Slashdot Mirror
Sklyarov Released On $50,000 Bail
Mike Schiraldi was the first to write about Dmitry Sklyarov's release from jail, even before it happened: "According to this live report from the courtroom, Dmitri will probably be out of jail real soon now. Of course, he still won't be allowed to leave Northern California, but it's a start ..." Soon after, inaneboy pointed out this Reuters story on yahoo which says that Sklyarov has been released, on 50,000 dollars bail, raised by his employer, ElcomSoft.
phalse phace wrote to say that the EFF has just posted an announcement as well as some background.
That's your opinion; it's not matched by the experience of countless protest organizations and movements dating back centuries. As you've said, you don't have a similar well of experience from which to draw.
It is not effective or witty, it is lame. It makes you look like brainless, uncreative drones on television, and people will tune you right out.
While it may be annoying to you, it *is* effective.
The reason chanting has been used at protest events for centuries is because it works. Chanting, in combination with other factors (bright/colorful/memorable costumes, clear signs, catchy slogans) helps fulfill several goals that most protest groups have. Among them, chanting:
1. Creates substantive sight-and-sound bites for the media.
2. Conveys a basic message to observers.
3. Unites the protesters, giving a greater appearance of unity.
4. Helps keep participant energy up over long protest periods.
5. Can be used to synchronize group action and convey messages in large crowds. ("When we start chanting 'foo', that's the signal to move towards the gates of the plant.")
6. Provides a simple "hook" for bystanders to participate.
I understand that you may consider chants about the DMCA childish, but simple slogans can create interest in a topic. If I know nothing about the DMCA and hear people chanting "Down with the DMCA" (and see signs waving!) I may be spurred to find out more about the subject myself. While you may be adept at explaining the topic in 20 minutes, or even 5, you need to capture interest in 20 seconds -- the time my car is stopped at that red light on the corner -- and that requires slogans, signs, and *chants*.
Please think of something different.
I'll politely refrain from asking how many protests you've participated in, or organized, or how you've kept your mental and physical energy up after 4 hours of marching, or 20 days at the same street corner; after all, you've already said you have no experience with organized protest actions. While I understand that you -- someone educated about the topic -- may find simple chanting "infantile" -- I would suggest that you try engaging in the activity before demanding of others that they replace a time-tested and perennially effective element of protesting.
-Trin
Wrong. Any time you swear to an afidavit you are doing so on the penalty of perjury.
the next time we should discuss Adobe is when their employees are called to the stand. That's when we find out where they really stand on the issues. Right now they can't do anything - good or bad.
Bullshit.
Yes, Adobe's "retraction" and "regret" have proven to be the perfect copout for Adobe. Get the man maliciously arrested for "violating" a flagrantly unconstitutional American law for actions in Russia which were legal, even encouraged, under Russian law, then step back and say "oops, our bad, sorry, please keep buying our ebook products but now its the government's fault, yell at them instead!"
Adobe gets the chilling effect on research into their inadequate, even fraudulant, copy protection schemes and, if we listen to you, never have to suffer a single consiquence for their actions, the direct result of which have been the unjust imprisonment of a software engineer for giving a speech at a technical conference and quite possibly the destruction of the next several years of his life.
Until Adobe does something significant and concrete to make amends for their actions I will continue to hold them in the highest contempt, I will continue to boycott their products, I will continue to encourage my employer and my friends to do the same, and I will continue to speak out about it on public fora such as this one.
Adobe pulled the trigger. The very least they can do is pay reparations for the damage they have wrought.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Is anyone else chilled to the bone by the idea that AOL/Time Warner **owns** ``Happy Birthday''?
This isn't reality; this is the stuff of weird, weird dystopian fantasy.
At least they don't demand a buck from eveyone who sings is.
Can anyone provide a link to show that the song is, indeed, 0wned by AOL/Time Warner?
-grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
IHBT. Bite me, I like a good rumble.
-grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I agree with you again.
I'd even love to make a documentary helping him escape.
>I>"US law was NOT the Law of the Land in Russia."
Considering rampart corruption and almost complete dominance of MOB in Russian society one can argue there is no such a thing.
There are plenty of "mobsters" in the US too both the regular kind and corporates who have extended their behaviour into breaking, bending and rewriting the law.
Indeed the situation would well be worst in the US than in Russia
First of all the policemen were not being attacked. They were the ones attacking. Having said that.
If a police officer is not able to execute his duties when confronted with an unarmed crowd or an unarmed protester then they should be fired. Imagine how this officer will snap when confronted with an actually dangerous and armed felon who is trying to excape from a robbery or a murder scene. It is not the job of the police to execute people. In this case it was their job to keep the ordinary people from the rich and powerful people behind the fence. Seems like you could do this without executing people especially considering they could have used tear gas, water cannons etc. I guess those things are not as much fun as breaking open a skull with your baton or splattering some fuckers brains all over the sidewalk.
War is necrophilia.
Using my poor legal perception, it seems to me that it is still legal for end users to make the one copy, it just isn't legal to develop and sell software to do it for them.
So it is legal to make the copy, but impossable without doing business with a criminal. Sounds to me like they really mean it's illegal, but don't want to face the political problems involved with making felons of librarians, teachers, and grandmothers.
But those are **Windows** problems.
``Oh, so you mean you're a Macintosh user?''
No, no, open source geeks are very security conscious (or *should* be).
``Open source? Is that like in _Antitrust_?''
I give up.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I would like to point out that Ashcroft and his justice dept has a track record of throwing cases when they don't like the law. When the clinton wilderness bill was challenged by Idaho the ashcroft justice dept assigned lawyers filed a one sentence brief with the judge and took just 4 minutes of their alloted 30. Of course they lost and of course this is what Ashcroft wanted.
If you can convince Ashcroft that a law is bad (or puts republicans at a disadvange) he will willingly flub the case. Unfortunately in the case I mentioned he was on the side of the mining and logging companies and he is likely to be on the side of the corporations on this one too. Still maybe if the CEO of adobe was a democrat or gave a lot of money to democrats (I have no idea if they do it seems unlikely) then Ashcroft might not mind undermining their case to emberass them.
War is necrophilia.
He / his company wrote some software for the express purpose of enabling users to bypass Adobe's encryption scheme. He/They marketed it to Americans and then got nabbed when he came to babble about the joys of spam at a convention. He didn't write that software to 'help blind' people, and he didn't write it to 'alert Adobe to flaws in their software protection'. He wrote it to make money, and to make it at Adobe's expense in direct conflict with existing laws.
If he was just some schmuck releasing some free code to over-ride protection I would have a little pity, but as it is he gambled for real and lost. Of course his new role as Poster Child Du Jour means that his future is bright regardless of what the courts decide.
**>>BELCH
Justice would be imprisoning the Senators, Congressmen and President who wrote and signed the DMCA into law.
Err, no.
Law enforcement **is** responsible.
Because of our ludicrous War On (some) Drugs, drugs are a source of incredible potential profit. They are, in fact, the **only** way to not be poor and miserable for a lot of young, poor black men.
