Sklyarov Case Exposes DMCA Contradictions

aePrime writes: "This article on the New York Times describes how the case against Dmitri Sklyarov is bringing up some contridictions within the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. One is allowed to bypass security measures to backup data, but one is not allowed to write the software to bypass the security. It mentions how this first case to be prosecuted under the law may indeed cause changes to the law." A lot of bad laws have stuck around for longer than the DMCA has yet, but the more this kind of analysis is seen, the sooner sanity can be restored.

Comments

Re:Jury nullification

[Danse]

Just like you have "fair use" rights but that doesn't obligate the copyright holder to make it easy for you to excercise them.

True, but they shouldn't be able to make it illegal either.

You CAN be tossed in jail (for a long time) for perjury if during Voix Dire the judge asked if you would accept him as the final authority on matters of law and you said "yes".

So, basically, the judge can force you to give up your right as a jurist to decide on both the facts and the law of the case as a condition of being allowed to serve on the jury. Doesn't that pretty much destroy the right in the first place? Should it be legal for them to dismiss you from duty for that reason?

Re:A good thing?

[Tim C]

I only hope that Sklyarov (not to mention his family and friends) shares your sentiments.

This probably is the only way to get the DMCA amended, but it's not really fair that it involves a foreign national.

Cheers,

Tim

informative? Not really.

[Anonymous Coward]

You speak as if you are telling the story, but you're not. You can't be arrested because a copywrite was assigned to you. Correct you post if you can.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Mr. Slippery]

How about you let me vandalize your stuff, and then let me know what you'd like to do to me. I'm sure that some defintion of "torture" would be met by your words.

If you damage my stuff, I want you to fix it or pay to have it fixed, and compensate me for the time I didn't have the use of it. If you keep it up, I want you placed under supervision to prevent your poor behavior...in the extreme, humanely incarcerated. None of which qualifies as "torture".

Re:Is anybody else

[SlippyToad]

I think the lameness filter is, well, lame. It doesn't catch trolls, and it does piss off legit posters who don't know all the tricks for getting around it.

Re:Jury nullification

[plague3106]

Wether or not the law is constitutional is decided in the appellate courts.

Actually on the SC can do that...

Re:It will never get to a jury

[alkali]

You're correct. The judge can overrule a jury's verdict of "guilty" but not a jury's verdict of "not guilty."

(Technically, the judge enters a "judgment notwithstanding the verdict," more commonly known by its Latin initials "j.n.o.v.")

The rationale is that a criminal defendant is entitled to a trial by jury so the benefit of a jury's "not guilty" verdict can't be taken away from him, but presumably a defendant won't object to having the jury's verdict of "guilty" reversed in the interest of justice.

"Jury nullification" refers to the situation where a jury returns a "not guilty" verdict where the facts and law dictate otherwise (thereby violating their oaths as jurors). It is not so much a legal doctrine as a recognition that where a jury refuses to convict the double jeopardy clause makes any further prosecution impossible.

Some people think jury nullification is the last bastion of freedom, etc.; other people note that jury nullification was basically how the practice of lynching was legitimized in the South. ("Gentlemen of the jury, I think we all know these boys were only having a little fun ...", etc.) I don't know where I come out, but I am suspicious of those who defend the practice too enthusiastically.

Re:Jury nullification

[Anonymous Coward]

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

An unpopular position

[RalphTWaP]

"The DCMA[sic] takes away my right to h4x0r j00..."


<irony>

That having been cleared up, there is a portion of the article that seems interesting. In summation, Ms. Harmon writes:

copied directly from this article without permission, with all due credit, and with unknown intentions.

"The inequity is of greatest concern to the law where there's a constitutional interest at stake," said Pamela Samuelson, co-director of the Center for Law and Technology at the University of California at Berkeley. "If there is a constitutional-based interest in fair use, it shouldn't just be someone with a Ph.D. in computer science who can circumvent an access control -- just like you can't say people who own property can vote, but poor people can't."

end quote
Essentially, the viewpoint that Ms. Harmon relates here shows the problem of fair use limitation in the DMCA as a question of equality before the law.

Now, the traditional American viewpoint (as you can see above) is even still somewhat fragmented. Equality before the law is given at least a nod of consideration, unless of course it isn't....

So if I may make a slight and modest proposal....

Proposed:
Whereas much of western polical thought since the Hellenic age has rested in part on an underpinning concerned with a 'aristocracy of the mind', and whereas the DMCA is one of the clearest positional statements of the American Government on the principle of an 'aristocracy of the mind', it is hearby proposed that

The American Government consciensiously and systematically adopt the advancement of an aristocracy of the mind with respect to equality before the law.

