Slashdot Mirror
Sklyarov Bail Hearing Monday
mr_don't writes: "I just saw that the Electronic Frontier Foundation has just posted an Action Alert entitled "What YOU Can Do To Help Set Dmitry Sklyarov Free"
... Around 11am on August 6, 2001, at the San Jose Federal Building, Dmitry is set to have another bail hearing in front of Magistrate Judge Edward A. Infante. Protests are planned to coincide with the hearing. I hope as many people as possible can come to the demonstration... Help the EFF pack the courtroom during the hearing." A short article in the Mercury News mentions the hearing too, as well as the half-million dollar, five-year penalty that could be imposed.
Material which is encrypted can't be legally copied when it moves into the public domain because of DMCA. What if works like Shakespeare, Dickens, and the bible had been created under DMCA?
Fair use is a very established limitation to the monopoly of copyright. The DMCA makes many forms of fair use criminal by placing legal impediments that have nothing to do with centuries of copyright law.
As second ammedment advocates like to point out: just because a tool can be used to criminal ends doesn't necessarily make it a criminal tool.
As to the license vs. property argument, there are plenty of precedents which establish that fair use of copyright extends to software regardless of license details to the contrary.
A common clause in many contracts states that should any clause of the contract be found to be unenforcable, the remainder of the contract shall be binding to the extent of its enforcability. Essentially, this allows the contract drafter to fill an agreement with all sorts of dire threats and restricions that the licensee feels bound by. Whether those agreement details are within the scope of what can legally be contracted is another matter altogether.
A cocaine manufacturer, however, is directly responsible for manufacturing an illegal product with known serious health effects and which has a negative impact not only on the user but on those around him.
Problem is that the vast majority of these problems are created as a direct result of a policy of prohibition (a lesson sadly not learned from history.) There is no product which would not be made highly dangerous through handing the production and distribution over to criminals.
The point is, however, that they've not only outlawed mass redistribution, but are now making claims against fair use rights which have been in place since the founding of copyright law in this country in 1791, such as limited copying for education or research, and "first sale" rights which allow for the purchaser of a copyrighted work to do anything he wishes with said work save redistribute unauthorized copies for a profit. Sklyarov's tool is necessary for the exercise of these rights in the e-book's current form. The DMCA is attempting to outlaw this and other tools,
The law in Russia appears to be similar in terms of "fair use" indeed it is probably more oriented towards the consumer than that in the US.
It's funny that you're being such an ass towards someone you think is wrong, when it's really you who hasn't a clue...
His software was designed PURELY to do something LEGAL, in fact, REQUIRED by law.
Yes, it was designed to allow backups. Russian law requires that customers be able to create backups. There was no law being broken.
His talk didn't even break the DMCA, but Adobe's knee-jerk reaction made the FBI scramble to claim that it did.
(His software doesn't circumcent a legal and effective access control measure, because it's not legal to limit that access, where he wrote and sold the software.)
Don't bother replying, we both know you're wrong.
The U.S. Constitution lays out clearly the process for something to become law. It also gives a specific set of powers and a specific set of limits to what things can become law by proclamation of the U.S. congress.
Some of the things in the DMCA are outside of what the U.S. congress has the power to declare law.
This is misleading. The DCMA is a law. Once congress passed it and the president signed it, it became law. It is not up to congress or the president to decide if the law is constitutional or valid; that is left for the courts to decide. The Skylarov case could be a test case for the DMCA, if the charges are worded correctly. But if it ends up being just a dispute over whose laws have jurisdiction (Russian or US), it won't be a test case. It seems on the face of it that this second option is the most likely.
The Economics of Website Security
If the rest of the world decides to follow the U.S.'s example, there will be an end to all international travel. No matter who you are or where you live, you have probably done something perfectly legal where you live that is a crime in some other jurisdiction. It (whatever 'it' is) might even be a felony.
Perhaps you talk about it on your personal website. Why not, it's not like it's a crime (where you live). Do you own an unlicensed television? Stay out of the U.K. Do you provide unfiltered internet access? Stay out of Austrailia. Better make sure when visiting a foreign country that they drive on the same side of the road as you do unless you want to get a ticket when you arrive.