Well, they become poor and miserable once they're in jail, but it's not really all about forethought.
To sum up: if white boys wouldn't waltz into the hood and wave hundred dollar bills around, the locals wouldn't shoot each other over them.
``Completely unrelated''---the nerve!
-grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Under various international agreements he can be refused entry upon arriving at his destination and sent back to where he came from.
(Occasionaly Canadians get refused on U.S. airlines because they do not have a passport. The airline would have to foot the bill if the individual was refused entry into Canada as they would have to fly them back to the original airport they departed from. (Even though no passport is required for a Canadian to enter or leave the United States.)
The problem is that people seem to believe that just because they don't like the law Dmitry should be freed. This is just not true. Number one the /. crows is a small section of society (not that only /.ers oppose the law). Number two, those that disagree need to make their voices heard when this goes to court. Dmitry stands accused of commiting a crime, which he did in fact commit.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
And, for all you conspiracy theorists, notice that it's illegal to own the kind of firepower that can hurt a large corporation (say, a tank or a nuclear bomb).
The only case of a corporation being harmed by explosive would be PanAm though...
Unfortunately, yes. Read up on the DMCA... you aren't aven allowed to speak about how to break a copyright "protecting" encryption scheme.
That section of the DMCA must be void possibly the whole thing is void. Depends if someone remembered to add the clause "If any part of this law is voided by the US constitution then the rest still stands".
Problem is that the founders of the US apparently never imagined the possibility of unconstitutional laws not being immediatly struck down by the US supreme court.
For minor offenses here they take a 10% fee off the top before they return it...
Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
No comparison. Phil wrote a program that others exported. Dmitry wrote a program that he distributed at defcon (that much is apparently provable).
Even if he's guilty of breaking the law, that doesn't change the fact that it is a bad law, and that is what should really be addressed.
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
The police SHOULD enforce even laws they think are stupid*; that is the only way the stupid laws can be corrected. Otherwise the public and congress never get any feedback that the law isn't working right.
In which case the best "feedback" would be to arrest the congressmen concerned and give them a a public test about the US constitution.
I think Winston was a little tweaked about America ignoring the incipient rise of a Real Live Evil Empire in Europe until Pearl Harbor got us into `War Mode', where we still are today.
``Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has **always** been at war with Eastasia...''
Churchill was experienced with idiot leaders---his predecessor, Neville Chamberlain, was quite famous for appeasing Hitler. Of course, once he did his little Arthurian thing and saved England from the `Naaaawzis' (as he said it), the good folk of Britain promptly de-elected him. Schmucks.
You know, if France had had a Churchill, World War II would have probably been a lot shorter.
But to summarize: Churchill had good reason for calling the Americans slow to action---they were.
-grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Neither you, I, or anyone else has the right to decide that another country's laws are unjust and need to be broken. When you travel you agree to follow the laws of the country you're visiting. If you don't like the laws, DON'T GO THERE. If you choose to break the law because you feel that it's unjust then you must face the consequences. Especially if you are breaking the law because you feel it's unjust. You are making a conscious choice to buck the system, if you're not smart enough to realize that you will have to face those consequences, that's your problem, it doesn't excuse you from being punished. Or more appropriately from having to fight the unjust law in the legal system that you broke it in.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
Not being allowed to leave California is one of the most Cruel and Unusual punishments I can imagine.
**>>BELCH
He is not a free man until he hits international airspace on a jet bound for Moscow.
Actually he'd be a free man the moment he borded a non US flagged ship or aircraft.
I guess I'll jump in here.
your attitude seems to me that the penalty for vandalism and assault ought to be death. Not only death but death without a jury, a trial, a lawyer, a sentence. No chance at appeals or the opportunity to call witnesses or defend yourself. In your eyes if a person commits vandalism then he or she ought to be summarily executed by any police officer who happens to be at the scene.
Unfortunately there are plenty of people like you in this world and that's why brutal opression exists all over the planet.
War is necrophilia.
If the above is factually correct, then the prosecution's only hope is to find relevant US law, precedent, or theories under which an ordinary employee of a corporation can be held to have criminal liability for the actions of the corporation.
Which is something which US corporate interests would not want to happen...
No, he didn't plan on being a martyr perhaps, but I'll wager he did enjoy thoughts of becoming a counter-cultural hero of sorts.
The man wrote software to circumvent Adobe's encryption. Fine. He (HIM, not just his company) then sold it for a profit using American credit card systems. He didn't give it away to help the blind or any bleeding-heart nonsense like that. He broke the law, flaunted it and got busted. His fscking problem, IMHO.
All this 'Free Dimitry' nonsense is embarassing. Predictable, but embarassing.
**>>BELCH
For starters, as this is a Federal prosecution, it's the US Attorney, not a D.A. In either case, they're shielded by prosecutorial immunity.
Ben Masel: 51,282 votes for US Senate in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary
Hey, I was there from about 10:45 AM to noon. Where would I send pictures I took with my digital camera? I don't have any place to host the pictures from.
We do the right thing.... sooner or later.... heh.
Oh well, I guess I'm just an eternal cyncic. Still, I'm very glad this happened, and hopefully he'll be able to get on with his life ASAP. Props to his employer for raising the cash. Somehow I doubt Adobe would ever do the right thing and reimburse them. I must say this whole experience has left me with a very bad taste in my mouth regarding Adobe.... I'll make sure never to purchase any of their products, and reccomend the same to any of my employers/employees/anyone.
He's gonna have a lot of e-mail to catch up on. Wasn't he in jail for the whole SirCam bit?
BilldaCat
I think the feds should pay HIM $50,000 personally and get him on a private luxery jet home and get down on their knees and beg for forgivness :)
What is Think Geek going to do with all of those Free Dimitri shirts they just got in? Nobody is going to want them now....
If, as they claim, Adobe doesn't want him prosecuted any more, then why don't THEY pay the $50000 bail?
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
... for pointing something that should get hyped in every dealing that anyone sympathetic to Sklyarov's plight has with anyone else: that this was legal under Russian law.
Seriously, the fact that he's a Russian (read "commie") coder (read "hacker") can, and may, get played against him in the press to no end, so it's nice just to see those little words, "legal in Russia," that should humble the cretins who pushed this misguided law.
"Ah, for the freedoms of Mother Russia..." *sigh*
AHHHHHHH! I'm burning with goodness again!
- Reakk, Sluggy Freelance
he still won't be allowed to leave Northern California...
Which earnestly solicits the question "may he code???"
Just because its "doing your job" dosent make it legal. Hitmen do there job, and get put in jail for it. The question is not whether he broke the law, he did. The question is whether the law is unconstitutional and or unethical. The feds at this point cannot just be like "You know what, this law just isnt right. Let him go." Thats not their job. It will be a long process for him to ever be released.
my other penis is a vagina
Here are a couple new SF Chronicle articles of interest:
Probably only applicable to those of us in Silicon Valley, but is anyone else interested in taking him out for a beer and some decent food? Show him the parts of the US that don't suck....
there are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
Yep. $50000 for bail is a well-deserved slap in the face of FBI. I wonder what's going on inside FBI now. The agents are not stupid, just following orders. I am sure they know as well as all of us that this law is bogus. Must suck to be them.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
(Usual disclaimers: IANAL etc.)
