It is much easier to attack anything that looks like a threat. That is what this looks like.
So don't expect help from mass media. They might play up the family man angle, but his general appeal is zero. As is ours, where matters like this are concerned. We insist on the real solution, which is too expensive and too much work, so we will be ignored.
I'm not saying we should go gentle into that good night, but we need to be realistic here. Convince the people who make the laws. Find compromises which meet everyones needs. Because nothing else will work. We aren't going to win a total victory. We don't have the public with us, and never will.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Were he a reporter for the Washington Post or New York Times challenging claims of Microsoft or Adobe or Disney, you can only imagine the media furor, and the pressure being brought to bear on politicians and federal officials to get him out.
The reason the media hasn't said jack about Sklyarov is not becaue he's not a journalist, it's because he's not an American.
He's a Russian Hacker. See!? Even to us slashdotters, that almost sounds like a bad thing, but of course it isn't.. That's profiling for you...
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
Having waded thru 300 odd posts of hand wringing and back biting, I failed to see the most obvious
remedy mentioned. Writing Congressmen and columnists is all well and good, but so far it hasn't shown significant results.
The proper way to kill the DMCA is to make it innefective, by ensuring that the program in question is disseminated as broadly as possible over the internet. The real significance of the DeCSS case was that regardless of what the courts or the government did, the cat was out of the bag.
The most distressing thing to me about this case is that I have seen no evidence of Sklyarov's program ( or anyone else's ) being posted anywhere.
If you really want to make a difference, this is the strategy to follow.
Please, someone with access to his program, or the
necessary skills to duplicate it, get to work and post the damn thing (and become a martyr yourself if necessary, although that shouldn't be ineviatable.) and render the whole foolishness moot.
If you have scruples about violating Sklyarov's (or Elcomsoft's(?)) intellectual property rights,
by all means ask for donations for him or them, but this is war, and he is already a casualty.
If you don't think that the proper way to kill a law is by showing that it is unenforceable, or that doing so is immoral or unethical, then you
simple are living on the wrong planet.
Anything NOT worth doing is NOT worth doing well...
Actually, if you extend that last analogy, it comes across very clear and concise:
1) GM sells cars.
2) GM sells spare keys for cars (in case you lose yours, you are a repo-man, you don't need a reason to buy these)
3) "Company X" also sells spare keys to cars (same reason, not illegal)
4) It only becomes illegal if John Doe purchases spare keys from either company to gain access to a car that does not belong to him.
5) The DMCA is transferring the legal liability from the consumer to "Company X", so it is essentially saying: "Only GM can make keys for GM cars, anyone else is breaking the law"
Now, this is how John Doe is able to visualize the fellacious nature of this law and understand that the DMCA _DOES_ protect GM, as much as it is guaranteeing a monopoly on a product, and enforcing it.
---
Hammer of Truth
I have come to believe this about 'content providers', the media in general as a business since about 1980 when News and Sports became entertainment vying for ratings, and advertisers on Madison Avenue in particular:
They must maintain control over the flow and content of reality as we perceive it because it is the way to control and manipulate behaviour. The thought of a truly free-thinking mass enjoying free discourse of ideas and free expression is anathema to 'them' (Yes, Them).
Now, in the present, now that the ways and means of production and distribution of information (i.e., what the media once owned exclusively) is available to all, to the People, They need control. How do they obtain control? By vilifying an entire sector of society, pointing out the dangers of allowing 'Hackers' unfettered sovereignty, and locking up - er, literally - access to the information flow as if that were the only solution to reduce the anxieties of a mind-numbed and brainwashed populace.
Ya know, I used to feel somewhat paranoid about this, and I Know I Sound paranoid. But repeated excesses of those in power have only served to reinforce my belief in the complete loss of self-autonomy and sovereignty of the Human Spirit in America.
And what have we gained from this? We have preserved the profitiability of a few hundred corporations.
I don't think that's a fair trade.