Perhaps, if we're lucky, the right to vote in America will some day have the prerequsite of correctly explaining the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Nater]

The US seems to have a lot of double standards

Indeed. I don't know all of the details in the case, but there are some Americans in jail in China right now for violating Chinese law on China's turf... and the US Gov. is protesting it. It had a few headlines while protests were going on in the US over Sklyarov's arrest. I didn't bother reading the articles, mostly because I found the irony - and hipocrisy - so sickening.

No mention....

[Liquid(TJ)]

Of course, the NYT isn't going to mention that he rotted for two weeks without bail. The FBI and it's corprate backers know they may not win the legal battle, so they gotta try to scare the hell out of the tech crowd too...

Re:No mention....

[Anonymous Coward]

The NY Times is arguably the most influential and powerful newspaper/media outlet in the country. It--as many news organizations/outlets--tends to the liberal side of things when unable to maintain neutrality. Anyway, the point: I don't think the FBI--large and powerful though it may be--has much leverage to "bully" the NY Times...especially on such a small issue in the grand scheme of things. That is, I'm sure the brass at the FBI are much more concerned with violent crimes, terrorism and other international concerns, etc. at the moment than a single (supposed) "hacker" who has not created much controversy on a large scale so far.

Re:No mention....

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

Well, if the hackers would stop helping the FBI crack stuff...

One thing I liked about this article...

[Masem]

Was that it emphasized the fact that the DMCA harms the common man moreso than the one that is technologically adapt. A good case was the guy that had a virus incident that caused his ebooks to become unregistered (he probably had to reinstall his OS). He was left only with the options of either registering the second 'installation' of the e-books on that computer, or save it for a different computer like his laptop. He wasn't technologically adapt enough to figure out how to bypass the measures himself, and thus was harmed by the control measures in the fact that he 'lost' one use of the e-book.

Once similar cases start growing in number in which the non-computer-geek common man finds their rights limited by copy protection, the case against DMCA will grow as well.

Re:Fuck That Moderator.

[rkent]

Part of maintaining a civil, productive discussion is the "productive" part.

Oops, I meant "civil."

(moderation: -1, Reply to self...)

It will never get to a jury

[www.sorehands.com]

Only questions of fact get to a jury (and mixed law and fact). This case will soley be a question of law. Juries do not get to decide if a law if legal.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Theodrake]

No, no, no. We need a jury to convict so it can be appealled and then overturned because it is unconstitutional.

Or can the trial judge declare the law unconstitutional? Can the defense request the trial judge to make a summary ruling (or preliminary) that the law is unconstitutional?

Re:It will never get to a jury

[mindstrm]

Actually, from what I've read, judges cannot override jury nullification; it's been upheld before. You have the right to trial by a jury of your peers. If that jury decides you are innocent, regardless of the facts, then you are innocent; a judge reversing this decision makes a reversible error.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[alkali]

A juror who's fucked enough in the head to think that lynching is good clean fun is also fucked in the head enough to have no problem in breaking the law to accquit. It's the good citizen who want to respect the law, but finds this particular law not capable of respect, who finds himself in the bind that a Fully Informed Jury Act could resolve.

If there is a obvious way of distinguishing these cases ab initio, I'm all ears. The jury that can avert application of an unjust law might also be the jury that ratifies the acts of a mob. I don't really know where I come out on jury nullification, but the possibility that juries might bring about the result I'd prefer in some cases is not enough to make me enthusiastic.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Nater]

the judge can overrule the jury nullification and in most cases they do.

In most cases, there's nothing wrong with the law, since most laws are okay. Unless you mean most cases of jury nullification, in which case I really couldn't say.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[David Hume]

In principle, yes, but in practise the judge can overrule the jury nullification and in most cases they do.

You are wrong. Again (if you are the same AC as above), you may be thinking of a civil case. In a criminal case, in certain jurisdictions (I'm not sure about federal law; I would have to look it up), the judge may (at most) before deliberations instruct the jury that it has no right to consider the validity or fairness of the law, nullify the law, etc., but if the jury disregards the instructions and brings in a verdict of acquittal, there is not a damn thing the trial judge can do about it. Further, the prosecution cannot appeal a jury verdict of acquital. Finally, the defendant cannot be tried again.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Mr. Slippery]

"Jury nullification"...is not so much a legal doctrine...

It's explictly mentioned in the state constitutions of Maryland and Indiana. It was discussed by the likes of Supreme Court Justice John Jay, by Tom Paine, by Judge Learned Hand. Sounds like a genuine "doctrine" to me.

...other people note that jury nullification was basically how the practice of lynching was legitimized in the South.

It also protected people who assisted escaping slaves under the fugitive slave law and who broke Jim Crow laws. It helped end alcohol prohibition and is protecting many people accused of non-violent crimes of drug possession today.