Finding God in a Dog
California: Vast, beatiful scenery
Jail: 4x6 cell, concrete
California: Sunshine
Jail: Flourescent track lights, or perhaps a bare bulb. (Note: I don't speak from experience here, but from such great documentaries as "The Shawshank Redemption"", "Escape From Alcatraz", and "Sleepers")
California: I'm hungry, I haven't eaten in like 8 hours, this sucks.
Jail: This constantly being beaten by corrupt guards sucks.
California: Bikini (somewhat)clad women, everyone stares at hungrily.
Jail: You (*shudder*).
shaddup
Ummm, he is most certainly not free. He is just out on bond awaiting trial. He has no passport, and no freedom of movement (he can't leave California, and he most certainly can't go home to Russia).
Yes, this is an improvement of his general situation, but this is far from over. He still faces the possibility of hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and years in prison.
For now, he just has a much bigger jail cell.
The message our lawmakers are sending to hackers is clear; leave the copy protection alone and instead just beat the f*cking shit out of the copyright holder.
I hope Dimitry flees. There won't be any justice for him here.
So what you're saying is that we shouldn't be upset with the Feds for throwing somebody in jail for no good reason because they're just doing their jobs...
No, I didn't read the goddamned article.
...is that it doesn't clarify the real difference between the legality in Russia and the illegality in the States -- i.e. that the reason you're allowed to do this in Russia is to make backups for personal use.
Overall, I think it's a reasonable story, and not slanted. But the average reader (side-note: how much do we think this will be picked up by the mass-circulation papers?) will end up thinking that this is a symptom of the decline of the Russian ex-empire in that it's legal to pirate CDs there. The reality, of course, is the reverse: it's legal to make a fair-use backup for your own purposes, as opposed to out-and-out piracy, and that is what Sklyarov's software addresses.
He easily could. Especially since he is guilty of no crime under Russian law.
But I sure hope he doesn't, and I think the EFF and Elcomsoft understand that this is a valuable opportunity to strike a blow against the DMCA.
I mean...the EFF can call freakin Adobe to testify that this is undeserved and leave the FBI with severe egg on the face.
- JoeShmoe
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Actually, it's the fact that they finally HAD a bail hearing... I mean the guy was in for what, 3 weeks without a hearing?
.technomancer
Bringing a bad case to court is considered a loss of face for any prosecutor, and they hate to do that. So our criticism of FBI for blindly charging into this case stands.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
Front Page article in the LA Times about E-Books and Dmitry. Had a great picture of one of the protests on an inside continuation page (pic not available on line, bummer!).
LA Times article on the bail.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
I think the real fact of the matter is that what Sklyarov did in his own country was well within the confines of Russian legality. From his point of view, he most certainly did not break the law. The United States is setting a new precedent in legislation. Do internet laws have unlimited jurisdiction? If so, who decides what these universal laws will be? Apparently, the US is taking it upon themselves to baby-sit the entire world. Hypothetical situation time: Say, for instance, I'm the writer of a strongly capitalistic, widely circulated e-zine, and I publish an article denouncing the dictator of a communist country. I then decide to take a trip to said country. "Well, I'm sorry, but we don't have this 'freedom of speech' thing here. You're under arrest." For some reason that just doesn't seem right to me, but mayve that's just me.
- Don't get in fights with ugly people, they've got nothing to lose. -
Is this a precursor to the widely expected split of California into North and South? Where is the boundary between these (soon to be two) states that Dimitry cannot cross?
Props to him on his bold defense of international freedom of speech.
-Ben
I personally wouldn't consider this a slap in the face of the FBI, but perhaps a slap in the face of the DMCA. Clearly the US Atty. intends to prosecute, but I suspect that John Ashcroft not exactly enthusiastic to prosecute Sklyarov. If we keep up the political pressure on Ashcroft, we may indeed stop this prosecution altogether.
So, let's step up the pressure. Call John Ashcroft (the US Attourney General) at 202-353-1555 and let him know that you think Sklyarov's prosecution under DMCA is unjust.
Finding God in a Dog
Must really suck to be them! Many of them won't know about this ruling until they get home tonight because they don't have Internet access!
Check out this story in the Chicago Tribune about the state of their computers.
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
Define Irony: Fleeing to Russia from the US for the sake of Freedom...
If he was really a valuable employee, his employer would have put out an insurance policy on him... especially for stuff like this. Heck, my autoclub provides me a $5000 bond for my $12/yr membership fee.
Got Rhinos?
> His employer raised that money? That's great! Talk about dedication! More companies should back their employees in this manner.
> I can hardly believe this; are they hiring???
Why, you planning on getting arrested?
...The question is not whether he broke the law, he did...
Where have you been for the past forever? Dyema' broke no law, just as you're breaking no law by getting drunk off your ass in your own home, provided you're allowed to purchase alcohol in your area, even though there are countries where being intoxicated past a certain point is illegal. A 19 year old in France who buys a beer is breaking no law, and neither is the man or woman selling it to him. Sure, over here the legal drinking age is 21, and over here we have a DMCA also. But Dyema' didn't break the DMCA while he was over here. He did actions in russia, previous to his ever having come to the U.S., that had he done them here, would have been illegal. The speech he gave is protected in a specific exception clause in the DMCA, which allows unlimited discussion of cryptography, as long as its application is not sold to break specific copyrighted software.
However unethical the DMCA may be, Dyema' did not break it.
However unethical underage drinking laws may be, then my 19 year old friend Ja'nos did not break them when he was over here mixing drinks, even if he had drunk alcohol in Hungary at the age of 18 before he ever came here! (Which is the legal drinking age over there).
Dyema did not break Russian or U.S. laws while in Russia. Dyema did not break Russian or U.S. laws while in America. Therefore, he is not a good test case to establish a precedent against the DMCA, which is an unethical law. A good precedent would be someone who actually broke it.
Duh.
Where have you been?
Search Skylarov on the slashdot front page and read the +5 insightful comments on any one of the many resulting slashdot stories. We've established this thoroughly. How can you still think that Skylarov broke the DMCA?
I assume an underage person is allowed to mix drinks, because I know someone so employed.
Gee, I thought we claimed at Nuremburg that "just doing my job" isn't sufficient reason in all cases.
Yeah, I'm looking in your direction, FBI... Killed any kids lately?
that isn't the question, the question is can the US processicute a crime commited in anouther country.
Minnesota where I live has made prostitution illegal. Nevada has not, If I hire a prostitute in Nevada I can return home to Minnesota and I cannot be arrested. This isn't a case of Minnesota choosing not to prossicute, they cannot arrest me.
Running away does not fix the issue(ie. a bad law was passed). I can't believe people even suggest this as a correct corse of action.
There are two common ways to change the laws in most places in the US and at the Federal level.