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
Ya know, I read Thoreau's treatise on Civil Disobedience last night, and he actually mentions corporations. Here is the quote:
/code sites, that is...
It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation on conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience.
In ca. 1974, the foundation of journalistic integrity began eroding as the Newsdesks of the big three factored ratings into their determination of what is and what is not newsworthy. But something is not important just because people watch it! Some things stand apart from marketing concerns, and an honest news reporter would know that.
Just because you worked for CBS, a company that sold out just like the rest, doesn't give you the authority to blame the American people for your bosses' decision to turn What is Important into What Sells.
I'm sorry, but when it comes to news, Screw Ratings, Man. Have some integrity. If your company had kept its integrity, such things as the DMCA, SDMI, and the plight of Mitnick would have been reported a long time ago.
Not for gratuitous points, but Thank God for this forum, the only place I know of to get some honest reporting and opinions! Um, other than the other
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
I notice that the ACLU's web site still doesn't have any mention of the case since I posted about this last time.
At the time, several people posted that they were going to submit requests to the ACLU's submission page. Did anyone get any response?
I still cynically believe that the ACLU will never pay attention to this case because they don't want to piss off their gravy train, but I would interested to hear if anyone got a response.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
KQED radio (San Francisco) had a bit on the Dmitry protests today also. Are stations in other markets covering this?
sulli
RTFJ.
Yes, the Katz bashing gets out of hand, but it is often quite deserved. If Katz didn't try to present himself as a mouthpiece for and expert on "the geek culture" (a concept about as meaningful as "the homosexual lifestyle"), we'd have much less reason to bash, but frankly, he makes all of us look like whiney, uneducated morons who think the world started in 1960.
A large and growing number of "geeks" - particularly those in more senior positions - aren't former high school computer whizzes or tech school grads with honors. They're - we're - very highly and broadly educated people who've found an enjoyable way to make money and support our interest in music, history, theology, philosophy, sociology, public health, and the myriad of other fields we have graduate degrees in and are competent to work in, but have tired of the 1000 qualified candidates for each halfway decent position that working in such fields requires one to get past. In other words, we are FAR smarter and have a far broader perspective on the world than Katz gives us credit for, or than Katz himself has.
The myopic cultural and historical perspective that Katz has, and consistantly projects on us all, is insulting and degrading. For this reason, I find it perfectly justifiable to insult and degrade him when he writes in such a manner, as he almost always does.
That said, this was not an entirely poorly written artical. The topic is, indeed, important. Of course, it's also something WE all know about - both the case itself, and the lack of outside media attention. And I do, as I did with his last piece, take serious issue with his attempts to frame this as an issue of obstructing the press. Dmitri is NOT a journalist. He was in the country to give a paper directly promoting his company's products. He's a hacker and a salesman. And his treatment has been just as wrong as it would have been if he were a journalist. And the lack of US press coverage is just as obscene - not because he is one of "their own", but because he's a foreign national visiting our country and being held without bail or even a bail hearing. Our treatment of him is exactly what one would expect of some generic dictatorship that we would suspend aid to over said treatment.
But Katz seems way too interested in trying to play up the "he was acting as a journalist" thing. I don't know if he thinks that only journalists should have such protections, or that anything that informs anyone of anything is journalism, or if he's just trying to get "journalist" defined broadly enough that he can actually be one. I'm not a journalist, and I expect to be treated with dignity, even if I do break a law, and I find it yet again insulting that Katz thinks that I would need to be redefined as a journalist to merit news coverage of my questionable arrest and denial of due process. And I'm more than willing to call Katz a butt-head for implying it.
Since the big news agencies answer to the same corporate masters that produce (other) copyrighted material, why would it be in their best interest to overturn a law that guarantees them more profit at the expence of the common good?
Let me say that again. Big news media is owned by big business - they don't want the DMCA overturned, so why should they report on how it is abusing the Constitution?
science is a religion
try your local radio or tv stations...