A juror who's fucked enough in the head to think that lynching is good clean fun is also fucked in the head enough to have no problem in breaking the law to accquit. It's the good citizen who want to respect the law, but finds this particular law not capable of respect, who finds himself in the bind that a Fully Informed Jury Act could resolve.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Anonymous Coward]

While it is true that juries decide questions of fact, one question of fact in *every* criminal prosecution is whether the defendant committed the crime. In short, "did the defendant do *it*?" By entering a plea of "not guilty," the defendant requires the prosecution to prove each and every element of the crime charged. Jury nullification occurs when the jury determines that the crime charged should not be a crime. A jury does not need to nullify the DMCA in order to acquit in this case, it only needs to find that the defendant did not do the crime. Jury nullification is a difficult defense to raise for the reason that the judge will not permit the defense counse to inform the jury of this option. ON the other hand, Racehorse Haynes has had a considerable amount of luck with a similar defense of "the SOB deserved to die." Here, the defense can argu that the DMCA permits the activity complained of and is devective because it treats lawful actions as a crime. This is a winnable case.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[alkali]

Whether some set of proven facts constitutes a crime under the law is a question of law, not a question of fact. Whether the law criminalizing the conduct is a good one is not an element of the prosecution's case. I agree that a jury can acquit notwithstanding the facts and the law, if they choose to ignore their oaths to follow the facts and the law. Whether a jury should ever do this is another question.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[lordkuri]

umm... take a look at http://www.fija.org . A jury in the US can base their decision on the fairness of the law, not just the "facts" of the case.... i.e. they can acquit a person because they believe the law itself is wrong. This is what we need for the DMCA, congress won't change it, they're too damn scared of technology.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Rev Snow]

...in practise the judge can overrule the jury nullification and in most cases they do.

Nonsense. In a criminal trial an acquittal by a jury is final. No judge may change it.

Judges do have the power to overrule convictions, but I can't imagine a conviction that would be considered jury nullification.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[cdrudge]

I know that it is not exactly the best source for legal knowledge, but I remember several episodes on Law & Order where the judge felt that the jury disregarded the facts of the case and overrulled the jury, submitting a bench judgement. So is that only for convictions?

Re:It will never get to a jury

[_LFTL_]

From the link you posted: "Despite all the modern government resentment toward "jury nullification," its roots run deep in both our history and law. At least two provisions of the Constitution, and arguably three, protect the jury's power to nullify. They also explain why that power is limited to criminal cases, and has no analogy in the civil context."

The article states that juries have the right to decide wether a criminal law is legal or not, but that there is "no analogy" in the civil context. So, while this may be applicable to the criminal side of the DMCA for Dimitry it will have no bearing on civil suit applications of the DMCA such as the DeCSS case.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Auckerman]

"Juries do not get to decide if a law if legal."

They effectively do when they pass a verdict of not guilty, despite the evidence. Juries can do that, you know?

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Anonymous Coward]

In principle, yes, but in practise the judge can overrule the jury nullification and in most cases they do.

I'm actually happy for that. I wouldn't trust twelve ordinary citizens to draft laws. That way we'd end up with an eye-for-an-eye society.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[alkali]

I agree you can't "eliminat[e]" jury nullification ("JN") without removing the double jeopardy protection. Assuming that the possibility of JN is a permanent part of the American legal system, then, the question is really whether you are going to make jurors swear they will follow the law, and whether you are going to let defense lawyers argue to the jury that they should ignore the law.

There are at least three good arguments here:

(1) JN is antidemocratic. The elected representatives of the people, after holding hearings on the issues involved, make the law. Because 12 jurors feel differently doesn't entitle them to overrule the majority. There are other constitutional protections against majoritarian overreaching.

(2) JN violates the principle of equality before the law. The law should apply equally to everyone. Jurors shouldn't be encouraged to set aside the law just because they feel a particular defendant is sympathetic (== white, well-spoken, member of the dominant religious group).

(3) To the extent it's needed, you get JN anyway. In cases where the law is really heinously unfair, jurors will decide on their own that they can't follow their oaths. You shouldn't encourage people to do so in other cases.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[spagiola]

Juries do not get to decide if a law if legal.

Apparently you've never heard of jury nullification. You most certainly *do* have the right to decide if a law is legal when you are on a jury.

No, a jury has the ABILITY to go against what the law says. That's what nullification is. Juries do not have the RIGHT to do so. If they already did have such a right, why would Missouri need to pass a law that said they did (which is what the URL you provided says? The author may believe that this is a right "rooted in the constitution" -- and maybe he's correct -- but it's not recognized under current law.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Kotetsu]

Juries do not get to decide if a law if legal.

