Say Here Why Sklyarov Should Go Free

In some previous columns I argued that Russian hacker gadfly and academic Dmitri Sklyarov, in a Nevada jail at the hands of federal authorities, is the victim of a serious injustice. He should not have been arrested and jailed under the DMCA in for writing software that undermined the effectiveness of Adobe's e-book encryption software. Were he not a so-called "hacker," he wouldn't have been. Sklyarov, 26, has been jailed for two weeks now. This is a perversion of copyright law and principles that have stood for more than two centuries. The arrest seriously undermines the First Amendment. Some of you disagree. But if you agree, here's a cyber petition in the spirit of the Net: rather than sign somebody else's statement, post your own reasons you think the arrest was inappropriate, and why Sklyarov should be freed. If you feel the arrest was justified, you are welcome to say so. I will see that your comments and arguments reach the appropriate federal officials. This is one of those rare battles that needs to be won. Add your ideas below:

Skylarov's fate has significance far beyond encryption programs. It goes directly to the very idea of security online, of hacker exploration, the open sharing of software processes, and to the creativity and challenge that is at the heart of the Net. This process of sharing, exploring and challenging is one of the primary reasons for the Net's growth, from gaming to messaging to system software to open source. This case also involves the future of copyright and intellectual property. Sklyarov is in jail because of a poorly-conceived provision of the DMCA written by entertainment company lobbyists that goes far beyond existing copyright law.

Sklyarov violated no aspect of traditional copyright law -- only the outlandish provisions of the DMCA. His behavior is similiar to that of many journalists and critics who, over the years, have obtained secret, classified or copyrighted corporate or governmental information to expose flaws, weaknesses or more serious forms of wrongdoing. Few have been arrested and thrown in jail. The federal courts have always taken the view that the greatest threat to freedom is the unchecked power of large institutions, from governments to auto manufacturers. In a sense, the future of Net security depends on people like Skylarov probing for weaknesses and flaws. Whatever his motives, Sklyarov's behavior was in this protected tradition.

Even if Skylarov is freed tomorrow, his arrest and persecution will chill criticism of corporate products and power, and threatens the survival of individualism online. This is a major escalation for increasingly aggressive and monopolistic tech and media corporations, some of which are aggressively moving to control content and communications. Copyright is their new wedge. This criminal case should be dropped, and Sklyarov freed.

Comments

I would agree, but...

[truthsearch]

A court case like this over the DMCA would almost certainly get overturned (of course, IANAL, but this is IMO). However, a Russian would have to wait in our federal jails until the whole process is complete. We could be talking years. I would be more inclined to want the case to go to trial if an American were in jail. And no, it's not so an American can be the hero, but because he/she will be closer to home and would most certainly be treated better.

FBI web readers take note: I am almost inclined to heavily study encryption, reverse engineer some stuff, and publish it on the web just to say, "Come and get me, let's go to trial and get this sh*t over with." I have no immediate family, so I'm almost tempted to do it.

How to change the DMCA

[Gehenna_Gehenna]

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King taught that the only way to respond to an unjust law is to break it.

I agree that Skylerov is not being served justice, but perhaps his sacrifice can bring about change to the ill-devised DMCA.

This needs to go to a court where technolegy isn't veiwed as a yoke to assist in our daily lives. My hope is that the lawyers and judges on this case can see technolegy as the last great American Freedom. Skylerov's actions were to free restrictive and narrowminded technolegy to empower people to use the product in question, not to promote pirecy or theft of a product.

I can only hope that thi is the death knel for the DMCA I hear on the horizon and not the sound of the big business gestapo making sure that their power isn't lost.

Lets make an analogy here:

[MongooseCN]

Case 1: Sklyarov writes a program which demonstrates the lack of security in a programs piece of software. This shows that the developers of the software have to rewrite their code to fix this problem, this also prevents consumers from buying faulty software which could leak important information.

Case 2: Consumer Reports buys a car, test drives the car and tips it over. They publish a report showing that the car is defective. The cars engineers have to redesign the car and this also prevents consumers from buying a defective car and injuring themselves.

So when Consumer Reports announces that a car is defective, how come they don't get arrested and jailed? They are releasing information against the companies interests in order to protect consumers, damaging the companies reputation and sales of the car. I'm sure any company would want to prevent this information from being released. Sylyrov was not arrested for reasons of immoral acts or destructive behavior. Sklyrov was arrested because he released information that was against a companies interest in order to protect consumers, and the company used a new law which applied to this type of information to prevent it.

Re:Which fair use does DMCA interfere with?

[stuccoguy]

Adobe's implementation of the EBook standard allowed publishers to prohibit the printing of validly purchased EBooks. Obviously printing a lawful copy of an EBook for reading while in the bath or on the patio is a Fair Use. Adobe's scheme prohibited that fair use. The Advanced EBook Processor broke Adobe's encryption scheme and allowed lawful owners of EBooks to print them for reading someplace else other than at the computer.