Laws vary from state to state even within the U.S. Before visiting a neighboring state, it might be best to check with a lawyer from that state. If you run a casino in Vegas, you're pretty much confined to your home state and a few reservations as far as U.S. travel is concerned. If you have ever bought or sold alcohol on Sunday, don't come to Georgia (the one in the U.S. that is).
It's bad enough that there are now enough obscure laws that lawyers have to specialize without having various 'justice' systems enforce their laws in other jurisdictions as well.
Anybody know of protests scheduled in New York? If you do, email me and of course post.
Again, could you please explain the relevence of the fact that he holds the copyright to the code.
The copyright holder has the exclusive right to distribute the work. So in order to distribute the work, ElcomSoft needed Sklyarov's permission (at least, you can presume they had it since he worked for the company and wasn't suing them for copyright infringement). Unless Sklyarov had already given a blanket permission for distribution before learning about it's distribution in the U.S., it seems that he's certainly guilty by not withdrawing that permission. Hopefully his lawyers have already fabricated a fake license agreement signed before any of the U.S. distributions took place, but I'd say there's certainly some evidence of a crime. Now that I've read up on probable cause as the standard of evidence necessary for an arrest warrant, I'd even say that was reached.
Now maybe there will be some defense evidence to counter this at some preliminary hearings, but as of now it seems like a trial will occur.
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
Yes he could do this. In fact there is a Russian consular office in San Francisco, does anybody know if a consular office is considered the soil of the country it is an office of? I know an embassy is, but the only Russian embassy in the USA is is Washington, D.C.
:)
I don't know Dmitry so I have no idea if he would flee or if he would want to "fight for his innocence". If he fled the jurisdiction, it would be nigh unto admitting guilt.
The problem for the Russian Government if they help him escape is that they want to be our friends now (at least in the monetary sense) so they can't just go flying all their criminals out of the country. (Don't flame me for calling him a criminal, I don't agree with the DMCA, but it is currently and law and if he broke it, he's a criminal.)
Diplomatically, this kind of thing might not go over really well, it certainly wouldn't if he was a big scary criminal. With the current "low profile" nature of this case (at least in the mainstream media), I don't know if anybody would really give a rat's ass in this case.
Hey here's a thought...Maybe this whole thing is the USA's revenge for that college student accused of drug possession and jailed for 6 months in Moscow? The guy just got released today I think.
I'll get really suspicious if Dmitry serves 6 months of a 1 year sentence and is then released.
------
Where are the slash-groupies? I distinctly remember being promised slash-groupies!
No, he has been accused of breaking US law. He has not been found guilty yet.
Furthermore, when he developed the program that started all of this, it was in Russia. Russian law requires that all software must be able to be backed up. The Adobe e-books violate that law. He was just writing a program that allowed for backups to be made. This program was later marketed in the US. Did he market it personally? I don't believe so. But because he was the lead programmer for the program, he is the one getting hit.
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Dmitry broke US law
As he has never been a US citizen it is utterly impossible for him to have broken any US laws when he was outside the US.
and then came to the US to teach Americans how to break the same law.
A law which is void.
Let's keep his ass in prison and make an example out of him.
Rather than making a example out of the people actually responsible...
I understand your feelings, but I don't entirely agree. If it hadn't been Adobe this month, it would have been another company next month. The DMCA is a massive "security hole" in our civil liberties, and Adobe was just the first company to exploit it. That's not an admirable action, but it must be said that the primary problem lies with DMCA, and Adobe is only a secondary culprit.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
He could just walk into the next Russian embassy. It's basically Russian territory, they can't arrest him there and the embassy people would be able to fly him out to Russia without a passport and could even give him a new passport. So there, definitely, unfortunately, is a flight risk.
"It may be your sole purpose in life to serve as a warning to others."
Actually they only have the power to strike down unconstitutional laws, not those which are merely unpopular. You may not like the DMCA, but if it is constitutional, the courts can't do anything about it.
Depends what level of proof is needed here. Someone arrested for giving a talk looks like either an unlawful arrest or an unconstitutional law.
Maybe the onus should be on those who voted (and lobbied) for any law to prove to the US supreme court that it is in accordance with the US constitution.
Rather than the current situation of assuming a law is constitutional until it is dragged (kicking and screaming) to the US supremem court.