Apparently you've never heard of jury nullification. You most certainly *do* have the right to decide if a law is legal when you are on a jury.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[David Hume]

Only questions of fact get to a jury (and mixed law and fact). This case will soley be a question of law. Juries do not get to decide if a law if legal.

You are wrong. You are thinking of a civil case. In a criminal case such as this one, if the defendant demands a jury trial, in the United States there must be jury trial. The trial judge may attempt to guide the jury via the jury instructions (which is very dangerous on appeal), but in the end the jury decides.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Danse]

I don't see it as making the legal system worse than it is now. I think it has its potential for good and potential for evil, which is more than I can say for a lot of the laws we have on the books now. Personally, I feel better knowing it exists since our government seems to want to only create more, and more complex, laws to the point where nobody can figure out what the hell is legal anymore.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[pyramid termite]

The problem with eliminating jury nullification is that then, who is going to determine whether a jury decided someone's innocence on the facts, or on being against the law? If a judge decides a jury was not ruling on the facts, how could he decide the defendant's guilt without violating the defendant's right to a jury trial? There's really no way of guaranteeing a jury will convict someone based on the evidence.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[alkali]

Yes, the defense will move to quash the indictment on the ground that the statute under which the indictment issued (here, the DMCA) is unconstitutional.

Re:It will never get to a jury

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

It was my understanding jury nullification was the jury deciding (as representatives of "The People") to not apply the law to that particular case.

Fuck Adobe. Fuck them till they bleed.

[jcr]

Yeah, I know they recanted after the EFF pointed out to them that this fracas has made people all over the world hate them, but god DAMN it, they caused this mess and the very least they could do if they were serious about making amends is PAY FOR DMITRY'S DEFENSE.

Until and unless they do something more than say, "Oops, we're sorry we called in the jackbooted thugs, but it's of our hands now, and gosh, we really wish they would just let him go!", I say Adobe deserves to be on all of our shit lists, even above MicroSquish.

Would someone please re-post the names of the perps who fucked Dmitry over? Let's start with that incompetent prick who decided to call in the thugs instead of FIXING the crypto in his pathetic excuse for a product.

-jcr

Dmitry KQED Radio Show Fixed the Link Here!!!

[byoungvt]

as usual I will have pictures and info up from tonights rally ASAP. Also Dmitry is the topic of a KQED radio program at 9AM Featuring the EFF vs. AAP. I will put the streaming link up for the broadcast on my site! http://sjrally.n3.net BJY

Re:The DMCA

[topher1kenobe]

Is that PDF encrypted? Anyone know where I can get a good pdf decrypter?

Re:Details on the DMCA?

[_anomaly_]

http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/
http://www.tuxers.net/dmca/

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Emil Brink]

I wondered about that very same thing, actually. But what you're forgetting (I think) is that he also presented his results in the US, and I think (=hope!) that's what makes him prosecutable. I haven't stayed current with the details of the case though, so I could be totally wrong.

A short walk off a long pier

[Ethidium]

This law has been around for three years now, and I don't think it's likely to dissappear in any shorter time than that. The Skylarov case is certainly going to be a landmark one, which means that it will almost certainly see the Federal Appeals Courts, and, if they grant it considerations, the supreme court. Boucher ammendment aside, I know that there are those among us who will continue to argue that outlawing the writing of code is a violation of the first amendment to the U.S. Consitution ("The Congress shall make no law . . . . abridging the freedom of Speech or of the Press . . .").

At least they finally let him out on bail. My lord he looks tired in that picture.

Re:A short walk off a long pier

[Decimal]

At least they finally let him out on bail. My lord he looks tired in that picture.

Of course... god knows what could have happened to him in there. =/

Re:A short walk off a long pier

[Anonymous Coward]

He ain't tired. That's email withdrawl syndrome.

Re:Ultimate ThinkGeek item...

[Odinson]

I'd buy that for a dollar...

No really I would. :)

Re:Do we dare combat the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Get real! I do resist cool toys. I rarely go to movies (Planet of the Apes is the first movie I went to in 2 or 3 YEARS, and it reminded me why). I don't own a DVD player nor DVDs. I don't have cable OR satellite. I do admit that I have purchased games that probably can be traced back to the big corps but I only buy 1 or 2 of those a year. I do other stuff: water ski, build cars, work on my yard, play golf, besides coding and reading material. So don't give me this attitude. I put my money where my mouth is.

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

The DMCA is about writing software which defeats protection of *copyrighted information*.