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
computer savvy person == suspicious
encryption expert == suspicious
person who wrote a decryption program without governmental or corporate blessing == hacker
hacker == evil
hacker arrested by FBI == no smoke without fire, therefore the hacker must be guilty
and for many in the US :
russian == communist
communist == evil
russian hacker == evil evil
russian hacker arrested by FBI == hooray FBI for saving the free world !!!
Most likely, if Dmitri's case receives press coverage, it'll probably be something like "Evil russian hacker arrested for attacking good US corporation Adobe's interests", not "Poor bastard in jail for 2 weeks without bail hearing". So maybe it's just as well if the press doesn't talk about it (the word you're looking for by the way is "biased").
Welcome to the politically corrected corporate America ...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Read practically any *political* book by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, and you'll soon come to the realization of the futility of your proposal (for a taste from _Manufacturing Consent_, go here.) Only ideological material that fits within the agenda of the given elite will get full play in the media--which is, of course, NOT free, but wholly owned by increasingly fewer groups of people whose interests coincide less and less with those of "the People"; that is why, surprise, surprise, this case is muted, if not completely unknown, because it challenges the tenets of issues the DMCA camp wants kept quiet.
Sadly, writing to your editor solves nothing more than venting your spleen *here* does--actually, probably far less, as at least SOME people beyond the Gatekeepers see your opinions here, whereas at the Times and Post the most likely recipient of your words is the Round File.
No, if you want to support Dimitry, send him and his lawyers money. If you want to stop the DMCA--and other repressive measures taken by the Elite, be prepared to help those on the front lines with your wallet. In this unjust society, money is the only force that can buy Justice.
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, The Histories
What really frightens me is the chicken-and-egg problem inherent in all of this. The media thinks that the masses only want titilating sensationalism in their news. Yet, the masses typically look to the media to know what to be concerned about and to what they should pay attention. Unfortunately, the media isn't giving issues about digital law any type of coverage, therefore no one is concerned about it.
The other thing that worries me is that people just don't seem to care about laws in the digital age. Given that the average computer user doesn't show the slightest interest in how and why computers work, I honestly can't imagine that they would care about how and why digital laws work. As long as they can get their music and chat rooms, they will probably be content with the DMCA. Professors being threatened by the RIAA over a scholarly paper? Big deal. Russian hacker tossed in jail? That Commie deserves it. The Slashdot community is up in arms but that is only because it has entered our realm.
Perhaps I've been reading Transmetropolitan too much lately, but I'm starting to think that society in the future really will degenerate into a group of apathetic people who are only concerned with what they can buy, eat, or fuck.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
I only wish. I drank a can of "Old Coke" about six months after New Coke came out. (At an automotive garage that would buy months worth of soda ahead of time just because they could.) It was only after I drank it and noticed the familiar flavor that I looked at the can and saw the promotional offer from just before New Coke came out.
New Coke was really just a scam so they could stop using 100% sucrose sugar because U.S. sugar prices were so inflated (like 10 times the world market price) and start using High Fructose Corn Syrup instead. They would mess so much with the sweetner mix for Coke Classic that about three or four years ago I gave up and switched to Diet Coke because of batches of Coke Classic that would taste worse. At least Diet Coke has a consistent flavor.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
I'm out on my road bike last night to put in a couple dozen miles and a couple climbs. I'm about to head back home and take the lights legally, coasting along behind a silver/grey Ford Taurus around a left turn. I'm drifting over to the bike lane and ahead is a local TV news van, probably out looking for the odd house fire ("Houses, are they safe? Should people move back to caves, on tonight's in-depth report"), auto wreck ("Roads, are they safe? Should we go back to driving down rutted cart paths, on tonight's in-depth report"), or the next dog mauling victim ("Pitbulls, are they safe? Should people be required to wear padded armor in public to save this noble and misunderstood breed, on tonight's in-depth report"). The driver ahead of me stops, right in the road, IMHO, to see what excitement the news crew is there pursuing. To dodge the car I dive to the bike lane, my rear tire skidding and hammering into the curb, ejecting a spoke reflector, which shatters. My wheel is bent, but I'm otherwise fine.