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime. A person who aids or advises another in committing a crime may be guilty of aiding and abetting, and may be criminally liable for the acts of the other person, as well.
So why is Bill Gates still a free man?
How it works (I don't live in the U.S):
Every byte in the pdf file is XOR'd with every letter of the word "encrypted".
#define key "encrypted"
while((c = get_byte()) {
for(i = 0; i < strlen(key); i++)
c ^= key[i];
}
It's basically just as secure as Rot-X, but it's definitely not Rot-13 (although Rot-13 was mentioned in the presentation).
So if they wanted to they could use a different key per e-book, but according to Dmitri's presentation they don't.
--
Garett
The products aren't illegal. The DMCA violates the Constitution and is therefore void because Congress does not have the right to pass it.
Problem with the US is that those charged with enforcing the law (and indeed passing it) have taken on some of the attributes of mindless droids.
If they hadn't then the FBI would have simply told Adobe to go and read the US constitution.
So are you telling me that the very act of giving a talk is prohibited under the DMCA? In which case, I would think that it would be obvious that the DMCA is in direct conflict with the first ammendment.
There is a big problem with the US legislature in that it is possible to pass legislation which violates the constitution and have it treated as valid (rather than void). (This even goes as far as something where the title alone induicates a constitutional violation.)
I'm sure there's an international treaty or two we're in violation of as well.
The US violates treaties even more often than it's own constitution.
I just reread the DMCA and I see no mention of it being a crime to be the copyright holder of a circumvention device.
Also it's quite possible to argue that Adobe should also be hauled up on DMCA violations, since their product is a "circumvention device" for the program in question.
The problem is that the definition of "circumvention device" has already been extended beyond the point of utter stupidity.
Second, it should be made very clear that the original complainant, Adobe, has stated that they don't feel he should be charged.
The third point that should be made is that this tool only works for people who have purchased the book, and it allows them to remove certain restrictions, e.g., reading their book on a different computer.
Perhaps what this movement needs is a blind person who uses the tool to enable the read-aloud function of adobe reader to work...
Buy Hex-Rated Stuff, fight the DMCA!
As angry as people may be, understand that while showing up and showing support is great, doing so improperly will only hurt Dmitry, the EFF and the cause you may be trying to support. Don't provide ammunition for companies like Adobe, no matter how tempting it is. Be civil, be courteous and be well spoken if given the opportunity to speak on television, radio or even to the public. Don't alienate the public. Most of them couldn't care less about this case. If people can appear as reasonable citizens then the publics support has a better chance of swinging our way.
Ultimately this is a case for the courts I suppose, but public opinion is important.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
If there's any chance/way you could be there, do it!
Really! Just -- GO! --
Evan - needs to hit preview before submitting
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
What this means for Dmitry Sklyarov is that it will be very hard for him to get out of jail pending trial unless he can come up with some real ties to this district and/or some other means of ensuring he remains in the U.S. for trial can satisfy the District Attorney and the court (e.g., electronic location-tracking bracelet, house arrest, etc.)
How about the fact that I'm certain they have confiscated his passport? Now sure, that doesn't mean he couldn't get out of the country, but it certainly would make it more difficult not only to leave the USA, but to enter into any other country. Doesn't seem like much of a flight risk to me...
------
Where are the slash-groupies? I distinctly remember being promised slash-groupies!
I just made my $500.00 donation to the EFF. Have you made yours?
While I'm sure that the protest will generate all kinds of warm and fuzzy feelings in the radical /. camps, I fail to see how they will get any attention other than "Hey, look at all the nerds." The bulk of the population still does not understand the issues involved and will just write the whole thing off as "another protest, but these ones dress funny." Marches, chants and signs? Most of the press doesn't 'get it' and will only cover it if
- someone does something icredibly stupid (therefore newsworthy), or
- someone can actually get the point across that the DMCA is a horrible piece of legislation.
But c'mon - a protest? I would have expected something a little more creative from theAs far as the general population is concerned, the case involves a "Russian hacker". That's all they need to know and they will tune in to the new and improved CNN for the sentencing details and patiently await the feature-length movie or game-show style punishment.
one better than mcleodeight
Skylarov has become an unwilling pawn in a political game. In two earlier posts, I talked about why Skylarov shouldn't be made into a posterboy for the anti-DMCA lobby. A bunch of people replied, saying that no such thing was happening, and that the protestors were just trying to get him free.