Under current copyright law, a work is copyrighted automatically upon creation. Thus, every piece of email you write and send is copyrighted. Say Alice writes a memo and send it using an MS email client that automatically encrypts it. Bob intercepts this email (illegitimately) and uses his Linus email client to decrypt it. He has used a device to defeat access restrictions on a copyrighted work. Bang! DMCA applies.

Of course most people would not be using the Linux client to crack unauthorized emails but to access ones addressed to them. And of course the Linux client is not really the crucial part here, since Bob could conceivably have used the MS program -- it was the interception that was wrong. But the RIAA, MPAA, and other evil acroynyms have been arguing that a single infringing use -- even one entirely hypothetical -- is enough to open the developer to charges or suit under the DMCA.

The DMCA is a bad law because of its creeping featurism. In the 21st century, copyright law will become one of the major areas of law at all.

Re:A good thing?

[GreyPoopon]

I think it is a good thing Sklyarov was arrested.

I sort of agree, but perhaps it would have been better if an American were arrested. I would think it would be pretty awful to be arrested in another country just because the lawmakers there were stupid enough to pass such a lame law. I asked this once before. How would you feel if you went to Russia and were arrested for something as simple as speaking at a convention. I think you might be frightened. (Note, this is not to imply that Russia does or does not have such a stupid law).

Re:Details on the DMCA? Full Text

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the full text of the DMCA also known as H.R 2281.

DMCA

Re:Jury nullification

[garyrich]

>You can't get tossed in jail for it.

You CAN be tossed in jail for comtempt if the judge is pissy. You CAN be tossed in jail (for a long time) for perjury if during Voix Dire the judge asked if you would accept him as the final authority on matters of law and you said "yes".

>You can get removed from the jury (in fact, the second best way* to get out of jury duty is to mention to the prosecutor that you are aware that jury nullification exists), but the prosecuting attorney can only remove a few people

But, sadly, they have to ask. I got trapped on a panel a year ago. I kept waiting to be asked a question that would get me booted - but he just didn't ask them. They seem to always ask on drug cases, but not murder.

Also, they can only toss out so many jurors without cause. Not being willing to accept the judge as having papal authority over interpretation of law is considered very much "cause".

To tie back to copyright issues (neat trick) - the high court has said that while a jury has the right to act as judges of law - the judge is under no obligation to tell the jurors that. Just like you have "fair use" rights but that doesn't obligate the copyright holder to make it easy for you to excercise them.
garyr

Re:informative? Not really.

[_xeno_]

Um, did you actually read the full sentence?

Since the screen says that the Advanced eBook Processor is Copyright (whenever) by Dmitri Sklyarov, the FBI decided that he was the person responsible for "trafficking" the illegal circumvention device.

Look it up in the complaint - it's far too late in the life of this story for me to bother quoting the actual bit but the next time this story is rehashed and someone says he was arrested for speaking at Defcon, I'll find the relavent quotes.

OK, then everything is illegal.

[scharkalvin]

If the device used to enable fair use can't tell the difference between fair use and illegal use then the device must be illegal?

Well then we MUST make handguns illegal. A gun can't tell the difference between a legal use, and being used to commit a crime.

It MUST be made legal to SELL any tool that has a LEGAL purpose, even IF it can be used for an illegal one. Otherwise EVERYTHING is illegal. Guns, cars, screwdrivers, etc.

Re:OK, then everything is illegal.

[Odinson]

If the device used to enable fair use can't tell the difference between fair use and illegal use then the device must be illegal?

Well then we MUST make handguns illegal. A gun can't tell the difference between a legal use, and being used to commit a crime.

It MUST be made legal to SELL any tool that has a LEGAL purpose, even IF it can be used for an illegal one. Otherwise EVERYTHING is illegal. Guns, cars, screwdrivers, etc.

Dare I say that this logic is accurate and complete. It dosn't overreach, it dosn't gloss over anything. How can we possibly allow guns who's sole purpose is killing things, to be distributed? Simple, they have reasonable uses. Do people indiscriminatly kill each other? Very rarely.

Why?

The law gives gun owners reasonable leway, in return they are expected not fire except for practice, hunting animals, or unless necessary for their own defence. All good citizens in return assist in the enforcment process by calling in seen/heard gun shots to the police.

The RIAA/MPAA will enjoy no such cooperation until the freedom to obey the law or not is in the peoples hands. Expecting people to be encryption experts to excert their freedoms over their copy of the intellectual property is not reasonable, any more than building their own gun would be.

Re:English

[Electrum]

I attended his speech at the conference. I could barely understand what he was saying, and I imagine it was like that for everyone else there too. Unlike most of the speakers there, he wasn't really giving a speech, but rather reading a pre-written speech. My thoughts at the time were that it could have been a better presentation if a native English speaker were to have read his speech, with him answering questions. It was obvious when he was reading and when he was not. There was a short television interview with him available online a few weeks ago, and his English was very poor. I agree with the original poster that he will not be able to articulate his defense as well as a native speaker.