The news media is obviously a distraction. People look to it, as the driver did, to see what action they're after, while themselves posing a hazard to those around them ("Roadies, are rubbernecking drivers safe from them? Or should they all be locked in a burning mobile home full of pitbulls being towed down the freeway, in tonight's in-depth report") would hold up traffic. I have no doubt that if they asked the driver about a russian programmer being detained by an unjust law the driver's eyes would glaze over and they'd have to pull into a McDonalds to re-establish their bearings.
Just my half a nybble.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
We interrupt this broadcast to bring you the latest in the Chandra Levy case... yep, she's still missing!!!
Ok, now back to this thing about a russian in jail for breaking uh, the law i guess, i'm not really sure... i think the YMCA, er, DMV is involved.
Nosce te Ipsum
written anything about this in the major newspapers/news shows? (I don't mean news shows on the web, I mean CNN, NBC, ABC, FOXNews, on TV; I mean the New York Times, USA Today, Washington Post, and other local and national newspapers in print)
/. community would like to know.
Usually reporters are more than willing to be the first to post a story, why none here? I'm sure there are reporters who are reading Slashdot; if so, can you please reply on why your newspaper hasn't run any stories and/or if there has been any actiion by the Feds "convincing" you to not post any stories, or is it fear of gaining federal attention.
I know in my case, I've considered writing a letter to the editor regarding the DMCA and the resulting issues. However, I am definitely -not- a model citizen, and am afraid to gain attention by the FBI, and so I've kept my mouth shut, though as sson as I have the money, I'm going to try giving out flyers and such.
But regardless, if anybody out there has any *real* info on WHY the media isn't covering the case of Dmitry Skylarov or the DMCA, please inform us; I'm sure the
Thanks
It's a nice idea, but it would never work. There's a provision in copyright law that says that an illegal work cannot have protection. Just like you can't lock a nuke up in your house and claim that it can't be removed because it's inside your private property, you can't claim copyright protection for a virus.
Granted, it would have to be proven first that your code is malicious before they could break the encryption to study it, but that's easily done.
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
....it would get up in the top 10 so the others could find it and read this.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
woah, did you see the end of that article?
That's a neat little scenario of abusing the DMCA the guy mentions:
Virus writers can use the DMCA in a perverse way. Because computer viruses are programs, they can be copyrighted just like a book, song, or movie. If a virus writer were to use encryption to hide the code of a virus, an anti-virus company could be forbidden by the DMCA to see how the virus works without first getting the permission of the virus writer. If they didn't, a virus writer could sue the anti-virus company under the DMCA!
Now THAT is a nifty idea. Someone's GOT to try this. Not me though, I have vacation time coming up and I'm not going to spend it in prison!
-- Kengineer
Remember when Hitler turned Germany into hell on earth, said it would last 1000 years, and ended up sustaining it for only five years? The Digitial MILLENIUM COPYRIGHT Act sounds awfully familiar.
But now, they are quiet. Why? Because the intrigue of the story and the DMCA cannot be broken down into a 3 minute news segment. Besides that, most people who aren't geeks really don't understand whats at stake and whats involved. Call me elitest if you want but its true - most of my friends say they get the ol deer in headlights look when they try to explain why this is bad.
The only media that can do justice here is online media (which is redundant - the geeks already know) and print media which has more space to delve into the details. But even they are remainig quiet except for a few op-d pieces in the NY TImes and the like.
Plus, the fact that its 'some RUssian kid' instead of an all American honor student means most folks just don't care which is a shame. I'd love to see a news story where they talk with his wife (with children nearby of course) to try and humazine this. The other thing is the media needs to figure out a way to explain this to the average person - which is hard. Most of the analogies to lock picking tools, etc carry an inference of criminal intent - where most feel the DMCA restricts valid testing of encryption technologies to improve them.