Then I see this post, moderated up to 5, Insightful, saying that we shouldn't free Skylarov early, because he's more valuable as a weapon against the DMCA if he's in jail. Don't you just love all these people are willing to sacrifice an individual in the name of "individual rights"? What a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
DMCA isn't (or shouldn't be) Skylarov's problem. He's Russian, not American, and he didn't vote for the politicians who passed DMCA. Sacrificing him to fight it is just plain wrong. Maybe, if he was American, we could justify such a sacrifice as "his duty to the country" or some such other nonsense, but this is just sickening.
To all those fighting to free Skylarov, keep up the good work. To the rest of you, maybe it's time you gave things a good long thinking over.
Second, it should be made very clear that the original complainant, Adobe, has stated that they don't feel he should be charged.
Well boo fucking hoo. If Adobe didn't think Dmitry should have been charged they should have kept thier fucking mouth shut. Instead Adobe sites the dmca and sets the FBI on him for something not illegal in his country. Then Adobe get bad press and walks away leaving the FBI to do its job. Now Adobe thinks it can set on the side line and route for the good guys.
Fuck that. Adobe started this and they should be held accountable. Until the charges are dropped and Dmitry goes free I've got a good chunk of Adobe products zipped up and sitting on gnutella.
And I'm going to do this to any company that pull dmca shit. I hope a lot more people join me. If we can send a message to these companies maybe they will think twice about doing shit like this
Protests are planned in Boston, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis in addition to the San Jose protest detailed in the EFF's press release. More details at freesklyarov.org (of course!).
[
> He broke the law. If you want to change the law, lobby Congress.
A judge can rule the law violated the Constitution and nullify that law. There are many other ways for a judge to throw out the case. I'm sure his attorneys will know what to do.
-- Will program for bandwidth
this is getting old and so are you
blog
Seeing as how these hearings will be held in San Jose, and what with all the recent industry blood-letting, I'm sure it will be no difficulty whatsoever gathering as many geeks as possible with time to spare on a Monday morning to go fight the power.
--
$ chown -R us:us yourbase
While we all know that North American media is glossing over this (if mentioning it at all), I haven't yet heard anything about how the Russian media, government, and people are reacting. Surely this is an issue of some heat over there... anyone with a more direct exposure to this care to comment? Perhaps a link to a good online russian newspaper (in english please? :) )
"You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
It is said that if you like law or sausage don't watch either one being made.
The following will work best for those of us that are citizens of the US and are registered to vote.
A technique that works to find out if your lawmakers are listening to you is to write them a letter (snail mail) or to e-mail them.
The US House of Representatives has a page where you can send your memeber an e-mail and even help you find out who your representative is. The URL is:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
For the Senate go to:
http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm
The Senate does not have as much information about writting your senator as the House pages do but at least it is a way to contact them.
To assist them in replying to you always include your e-mail address, home address, and if you feel like it a phone number. If you know what precinct, parish, or whatever the number of your voting district is in your state/county/parish or whatever include that as well. Be brief but thorough enough to get your thought across. No more than a page and shorter if possible.
They do like to hear from you and I have yet to have my representative or senators abuse me giving them my information. Using the system when possible at least gives it a chance to fail and who knows, it might actually help.
"I want to know God's thoughts...The rest are details." Albert Einstein
Now IANAL, but I believe that our constitution would afford a visiting citizen of another country the same constitutional protections as a citizen of this country. So are you telling me that the very act of giving a talk is prohibited under the DMCA? In which case, I would think that it would be obvious that the DMCA is in direct conflict with the first ammendment. That case is being tried elsewhere, no need to kidnap foreign nationals to prove a point.
Now if I were Skylarov, I would already be lining up the lawsuits against Adobe and the US Government. Take your pick of civil rights violations, wrongful arrest, violation of due process, denial of a speedy trial, kidnapping and harassment. I'm sure there's an international treaty or two we're in violation of as well.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I am rather ashamed to be associated with folks that want to paste slogans onto a living person as if he were simply a name long dead.
Sklyarov's deeds speak for themselves in a practical sense- he proved, as a thousand cryptographers and analysts have proven before, why DMCA-like laws don't work on a practical basis.