- Get the lawmakers to amend the law
- Have a high court over turn the law
I would rather have courts review the law, all the way up to the Supreme Court, than to have lawmakers muck around with this issue any more. If Sklyarov flees how can the issue be pushed? It is a risk that unfortunately only Sklyarov can face but if not him who and when? Letting this horribly bad law sit on the books any longer is as a bad an idea as telling Sklyarov to run for it.
He'll get his ass back to Russia. Once he figures out the legal costs and his potential for incarceration I think he'll realise that it's in his best interest to flee prosecution. Hell! it's in ElcomSoft's best interests if he flees. $50,000 might sound like a lot, but once you start to think in terms of billable hours its really isn't that much. The sooner he's back at work the better it will be for them. It may be in the DOJ's best interest too. If you consider that this isn't exactly a popular case for them. Come to think of it... isn't $50,000 bail for someone that is as much of a flight risk as Sklyarov a bit low? Granted, he won't be able to return to the US again....but would he really want to? If it were you would you want to?
The last time I checked, even though the west won ther cold war US law was NOT the Law of the Land in Russia.
There is the legal concept of "Fighting Words". This covers things like inciting to riot, or other illegal acts. The Supreme Court has issued many rulings on this. These are the rulings that allow Nazis to stroll through a jewish neighborhood, while under police protection. This area of law is part of free speech rights, and basically knocks down the idea that you can be arrested for incitement to an illegal act. IANAL. A search for the phrase will turn up many referances.
People can buy instruments of violence in the US. But tread on someone's imagined profits, and watch out. Even if you are just speaking, or selling.
There could be a tremendous constitutional legal issue tied up with this. I hope the DCMA gets nailed.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
and replace Forrest with Dmitry and append "out of the country"
Thus allowing him to stay in the country, work to make enough money to eat and fuel the U.S legal system. (not necessarily in that order)
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Anybody else wondering if there's any connection between Sklyarov's release and John Tobin's parole? Eh, best not to look too close at these things, huh?
Just hope they junk the DMCA and stop imprisoning people for a little dope while Wall Street jerks off over the prospect of hooking us all cheap, generic happy pills (Prozac).
Rogue Bolo
>smuggle him out of the country
Where he would return to an employer that will never see their $50,000 'bond' again?
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
yeah, first post after #84...
speaking of which i got first post too, right after the one before this one...
Pictures now up here
Let's report federaly funded Quantum computer research scientist to the FBI at the next major Quantum Physics confrence. After all, they are creating devices for circumventing the copyright protection on libraries of encrypted information. Let's demand that all papers on using Quantum computers to factor large numbers be turn over to the FBI and thier authors prosecuted.
Simple people talk of people, better people talk of events, great people talk of ideas.
It is a definitely "OK" to break laws that are wrong... Civil Disobedience...
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
Sklyarov was handcuffed and wearing a fetching orange T-shirt from the Santa Clara County Main Jail collection.
The proceeding itself was mostly dull and could just as easily have been done over the phone. No controversy or disagreement. The judge seemed to just want to get the whole thing over with as routinely as possible. The only additional information he asked for was some assurance that Dmitry's immigration status would not interfere with the trial proceedings. And while the papers are reporting that the U.S. attorney is still holding Sklyarov's passport, he did make clear that it would be handed over to the court at their discretion.
The next court appearance is scheduled for August 23, so Dmitry must be indicted within that time for the case to go forward.
After the hearing was over, nine tenths of the people left the room, and the whole proceeding only took about twenty minutes.
If Calif. Supreme Courts just ruled victims can't sue gun makers, how in the heck can Adobe even THINK of sueing Dimitry?
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
I've been discussing a wild theory with some of my acquintances: Sklyarov may simply be a pawn in a game played by the US Department of State.
During the Cold War we exchanged spies. Recently, two private citizens were accused of spying (Pope and Tobin) and unjustly sent to the slammer in Russia. Could the DoJ attitude toward Dmitri Sklyarov have been encouraged by the Department of State?
If you think about it, it makes a twisted sort of sense. There is plenty of spy paranoia left over in Russia, so it's almost natural for them to aprehend someone on espionage charges. Try getting a visa to go to Russia, particularly somewhere other than Moscow or St. Petersburg, and you'll understand what I'm talking about. Here in the US we have plenty of business interests, and the Almighty Dollar is what dictates how justice is carried out (remember that Al Capone was nailed for tax evasion in spite of all the other crimes attributed to him).
When Pope and Tobin were originally caught and convicted the State Department and everyone else under the sun claimed they were innocent. The Russian judicial system ignored these pleas and convicted both (and both were freed shortly after). Could the handling of Sklyarov's case be no more than tit-for-tat?
What do you think?
Ehttp://eugeneciurana.com | http://ciurana.eu
The REAL people responsible for this whole situation are the INDIVIDUALS WHO FILED THE COMPLAINT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
These people made a PERSONAL decision to prosecute Sklyarov, and it was their INDIVIDUAL decision to cry foul under the DMCA.
We have their names from the criminal complaint document, why hasn't anyone in the media contacted them?
The individuals responsible:
Kevin Nathanson - eBooks Group Product manager, complainant to the FBI.
Daryl Spano - Adobe "Anti-piracy" investigator, also complainant to the FBI.
Tom Diaz - Senior Engineering Manager for eBook
Daniel J O'Connell - FBI agent who filed the complaint.
The media needs to put the spotlight on these I N D I V I D U A L S who are personally responsible for Sklyarov's situation.
Dmitry has NO civic duty to the U.S. I don't think he's going to jump bail. But if he does, it's a purely tactical decision and I'll continue to support him. He doesn't owe the U.S. legal system a damn thing.
Has anyone considered the fact that he could potentially be 'extradited' (is that the right word?) back to the US? If it was just for violating a US law while in Russia, I'm sure the Russian government would never allow it, but fleeing while on bail may be a slightly different story... And if, by chance, he does flee, and the extradition is successfuly, he's screwed...
No, IANAL, but take what I said into consideration before fleeing...
________________________________________________
suwain_2
damn, after reading the news about the american student who was held unfairly in russia and then released yesterday, i couldn't help but think there was a private exchange behind the scenes regarding our american prisoner and Dimitry. i think Dmitry was being made an example of as a way for the US to get back at Russia for unfairly holding our american student on bullshit (planted) drug charges.
after reading the full story regarding our jailed american student, i couldn't help but laugh as i read all the 'Free Dmitry' sites! i mean, maybe the US doesn't feel so strongly about the speech and freedom issues like we think they do. perhaps they were just playing a bit of hard ball with the russians to get our american student released...
just my thoughts...
I want to see the DMCA crushed and Dimitri get to go back home, but in every other /. article I've read, it makes mention of him SELLING the software at the convention. I agree that the law is bogus and should be declared unconstitutional, but what happened didn't just happen in Russia. The moment he sold the program in the US, if in fact that's what he did, he broke (a very broken and unjust) law. Sad, but true.
Lets not that little fact escape the discussion...
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Notes on this: Dima is not yet out of jail. Bond is posted, but he now has to process out of Santa Clara County Jail.
