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.

Comments

The point

[4n0nym0u53 C0w4rd]

I think it'll take a good deal of work to get the media (and thus, the public) to understand that this case is different from the typical "evil hacker" story. In general, when somebody gets arrested for some type of computer crime, we hear stories about how they "broke in" to top secret systems, intent on destroying or stealing valuable data and wreaking havoc on the poor victim. In this case, it has to be made very clear that this guy did something that was legal where he lived, then came to the US to do something legal, and was arrested. (An excellent example of both time-shifting and space-shifting if I ever saw one).

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...

Re:The point

[garett_spencley]

Yeah well the thing that gets to me the most is people's ignorance regarding encryption and "copy protection".

I do not understand, as much as I've tried, how it can possibly be conceived that encrypting something prevents it from being copied. It doesn't. Therefore I do not see how something that unencrypts something can be considered a "copyright circumvention device".

Let's say that Mary has an e-book and she wants to share it with John. How does she do this? She makes a copy of it. Now the supposed problem here is that her e-book is encrypted right? Wrong. There is no problem. When she makes a copy is encrypted but when John loads it into his e-book ta-da! He can read it because his e-book unencrypts it in order to display it!

Encrypted or not you can still make copies so how is software that unencrypts a piece of data considered a "copyright circumvention device"?

--
Garett

I wish the best, and if you go...

[eXtro]

I wish the best for Dmitry, unfortunately he's learned first hand that the United States government has become nothing more than the enforcement arm of the largest U.S. corporations.

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.

Skylarov being used

[tbo]

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.

How convenient!

[KingAzzy]

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.

Contacting your lawmakers (ugh)

[Jazz Fiddler]

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.

Re:oh. another protest.

[Anonymous Coward]

> But c'mon - a protest? I would have expected something a little more creative from the /. commnunity.

You seem to have more ideas abnout what not to do than about what to do.

Where are your grand creative ideas ? Runnning around and sarcastically demotivating people ?
Of course protestr are useless, but when protesting, people meet each other. When they meet they talk. And when they talk, they may have creative ideas.

You also need to know that 'the /. commnunity.' is a bunch of hackers melted with a bunch of wankers.

I sortof think that most of the ideas from here are better left unimplemented:

1133t> let's do a fr33 dmtiry outl00k virus !
h4x0> hehe. dude, u put a msgbox saying "do you agree with the DMCA ?"
ll33t> cool. luser clic yes, we eipe hard drive.
ll33t> eipe -> wipe. lol
f4gg0t> put other msgbox "next time, sayz NO to DMCA"
h4x0> hehehehe
soop3rc0p> f4gg0t u rulz
ll33t> lol

Is that what you want ?

Cheers,

--fred

Re:Cut the bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

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.