He'd go to prison in Russia (I think...)

[seizer]

Most countries (US and Russia included, I believe) have a mutual incarceration policy. DS would probably serve his sentence in Russia.

Ahh, the Siberian mines... think about that, next time you run DeCss or the like :-)

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[Pootie Tang]

Say Alice writes a memo and send it using an MS email client that automatically encrypts it. Bob intercepts this email (illegitimately) and uses his Linus email client to decrypt it. He has used a device to defeat access restrictions on a copyrighted work. Bang! DMCA applies.

I don't think the DMCA does apply here. The DMCA says you can't create a device that:

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof

The "Linus email client" is presumably primarly designed as an email client with decryption capabilties as just another feature. If it wasn't for this "primarly designed" language, the legitimate recipient's email client would also be a circumvention device.

Furthermore, I'm not sure that the purpose of the encryption in the first place was to protect the rights of the owner. I'm assuming it was to prevent prying eyes. However, this ambiguity is a good example of the creeping featurism you mentioned (which I completely agree with).

Re:Let my people go

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, here, I'll do it...

ok, you're all set!

Considering the Burst Test article as well.

[pornaholic]

"I made this - mankind will benefit from this thing I have created."
Perhaps the human experience is all boolean calculation. All we percieve, and all our associated thoughts can be convincingly simulated with computers.
I'm not saying that's all there is to us, but it could be all we're ever able to comprehend. Taken with a grain of salt, eventually somebody will accurately simulate the creative process. The electronic mind invents a new button that never falls off (Surely you see the case where a program invents a new program, but let's keep it simple).
Who owns the patent to the miracle button?
The button, in it's conceptual form, is only the result of a mathematical function.

Re:A good thing?

[stilwebm]

Good point. I would much rather it be an American, and much rather him be treated with rights, such as a timely bail hearing, etc.

Re:Alienation..

[alcmena]

I suddenly remember a quote, sorry I do not remember who said it first. "Only the entertainment industry treats their customers like enemies."

I agree that the movie industry is alienating their customers. I remember a while back when the DVD encryption scheme changed slightly. They put in some new code that would, in theory, only affect multi-region players.

My parents did not have a hacked, nor multi-region player. However, these new DVDs will not play on their player. The manufactur said that there was nothing they could do, the rules of the game were changed on them after the players were made.

Most DVDs still work for my parents, and it is usually Columbia/Tristar ones that do not. Though, my parents severly cut back on the number of DVDs they buy now, and are boycotting Columbis/Tristar entirely.

Re:I like this one....

[GemFire]

Here's something else to consider - if you steal real property (like money from a bank) and wait a long time (like 7 years,) then you can come out of hiding, write a book about how you did it, admit to everyone that you did it, and the statute of limitations protects you from prosecution. Even if you murder someone (which has no statute of limitations) they cannot prosecute you after you're dead. But with copyright infringement (and copyright is for LIMITED TIMES, remember) you can still be prosecuted for criminal infringement if you wait 94 years before publishing the stolen IP.

Can I shrink wrap a shrink wrap?

[Anonymous Coward]

Th circumvention provisions of the DMCA seem to revolve around having the authorization of the copyright holder to make copies of encrypted material. How can I as a consumer go about advising a copyright holder that by accepting my hard earned cash they are giving me the right to decrypt their material? Is there a straigh forward way of doing this?

Re:I like this one....

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

>> Allan Adler..."There is no device that can
>> distinguish between a fair use and a non-fair
>> use,"
>
> I beg to differ. I have the perfect device to
> distinguish fair use. It's called a brain.

This device is highly faulty. When used in the field, it turns out it has a >> 99.999% failure rate in distinguishing between fair and non-fair use.

Re:A good thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

a couple of Americans have been arrested in recent history for being there at the invite of Russia, and doing something that the local officials weren't informed of or just plain didn't like.

Of course, the two that come to my mind have been cellular phone techs spotting sites for cell phone towers, somehow being arrested by the local mafioso^h^h^h^h^h6h^hmilitary commanders for "spying", and essentially being held hostage for "bail"^h^h^h^hransom.

While sort of a big stink was made about one of these incidents in San Diego, because it was a Qualcomm engineer, I think it eventually played out when QUalcomm paid the bribe, the engineer returned to the US to face charges "later", which were probably quietly dropped some time later.
You can go through the same thing yourself if you want, too! Just go to any country other than the US. Do something silly, like try to sneak a handgun across the border into Canada or Mexico will do. If you get across, then sort of publicly display it on yourself, and then whine incessently that "I'm and American!" and "I won't pay their illegal bribes!" after you get arrested and thrown into jail, where at least in Mexico, you have to prove your innocence.