So we're left with a bunch of Internet geeks vainly trying to cause an uproar about this but until the avvg Joe Sixpack can a) understand the issues and b) give a rats ass about them, Dimitri will conitnue to languish in jail.
Top Most Bizarre/Disturbing Error Messages
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/2001 0730/aponline173608_000.htm
A reporter, Vanessa Leggett is being held without hearing, in contempt of court, at the FBI's behest, in Texas. The specifics of the charge and even the name of the JUDGE who issued the order is being kept secret, and her attorney was threatened with jail even for speaking out about it.
If we aren't over the line of federal tyrrany already, we are getting damn close.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
Now that that's off my chest... Laws is laws and it's far from unusual for the FBI or other Feds to try out a tactic, whether its bugging a mafia son's keyboard or arresting a foreign programmer (just to make up a couple purely hypothetical examples) just to float the idea and see how it plays in court. But my question for anyone with a little real legal knowledge is, why has no bail been set? When is he going to be indicted before a grand jury? How the hell long can they keep him in that Las Vegas jail without, you know, doing something definite? Since we routinely let murderers and rapists out on the street on unjustifiably puny bails, what exactly is the danger of letting this guy out on bail while they figure out how embarassing/politically damaging it's potentially going if they wind up getting the DMCA overturned and have to apologize to Russia for detaining their citizens unjustly in the same fiscal year as it becomes clear that the FBI is basically a lending library for sensitive information and expensive gadgets? Are they afraid he's going to write some really bad code? Can't they just hold his passport if they're afraid he'll leave the country? What the hell are they up to?
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
2) Even allowing your imperfect analogy, consider the reverse-engineering issue. Say I take a coke and run it through the gas chromatograph and come up with a formula that's equivalent: I strongly suspect that to win a hefty lawsuit Coke would have to convincingly demonstrate that my publication of their trade secrets had caused a loss in revenue - thus would the damages be determined.
There is a term for arresting someone because you think they are going to cause a crime: it's called prior restraint and it's unconstitutional. That is just one of the reasons why the DMCA IS something new and SHOULD be thrown out.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
A quick search on the New York Times Web site turns up five stories since July 18, six if you count the Lawrence Lessig essay mentioned by Katz. This story maybe hasn't been covered as much as you would like, but to say that it's being grossly underreported or ignored by the news media. If you're looking for coverage of the story on the local news, don't hold your breath. They're too busy with stories about lost kittens and "news you can use." TV news ignores a lot of important stories, not just this one.
Remember the sequel to Revenge of the Nerds? All the nerds went on strike, and there was no electric power, no gasoline, and nobody to run their computers.
If anyone out there is working on the servers that support NBCi or any of the other big media websites, next time the server crashes, just say no!
Without nerds the telephone system won't function, the U.S. will be at our mercy!
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
Bizarro Earth: Where a talented engineer who has been imprisoned by a repressive USA government longs to return to Russia so he can be free. Could any of us imagined this scenario 15 years ago?
-Patric
No, they still do. There is a reason it is called the "Original" formula. Cocaine is still a bi-product. They just extract it all later. I once read that Coca-cola is the world's largest producer of Cocaine for pharmacies. BTW, cocaine is legal for some mediacal use, including as a local anastetic for the nose. Fun facts, eh? Please see Web MD's page about the legal uses of cocaine.
Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
The Guardian, a left-leaning British newspaper, has had just two stories on Sklyarov (as far as I can see). One of them is here. This will probably tell Slashdot readers nothing new, but the journalist's own page has various interesting Sklyarov links, including to the Powerpoint file of his Defcon presentation.
That is not generally the case. This issue usually comes up in immigration cases. The US does treat non-citizens rather differently from citizens in some areas of its legal system.
That is only one aspect of due process. It remains to be seen how this will be applied in other areas.
Firstly, I have to say that I am not often impressed by the writings of JonKatz. I find them whiny and hysterical, but most importantly, poorly researched. They don't live up to the standards of what one would expect from a staff writer of an important publication such as Slashdot. His articles rarely do anything more than preach to the choir, rehashing the beliefs of a majority of slashdotters, rather than exploring the issues in detail and challenging widely-held assumptions -- which would make for MUCH more interesting reading (and discussion).