That is his statement against the DMCA- and it's actually far more powerful than most protests. This isn't to say that protests lack importance (in fact, they are the brute muscle of social change,) simply that it's the direct, practical activism of people like Sklyarov that keep this movement in the realm of reality.
Remember that there is a significant percentage of "radicals" out there that just envy the opposition, and aren't exactly for real change. They are what Hakim Bey calls "police-without-power". Such people cannot be trusted in any sense, and I'd advise those who would wish to use Sklyarov as a playing-piece to examine their own motivations- and make certain that they really mean what they say.
Tactics are fine when it's all in your hands and on your neck, but don't ask someone else to die for your cause. Bottom line.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
I'd have given my GWB check to them. No such luck, I fear.
This also tells you a lot about how able I am to donate under other circumstances...
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
I wish I had your penetrating insight into the law. How weak citizens are, to doubt the true words of the law as it is incribed in the DMCA. How wise our lawmakers, to draft and voted for such a pristine clear law. How righteuous our judges must be, to no further considerations upon their minds other than what clearly and rightly os is the case: DIMITRI SKLYAROV HAS VIOLATED THE DMCA, AND THERE CAN BE NO ARGUMENTS ABOUT THAT.
(Maybe you should familarize yourself with the reverse-engineering provisions in the DMCA while you are there telling us what your judgement is.)
I'm sure the Feds have handpicked the judge in question to do this hearing, and it will just be a whitewash hearing to "justify" his incarceration.
I'm sorry for being so pessimistic, but that's the likely truth. They will never let him out on bail because he's a foreign citizen. Remember, the so-called US "justice" system is all about the byzantine SYSTEM, not in meting out justice, else this case would never have MADE it to a court. In fact, the prosecutor should be the one in trouble for even BRINGING this case, and for lying to the court.
The charges are disproven by these facts:
1. Skylarov never wrote, or sold the program in any place where the DMCA is law.
2. Sklyarov never SOLD the program to anyone, he did it as a work for hire for his company. If they used a US company for billing and distribution, that was the actions of the CEO (who was there and wasn't arrested) and others, NOT Sklyarov.
3. Sklyarov never broke any US law on US soil.
They have not charged him with the only thing that he DID do on US soil that was a violation of the DMCA: giving his talk at the conference where he explained how to circumvent E-book encryption. The prosecutors are lying to the court because they will not admit that THIS is the actual basis for the case, yet isn't a charge. It isn't a charge because as a charge it would immediately flunk the 1st Amendment test (statutory law ala DMCA cannot override or abridge Constitutional Law, such as the 1st Amendment free speech guarantee).
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
Any Finns out there?
a sp
I'm at the moment writing the founding documents for the EFF-Finland (work name, If anyone has better suggestions, that would be good). I hope that the founding meeting could be arranged as soon as possible, preferably still during this month.
At the moment in Finland there is no organization , which would defend the basic right of the users in Internet. After the new copyright directive is implemented here, the Sklyarov-case may happen here, too. The difference is that currently there's no one to organize the defence. That has to be changed while we still have some time!
If you are interested to help or join, please contact me.
Ville Oksanen
Ob-eBook:
Microsoft and AAP have teamed up to control the internet-piracy of eBooks:
http://www.microsoft.com/ebooks/das/antipiracy.
Using technology developed by Microsoft to protect its own intellectual property on the Internet, the AAP has implemented an aggressive Internet surveillance program, which includes an automated, intelligent Internet search tool that searches for unauthorized distribution of eBook content 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The information and evidence gathered by this tool can form the foundation for subsequent civil and criminal enforcement.
To convince the judge to not enforce the law (judge-nullification??)
You say that like it's a bad thing, or even novel.
Yes indeed, the courts do in fact have the power to strike down unjust or even unpopular laws. That is exactly and precisely why the judiciary is a third, separate branch of government, not subsumed under the Legislative or Administrative branches.
In the wrong hands, sanity is a dangerous weapon.
Sklyarov (I knew I got that spelling wrong last time) was not arrested for giving a talk. He was arrested for trafficking in a product designed to circumvent copyright protection measures.
I am comparing that to being arrested for trafficking in cocaine. I believe the two are equal. In fact, I'd probably have more sympathy for the cocaine trafficker, since cocaine is less often used to hurt someone else. But for the record, I don't think either of them should be illegal.