At least don't be so stupid as to try it with heroin in the Phillipines or Singapore or any other Islamic-ruled nation...

Ultimate ThinkGeek item...

[Anonymous Coward]

The DMCA written on toilet paper!!!

Re:Ultimate ThinkGeek item...

[Leven Valera]

http://www.ccusa.net/tp/

Rolls of 1000. Run wild, capitalism.

Re:Ultimate ThinkGeek item...

[EMH_Mark3]

lol
Would make a great item to pass to people during protestations :)

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[ArcadeNut]

Under current copyright law, a work is copyrighted automatically upon creation. Thus, every piece of email you write and send is copyrighted.

IANAL, however, that statement is not 100% accurate. In order to have a copyright on it, you must put "(C) Copyright 2001, by [your name here]" somewhere on the document.

This gives you the copyright on it. Posting something (or emailing) without a Copyright notice on it, effectivly makes it Public Domain.

If you want FULL protection for your work, then you need to register the copyright with the copyright office.

Re:Jury nullification

[Nehemiah S.]

You can't get tossed in jail for it. You can get removed from the jury (in fact, the second best way* to get out of jury duty is to mention to the prosecutor that you are aware that jury nullification exists), but the prosecuting attorney can only remove a few people, and if all mention it then chances are someone who believes in jury nullification can and will slip through to prevent injustice from occurring. This is one of the main checks that the people have against the system.

Now, of course, since this is a check on the system the people who run the system (i.e. judges, prosecuting attorneys, etc) would rather you didn't know about it, and will do what they can to discourage it. But you cannot go to jail simply for saying someone is not guilty despite a preponderance of evidence, which is what jury nullification is. Contempt of court in another story, which is why it is best not to advertise loudly what you are doing and/or why.

Neh

*The first best is to tell the defense that his client is guilty... no matter what.

Isn't Elcomsoft a competitor of Adobe's?

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't Adobe also sell software that, among its features, has the ability to strip off the copy protection? So how would Elcomsoft be violating the DMCA and Adobe not be?

Re:Isn't Elcomsoft a competitor of Adobe's?

[puck71]

"Doesn't Adobe also sell software that, among its features, has the ability to strip off the copy protection?"

Umm, no.

Re:A good thing?

[_xeno_]

...arrested for something as simple as speaking at a convention.

If you're going to argue the case, at least get the facts straight - there was a criminal complaint against him before he came to the US (it's dated July 10th), and he was only arrested once the FBI found out that he was in Las Vegas (on July 17th).

He was arrested specifically because the copyright to the Advanced eBook Processor was assigned to him - leading the FBI to believe that he is the one responsible for it. He was also arrested because the software could be purchased in the United States and was purchased in the United States. This doesn't make the DMCA any more fair, but at least realize that he wasn't arrested for speech, but for trafficking in an illegal copyright-circumvention device.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Anonymous Coward]

The constitutions SOLE propose is to LIMIT the scope of power of the US government NOT to protect your rights.

That's half right... limiting the scope and power of the US government PROTECTS my rights.

An American Citizen

Re:Perfection?

[Blue Aardvark House]

Sure, we do not expect perfection, but then again we do expect laws to embrace a certain fairness. Stripping away one's last fair use rights is not even what I consider "fair", no less perfect.

Re:Let my people go

[GooberToo]

On the other hand, if someone wanted the DCMA to be invalidated what would be the best way of doing it without ticking off a lot of people and spending the least amount of money? You arrest someone from another country for violation of that law and use them as the legal acid-test.
Because of the fact that Abobe has withdrew their complaint and the FBI is still intent on pursuing this line of action, it seemingly makes sense that someone higher up does want this case to, at a minimum, recieve world wide attention and possibly, actually go to court. Think about it. Other countries have already started down this path. What better way to wake everyone up?
Of course, the best part is, (as long as your name isn't Sklyarov) since he's from another country, the amount of presure to actually prevent him from being taken to court is going to be minimal compared to using a citizen.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

What I'm wondering is, what exactly do they want with Sklyarov?

He's the perfect scapegoat:

• He's a foreigner -- no built-in sympathy and likely a lot of built-in antipathy among American citizens
• He's Russian ... and we've had nearly fifty years of programming that Russian == Evil
• He's unlikely to be articulate in English in his own defense -- and even if he is, he'll have an accent (see first point).
• Many Americans feel that the rights under the Constitution do not apply to non-citizens (although the Supreme Court has repeatedly -- and correctly -- ruled they do).
• His company is in Russia and does not have the legal infrastructure to mount a defense for him.
• It can be cast as a fight to defend "the American way of life" from the ruthless Cossack hackers.
• They can get a ridiculously high bail set, because -- as a foreign national -- he's automatically a major flight risk.