Background: When I was a dumb college kid many years ago, I flaked out on several speeding tickets and such, and wound up with several warrants for Failure to Appear. The total dollar amount was $1400, and as a minimum wage cashier for a pet shop there was no way in hell I could pay it. So, on Sunday evening of Spring Break week, I turned myself in to the local PD. 2 court appearances later (different jurisdictions) both judges declared time served, making me a free man in theory. Reality was it took a day and a half from the judge declaring me free to me walking out of LA County Jail a free man. Dima is a bit higher profile than I am, but it's still going to take some time.
Even when he hits the streets, he is still imprisoned, just in a 3000 mile wide cell. He is not a free man until he hits international airspace on a jet bound for Moscow. He is still separated from his family, his job, and his school, and facing 5 years imprisonment in a foreign country.
Ergo, we must continue to turn up the heat. This is yet another small victory, like Adobe, but the war is far from over. On a positive note, press coverage is picking up, and more publicity is a very good thing. Let's not lose our momentum here folks, onward... Free Dima!
ehintz
I hope that donations to EFF are reaching Dmitry's defense team. I donated specifically to fight DMCA and this looks like as good a case as any.
http://eff.org
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
As anyone reading my posts here, elsewhere, and any of the fiction I've put on line will notice, I have a particular loathing for our home-grown secret police we call the FBI.
But this is extremely unfair not just to Dmitry (who has my sympathy), but also to the FBI (who doesn't). The people getting off scott-free are the people who deserve to be eviscerated for this unjust debacle the most:
Indeed, violating one's oath to uphold the contitution in such an obscene and blatent manner should be grounds for impeachment of those who sponsored the legislation, those who voted for it, and he who signed it. But alas, the constitution is clearly little more than toilet paper within the D.C. Beltway.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
> Clearly the US Atty. intends to prosecute, but I suspect that John Ashcroft not exactly enthusiastic to prosecute Sklyarov.
Presumably the low bail is because the DoJ hopes he will flee the country. It would be a convenient face-saver for a case that doesn't have a leg to stand on, and would let them continue to portray Dmitry as the villian.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I still don't think the EFF has done diddley to help him really.
I'd much rather see people e-mailing the REAL Lawyers who help those burned by unconstitutional laws, the Institute for Justice.
Here's a law team that really pushes the envelope on laws that are obviously unconstitutional, AND they have a long list of cases not only where they have won their client's cases, BUT THEY HAVE CHANGED THE LAWS! How's that for freedom?
Upon leaving the jailhouse in Santa Clara, Dmitry was asked what he would do next. He replied,
"I am prohibited by court order from going to Disneyland. I'm going to Cupertino."
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely Place
Such a lovely Place (background)
Such a lovely face
They're Servin' it up at the Hotel California
What a nice surprise
What a nice surprise (background)
Bring your alibies
Mirrors at the protests
because flyers won't suffice
Hillary Rosen said
We are all just prisoners here
Of our own device
And in the judges chambers
They wreseled with the beast
They sue geeks with their witty lies
But they just won't disist and cease
Last thing I remember
I was running for the door
I had to find the passage back to the place I was before
Relax said the fed man
We are programed to recieve
You can check out any time you like
But you can never leave
(cool guitar solo)
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
Aside from the issue of whether the US has jurisdiction relevant to his DMCA-related actions, it's still not clear whether the DMCA could be applied to this situation without applying just as well to essentially anything.
After all, reading a "copy-protected" eBook involves three steps: XOR each byte with 102, a substitution cipher simpler than your average magazine puzzle; LZW decompression, a method invented in the 70s and widely used since; and reading a PDF, a very recent and relatively difficult technique. Of these, the most technologically advanced is the step that his software doesn't do, and Adobe's own software without copy protection checks does do.
Does his software assist in evasion of copy protection? Sure. Do WinZip, Acrobat, and Windows? Sure. Network drivers, memory controllers, and so forth? Quite important, in fact. The fact is that any use of a copy protected item is likely to involve almost exclusively the technology that is needed to defeat the copy protection: once you get access to it once to use it as licensed, you'll need only very simple technoloy, if any, to distribute it.
I'd really like to see DMCA prosecutions of the government for Echelon (can copy copyrighted documents from users' screens) and the-software-formerly-known-as-Carnevore (can copy email). Even if they aren't used for piracy or even intended for piracy, they can circumvent relatively effective copy protection (not giving the document to anyone else).
I think we've already agreed that he's broken the DMCA. He sold a product to circumvent copyright protections. We're more concerned about seeing the DMCA get knocked back judicially than we are about Dmitry being exonerated of charges. Personally speaking, I'm not quite sure just how to feel about that one..
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
Apparently you haven't been to Silicon Valley. What you describe sounds more like coastal Southern California. SV is more like: vast, endless traffic, no decent restaurants (only endless tech company offices), no women at all (only male techies).
I just read the complaint.
Looks like he didn't break a thing.
While he was in the US, he did not (at least, not in the complaint) traffic his software (I'd think they'd have complained about it if he did). After reading that, it looks like the only person they'd have recourse against is RegisterNow, since they can't prosecute Skylarov for his actions while in Russia. Skylarov was just an easy target (and it shows how aggressively and improperly Adobe went after him)
-= rei =-
*Kid Rock runs for Senate* Democrats: We must run Kid Scissors.
Where a monolith controls all things software, and with every release intends to control more, and learn more about everything you do with that computer.
Where a person can be arrested for looking into a product he buys, and sharing the findings with others.
As I look around my property today, there is not a single tangible thing that I cannot open, examine and post my findings on the web...save one:
The Windows95 CD I have in a box in the garage.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
I agree. It goes to show that if you are a police officer then the law doesn't apply to you. Of course the whole drink driving law is fucked up. If you knock back a bottle of Jack Daniels and plow into a crowded sidewalk in your SUV and kill a dozen people you'll lose your license, and serve a few years in prison. Try doing the same thing with a revolver and you'll get life in prison or the death penalty. Whats the difference? a dozen people are still dead. I think drunk drivers should be prosecuted for murder just same as if they took a weapon and killed someone.
As others have noted here, we must do what we can to keep the pressure on. Currently (6:30pm eastern) the Fox News site (www.foxnews.com) has a reference on their front page to the bail hearing. Big media companies like Fox keep track of their hits and visiting the link may help to convince Fox's producers to keep an eye on the story... just a thought.
NULL
No, no, I'm sure the DOJ will happily do the following in the near future:
Because of course the DMCA is concerned with justice, not with protecting US companies from foreign competition. No way.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Donations?
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
How many more cases like this do you need to find out that the proclaimed 'freedom' in US is just a dream and the same kind of brainwashing you could see during cold war on BOTH sides?
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
From the 'Martyr or criminal?' article:
Book publishers say they need a tough law like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or they'll never be able to make money selling electronic books. If programmers are allowed to crack eBook encryption, the next Napster-style trading system will be exchanging copies of "Moby Dick" instead of songs by Moby, they warn.