On the other hand, the JonKatz bashing has gotten out of hand. A typical rebuttal to a JonKatz piece can be summed up as "You Suck". These sorts of people should be introduced to the part of the User Preferences page where you can exclude stories by specific authors. Either that or they should be a little more creative and thoughtful and less infantile in their posting.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
First, compose it using some word processor, anything from vi to Notepad to MS word will do. Make sure the arrticle states your point in a pleasant manner, as flames and profanity hit the recycle bins quickly. Keep it short, 250 words should be sufficient. Long editorials get trashed fast.
Two: Prepare a cover letter. Include your name, phone number (home&work), address, and signiture. Phone required so that they can call you to confirm you are the actual author of the editorial. I have listed several addresses to where it can be sent:
Three: Send! Decide your submission process of either snail mail or e-mail. The 3 papers I listed above (plus another good one) can be reached at:
Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20071
letters@washpost.com
Letters to the Editor
Los Angeles Times
202 W. 1st St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012
letters@latimes.com
Letters to the Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036
fax: (212) 556-3622
letters@nytimes.com
USA TODAY
1000 Wilson Blvd., 21st
Arlington, VA 22229
Notes: If you snail mail or fax, you MUST have a signiture on your submission, and the submission must be a printout, no hand written material. Email: Do NOT send the an editorial to multiple papers at the same time. They won't like seeing the To line having other papers listed. BCC probably wont work either. More Email: Do not send your article as attachments. Put the work in the body of the message. We don't know what the receipient will have on their machine, so send email using plaintext.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Every now and then I see something on /. to the effect of "from the boring-news-submitted-10000-times dept," In this case, slashdot has received numerous submissions regarding the same topic, and decided to post it. Whether or not it's boring, it's something a lot of people have interest in, and an editor felt the need to pass the word along. Same deal at a newspaper, if the /. comunity can bury a review board in editorials all about the same thing, they can follow the same route, and also go one further of doing something about it by sending out the journalists. Even if all they find out is what has been already reported here on /. and tech news sites (CNet, Wired, etc), it may get more attention by being in places outside tech news sites.
As for journalists being deterred by DMCA. A good journalist isn't spooked by threats of getting jailed for reporting the facts. Dimitry wasn't scared of telling the world about Adobe, was he?
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Katz paragraph:
In April, Princeton Professor Edward Felten, an encryption researcher, received a letter from record industry lawyers warning him that a paper he was about to present at a hacker conference -- the paper described the weaknesses of an encryption system -- could subject him to criminal actions under the DMCA. Felten withdrew the paper, and is now the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the DMCA on First Amendment grounds.
New York Times paragraph:
Increasingly, in the United States, this freedom has been lost. In April, for example, Edward Felten, a Princeton professor and encryption researcher, received a letter from recording industry lawyers warning him that a paper he was about to present at a conference -- it described the weaknesses of an encryption system -- could subject him to enforcement actions under the D.M.C.A.. Mr. Felten understood the threat and decided not to present his paper. Largely as a result of this experience, he is now the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the Digital Millennium Copyright Act on First Amendment grounds.
--
Aaron J. Shaver
http://aaronshaver.com/
"Why aren't the media covering this?" Is this a rhetorical question? If not, and you really want to know why, read this.
Is there anything you can do about it? Yes. Stop buying books, magazines, tickets to movies and the products of advertisers that buy space from Big Media. Read alternative media. Create your own books, music, movies and distribute them via independent media outlets. Freeze Big Media out of your life -- they are propagandists and don't merit your time, attention or respect. Eventually, the layoffs will start and you'll have more foot soldiers ready to jump to your side.