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
Dimitri broke no law, American, Russian or otherwise. One simple reason: the DMCA is not a law.
The U.S. Constitution lays out clearly the process for something to become law. It also gives a specific set of powers and a specific set of limits to what things can become law by proclamation of the U.S. congress.
Some of the things in the DMCA are outside of what the U.S. congress has the power to declare law.
Talking to Congress about repealing the DMCA is nonsense; they have no such jurisdiction either to declare the DMCA void or true. It is outside of the scope of their powers.
The judiciary branch is what should be concentrated on right now, because they are the ones charged with interpreting what is and what is not law. Clearly, several segments of the DMCA (either through vagueness or malice) go outside of the bounds of what the U.S. congress has the powers to do, and it is thus the jurisdiction and the obligation of the U.S. courts to strike the bill down.
Congress should be talked to, but mainly for the purpose of ensuring that they do not attempt to pass such non-legally-valid bills in the future. Not to undo the damage caused by the DMCA, because there is no damage. That isn't their business. There is no law.
And if the courts and the american people decide to lie to themselves and say that the DMCA is a law, then we are all doomed.
Oh well.
I think you misunderstand how the Adobe e-book reader works. In your example, Mary copies an e-book file and gives it to John. You're correct in that the file copies perfectly. John then tries to open the e-book in his own reader, but it won't let him. You see, when Mary bought the e-book, her e-book program sent a unique key to the online bookstore, who encrypted the specific file which she purchased so that only her e-book reader could unencrypt it. John's program has a different unique key (as does every Adobe e-book reader), therefore he can't unencrypt the same file. All this happens automatically behind the scenes, without Mary's knowledge.
The program which Sklyarov wrote is very helpful for someone who purchased an e-book on one computer (say, a desktop computer with a fast broadband connection) but really would like to move it to another computer (say, their laptop). It's also helpful if you want to run an e-book through a text-to-speech processor (especially for blind people).
Adobe is mad because Sklyarov's program allows people to make useful copies. In the long run, they really just want to screw the consumer out of as much money as possible.
How is he involved in the trafficking? If anything, it is his company that should be arrested.
I don't know how much money Dimitry can come up with, but if all else fails, he can do business with a bail bonds business. Costs typically are ten percent of the bail. The only problem is that you sign all your rights to the bail bonds service. If you jump bail, they'll send bounty hunters to bring you back to court in a body cast, and it's all legal.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
First of all, You Are Not A Lawyer. YANAL. The DMCA is untested law. There is no way anyone can authoritatively claim that "the DMCA was broken". Now why can't the EFF claim that Sklyarov was making this "circumvention device" for "interoperability" between say, Blind screen readers and ebook readers?
Sure I agree with you that there is fair use, that it should be a consideration here. BUT THE AMOUNT OF INTELLECTUAL POSERY HERE ABOUT WHAT IS LAW AND NOT, IS DISGUSTING.
To that crack smoking moderator who thought it was insighful, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? Did you take Law 101 or something?
There is nothing idealistic about the reverie. This is very practical. Just because some of the folks ignore you doesn't mean they all will.
I used to think that writting your congressman was useless until I talked to several congress men and women from both the state and national level. They do listen. It is their choice to pay attention. One of them made comment that if they don't hear from us as to what is important to us, then they are making their decisions in a vacum. If we give them input and they ignore it, then we find a better candidate to vote for the next election. One retired member of the US House told me that he and his staff assumed that for each piece of information that a person sent to them, no matter what the form, there had to be at least a 100 people that felt the same way in the same area that person was from. It's simple math, nothing realy idealistic about it.
If I thought this was the only thing to do, I would be deluding myself. If I was in the area around where the hearing was taking place, I would be there. That not being the case, I will do what I can.
As an editorial comment that is not meant to offend, if you are a US citizen and are old enough to vote but are not registered to vote or don't vote, please register to vote and vote. End of editorial comment.
"I want to know God's thoughts...The rest are details." Albert Einstein
Would the EFF pony up, under the same circumstances? Interesting thought, considering they're in this for moral/ethical reasons, not profit.
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Fuckhead.
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
Dmitry was granted bail he will be released from Santa Clara Detention center before midnight Pictures from Rally and details here