From the Project Gutenburg website:
DOWNLOAD: moby.zip - 591 KB
Let's just hope no one alerts the FBI. ;)
Is he personally charged with having sold the software, or was the software sold in the US by the company and he was the only employee within grabbing distance (i.e., didn't have to be extradited from Russia)?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The fact that he, as a foreign national, and a HUGE flight risk, was released on bail at all, is an excellent sign that the court sees the chances of Adobe prevailing as slim. I see NO reason why he'd have been allowed to post bail otherwise.
Thank GOD that he's free. Not that he IS free, he's in the USA, particularly California. The Sklyarov case, I'm sad to say, makes me ashamed of my country. He puts a HUMAN face on the DMCA.
All I can say, is WOE to Adobe, for imprisoning an innocent man, and even more WOE to the Congress and President who broke their oaths to "protect and defend" The Constitution by enacting the DMCA.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
I just met the guy we all have been fighting for!!! I have no regrets what-so-ever. In fact after meeting him I know I have been doing the right thing. more Photos also!!!
I've been trying to explain this situation to my mother, who is a 1st grade elementary school teacher and clueless enough regarding technology that it took her over a year to learn how to use a VCR. (She is now using AOL to surf the internet... but I gotta acknowledge that it is a good fit)
I was trying to explain why copyright needs to expire, and why the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act was really a bad thing. I kept trying to come up with really absurd ideas because I was originally trying to explain why "Steamboat Willie", by Walt Disney, should be in the public domain by now. She just didn't get it and even said that Disney should get perpetual copyright protection.
I knew that she had totally lost it when I suggested that the heirs of William Shakespear might complain and demand royalties for plays written by the great bard. She thought it was a good idea and was trying to decide how we should go about paying those royalties...
I think if you were sober it would. DUI is a whole other story.
He's the copyright holder of a piece of software that strips technological controls (aka, encryption) from digital media put in place to prevent copyright "abuse". Pretty cut and dried to me. I'm not considering the whole points about it being written outside the US, it being a crappy law, or that he's got a strong civil case for malicious prosecution. That's outside the scope of this particular discussion. His actions appear to run counter to the DMCA. It's to a judge to decide if A) the law was substantially broken in the US, and B) if the law itself is constitutionally valid.
I read a report today, though I can't remember where, that he distributed 500 copies of the trial version of the software at defcon. That sealed it. Even if he made it elsewhere, that he was distributing it here was to invite trouble.
Don't worry, I'm one of the good guys. I've been making donations to the EFF for six years now, and have even named them in my life insurance policies. I'm happy as hell to see Dmitry out on bail, though I'd be far happier to see the case dropped.
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
Hmm.
From the EU perspective, the following question has popped up in my head:
Adobe eBooks and the reader are available for sale in the EU, where it should be legal to make a single copy of an eBook for personal backup use.
So how is it possible to make these legal copies?
I've just mailed this question to Adobe Germany's customer support, and await an answer.
Anyone got an idea about the backup obligations if any,
a company has when selling software products in the EU?
Although it is normally taken for granted , even if the product is shipped from the US, by being offered for sale and taxed in the EU, it is covered by EU consumer protection laws.
So, where do the US DCMA and EU consumer laws conflict?
Ideas?
(R)ule in Hell or (S)erve in Heaven [R]?
Poor agents, denied their touchy-feely GUI experience. Maybe they could paste a picture of a dancing paperclip to the terminal.
Why is their such a widespread belief among the pointy-haired that green screen terminals are 'obsolete' or 'inefficient'?
Perhaps they mean state of mind? In other words the communist, tree-hugging, marijuana-fogged Notheren Californian vs. the tax-happy, facsist, 4th Reich cadre of the metropolitan South?
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Book publishers say they need a tough law like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or
they'll never be able to make money selling electronic books.
Gee. I wonder if I can get the U.S. Congress to pass a law that says I have to be able to make a profit, no matter what stupid business I decide to get into.
To all of those making the naive assertion that "Sklyarov is accused of breaking the law, therefor he must stand trial": Time to open your eyes to see beyond the black and white illusion of idealized justice. Justice is for sale in this country, to the highest bidder and to those with the political muscle. Consider the selective enforcement of the "victimless" crimes (drugs, gambling, sexual proscriptions), tax laws and copyright laws (both skewed to favor the corporate interests): certainly the vast majority of Americans are "criminals" who have broken one or more of these laws, yet the prosecution falls overwhelmingly on the poor and the politically impotent. Unless a strong grassroots movement arises to support him, Dmitry falls into the latter category (evil communist hacker). If, on the other hand, programmers, scientists, and academicians can organize and bare their collective political fangs, the charges will be dropped, and deservedly so. We should not weaken our position unnecessarily with unrealistic illusionary concepts of idealized justice.
Nobody forced them to chose this job, there are enough other openings in the industry. By chosing to work for this corrupt system, they share a part of the responsibility, even if they are "only following orders". Publishing names (and home addresses, if possible) is fair.
Here's a point I haven't seen examined yet. IANAL, but I don't see how Dmitry can be charged with violating DMCA anti-circumvention (DMCA-AC hereinafter). Here's why:
Premise: As I understand DMCA-AC, what's forbidden is 'creation and trafficking' in anticircumvention tools, with geographic scope limited to the US.
Analysis: While Dmitry created (or created a lot of) Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR), he created it in Russia, not the US; and he has not personally 'trafficked' in it within the US - there is no DMCA cause of action against Dmitry. It was Elcomsoft that sold AEBR in the US, which -is- actionable under DMCA-AC. Despite employment by Elcomsoft, Dmitry the person is distinct from Elcomsoft the corporation and not criminally liable for the deeds of Elcomsoft.
Conclusion: For the prosecution to be successful, the US Attorney must show either:
a) that Dmitry individually has 'trafficked' in AEBPR, separately from Elcomsoft's sales of AEBR in the US, or
b) that Dmitry as an employee of Elcomsoft has criminal liability for Elcomsoft's actions in 'trafficking' in AEBR.
I don't see how either a) or b) can be proven, as there are no signs that Dmitry has personally distributed AEBR in the US, and no signs that Dmitry is an owner or officer of Elcomsoft -- just an ordinary employee. (If I were Dmitry's boss, or an Elcomsoft owner, I wouldn't be hanging around the US, though.)
If the above is factually correct, then the prosecution's only hope is to find relevant US law, precedent, or theories under which an ordinary employee of a corporation can be held to have criminal liability for the actions of the corporation. More specifically, the precedent or theory would have to pertain to the situation in which both the corporation and the employee are foreign nationals.
If there is no such law, precedent, or theory, the case ultimately fails, and therefore the US Attorney would likely decline to indict.
If the DOJ is looking for a way to make this case go away, either to avoid embarrassment or to avoid taking to trial a case with the potential to nullify DMCA-AC, this would do it for them.
In any event, there may not be any DMCA-AC test case here -- the charge may be flawed, and if so it should not have been brought in the first place, and will be dismissed.
Actual lawyers please comment?
Just ask Terrence McGuckin of 2600 magazine who was arrested last year after protesting at the Republican convention; hardened terrorist that he no doubt was, he was bailed for a mere $100,000. It wasn't returned after he was cleared of all charges, and only after two appeals did the judge decide to return it, minus $750 admin costs. If it hasn't sunk in, this was somebody who had been declared innocent.