Proteus7
"People in power are going to try to maintain their power. That's not a very profound thought. But there's no way for them to [maintain] it, except by obedience. And obedience isn't necessary. So there's no limits to the extent to which freedom and justice can not only be defended, but expanded." - Noam Chomsky
Katz's argument is flawed. He tries to equate the dissemination of information that breaches the security of a company's product to reporters packing toy guns in suitcases running through airport security terminals. There's a primary difference, here. Detailing weaknesses of an encryption method already put to use by a private company can wreak havoc on their profitability. There's a good chance that many of you are anti-corporation, anti-profitability. I might remind you, however, that it's the lure of being able to turn a profit that has motivated the advancement of the computer industry, and the economy as a whole. And that, in turn, is responsible for our high standard of living (assuming you live in America).
Software, MP3's, and eBooks in non-encrypted unprotected form are all nonrival nonexclusive goods, thanks to the fact that they aren't composed of matter and can be easily copied and distributed. Nonrival nonexclusive goods are what economists call pure public goods, which are typically provided by the government (assuming there is enough public support for them) because in most cases, it is impossible for a private company to recoupe its operating costs providing a pure public good. Perhaps the only significant examples of pure public goods provided by private firms is broadcast television and radio, as they're able to sell airtime to advertisers.
Private companies typically sell pure private goods, which are both rival and excludable. This means that it is possible to withhold the product from people who do not pay, and that consumption of the product means that the product is no longer available. A cheeseburger is a pure private good because McDonald's doesn't have to give you a cheeseburger unless you pay for it, and when you eat the cheeseburger, no one else can eat the same cheeseburger.
The Digital/Information/Whatever Age introduces a new problem. We now have products, which, when left unprotected/unencrypted, are pure public goods, free for the looting, and will run any digital business venture into the ground. The solution, then, is to encrypt (or do the annoying thing and splatter advertisement all over the place).
Say what you will about documents that detail methods of cracking physical security systems. When you provide information that cracks a security system protecting a digital good, you are effectively providing access to every instance of that good, and, in addition, allowing more instances of the good to be created. Anyone can understand the implications this has for a business providing a digital good.
This is why lectures and papers that provide the information to destroy a business's financial security are so dangerous. At the very least, jailed Russian boy should have informed Adobe of the weaknesses inherent in their encryption scheme before attempting to give this information to the public domain. Furthermore, arguments that revealing the weaknesses of encryption schemes is a public service is bunk in this case, because Adobe's encryption scheme isn't in widespread use.
Some may criticize Adobe for choosing such a weak encryption scheme in the first place, saying they had it coming to them. I say, if there's someone out there capable of breaking the encryption and is willing to use that ability to break the law and ruin Adobe's financial security, then let Adobe suffer the consequences. Offering information that illustrates how to bypass Adobe's encryption creates an unnecessary catalyst for illegal activity.
Think before you cry foul, people. For the record, there's not much of a legal precedent for putting the guy in jail, and thus I think that was the wrong course of action. But getting all riled up over the First Amendment (perhaps the easiest thing in America to get riled up over) is silly. You might want to consider the fact that there _are_ exceptions to the First Amendment already, and that making provisions for a new one might be the best course of action with regards to the future of the digital marketplace.
this discussion seems to be getting off topic, katz posted the original thread declaring the first amendment infriction that a man charged by the DMCA should not be kept in jail, "while lawyers get to slug out what ought clearly to be a civil, not a criminal, issue. "
and closes hinting that if the current Skylarov trend continues, the internet may become a very censored place
"They will have permanently altered the First Amendment and the protection it has always accorded free, controversial and offensive speech. And the Net will become a very different kind of place, not only for coders and hackers but for any person who loves the unique freedom it has offered for nearly a generation. "
too much of these threads argue the morality of reverse engineering, whereas i am not sure if that is what he was even charged for: and definitely not the purpose of the thread
basicly:
what is he being charged for exactly...
and how DOES reverse engineering adobe put someone in jail, while reverse engineering every version of doze98 that has been cracked hasn't landed everyone else in jail?
(and doesn't it seem nutz that the russian government isn't involved yet?)
"pink ones for everyone involved" -KP