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
In addition to the DUI, you could still be charged with involuntary manslaughter in an accident like that, though it's likely that that charge would be dropped in a plea bargain.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
I don't think the size of the bail is low.
the judge has to look at the people across the table when setting bail. the EFF and the other civil activist organizations don't want Sklyarov to flee the country, because then they lose the chance to fight the DMCA in court. His employer might want him to, though.
therefore, the judge wants to set bail at a high enough level that he won't just bop out of the country, but low enough that he won't rot in jail for a few years awaiting trial ala Mitnick.
also, the bench does look at the facts of the case. the feds allege that he wrote a program that violated the DMCA, and then allowed it to be distributed by an American distributor in contravention of the DMCA. even if he's convicted, his alleged role is fairly small: the distributor should to be the main defendant, since they're the ones actively involving in trafficking in the product on U.S. soil. Sklyarov isn't like a Colombian mastermind, he's not running the show.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
That's probably just as well, that way Dimitry doesn't have to worry about the bondsman's hired thugs^W^Wbounty hunters. He has enough things to worry about.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
flight risk. cops never run. they have nowhere to hide.
bail isn't about punishing the accused, unless he's Kevin Mitnick. it's about getting the accused to show up for trial. cops always show.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
I almost didn't go to this hearing. I thought to myself, "What's the point? The deck is stacked against me, the media will spin its own story regardless of the facts or what the EFF has to say, and we'll all be ignored, anyway." At the last minute, I decided that I had to go. I didn't want to, I had to. Though mine may be the proverbial voice in the wilderness, as an ethical software engineer of almost 25 years, I couldn't let this transgression against everything I hold dear go unanswered.
I dressed up in uncharacteristically formal attire, in the event I was asked for an on-camera interview, and drove to downtown San Jose, arriving at about 09:45, and walked to the "Snake" at the end of Caesar de Chavez Park. There were about two dozen people there, most of them carrying hand-made pickets, including a former colleague, who coincidentally also happens to be a Russian named Dmitriy. Also milling through the group were a few media representatives (I saw units from KGO, KPIX, and TechTV).
I didn't see any obvious representatives from the EFF there (though I was asked several times if I myself was a representative). Things seemed a shade disorganized to me. The march toward the Federal building one block away was supposed to start at 10:00. By 10:10, no one was moving, so I walked down myself to make sure I got a seat in the courtroom for the bail hearing which was to take place at 11:00.
I arrived at the Federal courthouse, and made my way through the security gauntlet. (You remember that scene in The Matrix where Keanu Reeves shows up in the lobby with all those neatly-dressed security guards? It was a lot like that. Seven Marshalls stood nearby as they X-rayed my mini-MagLite three times.) Finally convinced I was harmless, I went up to the fourth floor to Judge Infante's courtroom and waited to enter.
There, I met some more reporters from TechTV and the LA Times. Again, I was asked if I was from the EFF.
"No, I'm a software engineer," I said.
"Oh, an actual real person!", said one of the reporters. I got asked why I was there, and tried to explain my concerns. I don't know how well I succeeded.
While waiting, the rest of the protest group arrived at the front of the Federal building. We could see them from the windows of the waiting area. Not too long after, the corridor began to fill up with spectators awaiting admittance to the courtroom.
I managed to buttonhole the LA Times reporter, and tried again to explain the issues as I saw them. I related this case to the DVD CCA debacle, which the EFF is still fighting on both coasts. I felt I was actually beginning to help him understand, when our conversation was cut short when the courtroom doors opened and we were allowed in.
After inquiring with the Marshall what the rules were (laptops okay, cellphones bad), I pulled out my laptop and started making a few notes. While sitting there, I picked up a fragment of a conversation between the Marshall and a spectator who walked in.
"Hey, aren't you on the wrong floor?" asked the Marshall.
"Yeah, but this looked really interesting," said the gentleman.
I didn't get his name, but it turned out that he's a bankruptcy lawyer who was also a computer programmer back in 1963. He saw the hearing listed on the court calendar, and stopped by to watch. We chatted a bit about recording devices and court stenography methods.
At 10:55, Dmitry entered the courtroom with another man, Juan Valencia Rowa (sp?), who was under indictment for a drug and parole violation. Both were handcuffed, dressed in freeway-cone-orange scrubs. By the time court was in session at 11:00 sharp, the spectators' gallery was filled.
Judge Infante banged court into session. It was immediately apparent that this man worked strictly by the book. He was formal and precise, almost to the point of stuffiness. The first case called was Dmitry's. Counsels for the defense and prosecution introduced themselves, and Judge Infante read the summary of the government's criminal charges aloud to Dmitry. Standing next to Dmitry was a Russian translator (identity unknown).
Infante then asked for motions from counsels concerning bail. The government prosecutor stated that they considered Sklyarov a flight risk, since he is a Russian national and has nothing tying him to this area. Nevertheless, a deal had apparently been worked out whereby the government was willing to allow him go free, provided the following conditions were met:
Defense counsel, in support of this, presented character references from Dmitry's professors in Russia, as well as a letter from the Russian Consul. The Judge accepted this arrangement on its face, and ordered exactly those conditions be imposed on Dmitry for his release.
The Judge expressed a concern that the US Department of Immigration might present complications. Dmitry is here on a travel visa. When that visa expires, Dmitry could theoretically be arrested again for violating immigration laws. Judge Infante inquired if Immigration was okay with Dmitry's extended stay. Defense counsel replied that arrangements were not yet finalized, but were underway.
Defense counsel then announced that a custodian for Dmitry was available immediately. Sergei Osokine of Cupertino then stepped forward and introduced himself to the court. Judge Infante informed Osokine that he was vouching for Sklyarov's promise to appear, that he was to inform the court immediately if he became aware of Sklyarov's flight or intent to fly, and could himself become liable for the bail sum should Sklyarov disappear. Osokine indicated he understood and agreed to all this.
Defense counsel then announced that the bail sum was also available immediately, in cash, paid by his employer. Dmitry was then uncuffed, and brought to the center of the courtroom to sign the papers indicating the conditions of his release. The date was also set for the preliminary hearing: 09:00, 23 August 2001. Having forgotten to do so earlier, the Judge then informed Dmitry of the maximum penalty for his alleged crime: $500,000.00 and five years in prison. Once everything was signed, Judge Infante ordered Dmitry's release upon payment of bail to the court clerk, and moved on to the next case. The spectators' gallery emptied almost immediately. The entire process took about twenty minutes.
Outside, an actual representative of the EFF :-) stood before a camera claiming victory in this round of the dispute. Defense counsel, in a different interview, also said he was pleased with Dmitry's release, but that there was still a long way to go before a final resolution.
I stood around with Dan Kaminsky and helped answer questions from a reporter from Reuters wire service. Dan and I can get a bit animated about these issues, and I fear we ranted a bit. Hopefully the reporter wasn't put off by it.
What I did find off-putting were the chants that suddenly broke out from the picketers (who had moved to the other side of the courthouse). "What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! Hey-hey, ho-ho, DMCA's got to go," etc. I know I have absolutely no practical experience in social agitation for political change, so please accept it as my woefully uneducated personal opinion that I see this sort of thing as infantile. It is not effective or witty, it is lame. It makes you look like brainless, uncreative drones on television, and people will tune you right out. Please think of something different.
After the Reuters reporter left, we answered a few more questions from the reporter from WiReD News, then I left for an appointment at 13:00. On the way to my car, I bumped into Brad Templeton, president of the EFF, who hinted that you may expect to see some new fundraising events in the not-too-distant future.
Why do I give a damn about this? When I first touched a computer at age 12, I saw it as the ultimate tool of creative expression. Theoretically, there was nothing you couldn't do with these machines, no idea that could not be expressed in a myriad of ways. In that instant, I immediately knew that this was what I would be doing for the rest of my life. Not everyone gets the chance to spend their life doing what they love, and I value very highly my good fortune of my vocation also being my dearest hobby.
One of the reasons I've gotten nice jobs in the Valley is because I'm fairly good at what I do. Apart from my enthusiasm, one of the primary ways I got so good was by taking apart things other people did, seeing how they worked, and using those discoveries to build new ideas. I even described my discoveries to others, in the hopes they would get new ideas, too.
In other words, I built much of my professional career doing exactly what Dmitry Sklyarov did.
When the Judge read the charges to Dmitry -- "trafficking in a device to circumvent a technological measure that protects a copyright" -- I nearly became nauseous. There is not so much separating me from Dmitry. I have often thought about -- and perhas will one day -- writing a display hack that takes whatever DVD is in your drive, wraps the movie imagery on to an OpenGL sphere, and bounces it around the screen ("Boing 2001", if you will). To do that, I would have to use the DeCSS code fragment published by Jon Johansen. And doing so would make me a "criminal," a threat to the State and public safety, just like Dmitry.
In a brief flash, I saw myself up there, humiliated, in a hostile place where no one knows me, no one understands what I do -- nor do they care -- answering terrifyingly punitive criminal charges for doing nothing more than what I have loved doing all my life.
I am Dmitry Sklyarov. What the hell am I supposed to do now?
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
At least in California, it is legal to make a product that is explicitly designed to maim and/or kill someone, but it is not legal to make a product that will defeat copy protection.
And, for all you conspiracy theorists, notice that it's illegal to own the kind of firepower that can hurt a large corporation (say, a tank or a nuclear bomb).
If the police never enforce laws they think are bad, then what is the point of having a legislature; we could just have the police make up the laws.
The police SHOULD enforce even laws they think are stupid*; that is the only way the stupid laws can be corrected. Otherwise the public and congress never get any feedback that the law isn't working right. So they just go on and make more bad laws; which the police would then edit as they see fit, etc., etc. and so forth. Eventually almost everything would be illegal and the police would just arrest people they didn't like.
I realize that the police and DAs are human, and they are going to learn from The Courts which cases have enough merit to likely get a conviction and which ones aren't worth their time. I understand that they will have to make those kind of decisions at some level. But I'd rather the police err on the side of being automatons than have them err on the side of being "street judges". Let the real judges and the jurors be the ones to decide which laws are unconstitutional. Let the Governors and the President decide who should get pardons. Let the public get enraged and call their congressmen when bad or stupid laws cause good people to be arrested. That is the way the process is designed to work; that is where the checks and balances are; those are the people who should be making those decisions. That way bad laws get refined into good ones.
Don't get mad at the FBI for doing their job when they do it right; they have been dropping the ball enough lately that you have plenty of incidents where agents did their job poorly that you can get mad about instead.
*In the town I grew up in, it was illegal for women to wear pants. Of course they did; and didn't get arrested. The law was part of some old "blue laws" that everyone (including the police) thought were archaic. Ideally I'd like to see some city councilwoman arrested for wearing pants; then the law would get changed and the case would almost certainly be thrown out or she'd get a pardon or some such. As long as the laws are ignored they will stay on the books. And every kid who reads about them in school and laughs has their respect for other laws diminished. Worse, every time a policeman knows about such laws and chooses to ignore them, he (and really the rest of society as well) get conditioned to the idea that the police get to choose what laws they want to enforce.
As I understand it, it was Sklyarov's company, not Sklyarov himself, which marketed and sold the product in the U.S. Now, unless Sklyarov is a member of the board of directors, it is not usual, even in the U.S., to prosecute employees for the actions of their employer.
It is similarly not illegal (even by DCMA standards) to produce, sell, or otherwise distribute copy protection schemes outside the U.S. Hawking his wares in Russia does not make him a criminal in the U.S.
It is my understanding that Sklyarov was arrested not because he discussed the weaknesses of Adobe's copy protection schemes, but because he was selling his product at the trade show where he was arrested. If this is the case then he is clearly in violation of U.S. law and the FBI is well within its jurisdiction to detain, arrest and prosecute him.
Whether the laws are just is a separate issue, one which it is up to the courts, not the FBI, to sort out. The FBI did what it was required to do.
Anyone care to correct my understanding?
>> She just didn't get it and even said that Disney should get perpetual copyright protection.
r andchildren. However, if Shakespeare's works were still covered under death plus 315 year copyrights, surely a media conglomerate would be collecting the royalties now, not the putatively deserving 10th generation heirs.
My favorite example of the absurdity of perpetual copyright is the song "Happy Birthday to You", composed by Kentucky schoolteacher Mildred Hill in 1859. Her sister Patty wrote lyrics and first published it as "Good Morning to All" in "Song Stories of the Kindergarten" in 1893. Mildred died penniless in 1916.
In 1924, Robert H. Coleman republished the song without permission, adding a second "Happy Birthday to You" verse. The surviving Hill sisters sued and the song was finally copyrighted in 1935.
Of course, the sisters aren't collecting royalties any longer. The copyright is now owned by AOL/Time Warner, and still garnerting about $2 million in royalties each year as of about 5 years ago (which is why television programs usually resort to "For He's A Jolly Good Fellow" instead). If Disney continues to get copyright extension bills passed every 20 years, the copyright on this simple 19th century folksong will never expire.
The Constitution originally intended "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries". But death plus 95 years? To what end, encouraging Mildred Hill to compose more songs?
>> I knew that she had totally lost it when I suggested that the heirs of William Shakespear might complain and demand royalties for plays written by the great bard. She thought it was a good idea and was trying to decide how we should go about paying those royalties...
Good job getting your mother to think about the logistics of awarding Shakespeare's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-g
The point is that for 99% of population, the life was actually easier and more free during most of the communist era. Yes, I agree, they could not travel to the west, but lets not fool ourselves. They still cannot do it now, since they cannot afford it anyway. So what exactly is the difference?
Yes, for the 1% among which I count myself too it was not that easy, but most people don't need most of the rights that they cannot exercise anyway. And they had some, which in US you would find hardly. Like to send their kids in school without fear to found them shot or on drugs. Or right to have sex in their own backyard without police interruption :) And the right to drink beer in pub as much as they want without paying extraordinary sums of money for overpriced sewage.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.