Of course they picked a non-citizen for the first test case.

Re:No reg link

[die_rollerblader]

I hope that link isn't an illegal circumvention device!

Imagine if Skylarov were from China

[Wire Tap]

While reading over the stories surrounding this case for the past few days, I am reminded of the situation with the US Spy Plane earlier this year. Americans were being held in a foregin state, against their will, and for reasons which were debatable. Isn't the United States being the pot that calls the kettle black, here? Come on, what's the deal? I live in and love most things about this country, but when something like this crops up, it makes me sick to think of the people who drempt up such a convoluted thing as arresting a foreign national on disputable grounds... especially (and this is probably the biggest reason) because a large corporation is wetting its corporate pants. The hypocricy in this country, and around the world, needs to stop.

Re:Jury nullification

[rjh]

Wether [sic] or not the law is constitutional is decided in the appellate courts.

No. Any Federal District Court in the land can declare any law to be unconstitutional. It's not exclusively a matter of Circuit or Supreme jurisdiction.

(District Court = local, regional Federal Courts. Circuit Court = appellate court. Supreme = Supreme Court of the United States.)

Re:A good thing?

[RedBear]

I hate to say this, but going to another country and getting arrested for violating an insane law is not something the US just invented. There are a great number of governments still in power in various parts of the world today who have arrested foreigners not only on the merits of some insane law, but often even using a totally bogus reason, just because it suits their purposes. In many cases those governments have proceeded to torture and/or kill said foreigners, including some US citizens. At the very least, Sklyarov can hopefully expect to receive humane treatment from our government while he is interned here. No beatings, no starvation, no sleeping in a 3-foot-square box in 120-degree weather going 3 days at a time without water, and certainly no summary execution.

The law is no less lame, but we need a bit of perspective on how bad this is compared to how bad it could be. Should the DMCA be tolerated? Hell no, and Sklyarov's arrest was/is deplorable. But is it as bad as some of the things that have happened to foreigners in other countries? Not hardly. Sklyarov will survive this and can even expect to be in good health when it's over.

The DMCA

[Midnight Thunder]

For those of you who have been elsewhere for the past few months, you can check out the following page on the subject at the EFF. Another page has a link to the act, in PDF.

Re:The DMCA

[Midnight Thunder]

Another link of interest is the Anti-DMCA website. It is a good thing to share this link with friends that know nothing about this issue.

I was surprised at the number of people I know who didn't know anything on the subject, in most cases they hadn't even heard of the DMCA. You will probably find the same thing if your friends aren't /. readers.

Adobe products are pretty garbage anyway

[tre]

Free him, and don't buy Adobe Anything Version whatever. When there's free and opensource image editing programs available why even deal with Adobe, and we all know the popularity of eBooks... PDF's... wow. that's something to sue over.

Details on the DMCA?

[xZAQx]

Hey does anyone out there have a link to the provisions/highlights of the DMCA? I'm pretty ignorant of just how 'insideous' it is

Re:Details on the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what meta moderation is for. It requires some karma to get moderator status, and when a person's moderations get meta moderated as 'unfair' the moderator loses karma, thus reducing the chances of getting moderator points again. In the long run it supposedly works out, but unfortunately, there are casualties (such as yourself) along the way. I'm not really sure what happens to the post, though, when a moderation is meta moderated 'unfair'.

Re:Details on the DMCA?

[Nater]

The part most people have a problem with is Title 17, section 1201. That's the section that contains the circumvention and reverse engineering verbiage. Also take a look at section 1204. That's where the criminal provisions are.

Re:Details on the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

if you k1ll someone you get 7 years if ya break the DMCA ya get 5 years Wouldn't it be worth two extra years to /dev/null the ba5tards that create draconian laws before the laws are made

Re:Details on the DMCA?

[xZAQx]

WTF? Why am I a troll? I asked a question! And then people give me information and milk mod points off of my question. My question produces like 12 mod points for other people, and I'm a troll? Oh, wait, let me guess, this is a troll too?

well, good

[p3bf]

Okay, bring it on. I can take it. More DMCA.

Shouldn't we have a Code Red IV, The Voyage Home, where Skylarov travels back in time before the DMCA and can go home? A whale of a good tail.

Re:What Happens to Libraries with the DMCA

[SlippyToad]

But, if in the future they did become the only way publishers released books libraries would not be able to lend them.

It doesn't seem to have occurred to these people that they might not have a business plan doing that. I have attempted to make this point before to the "but copying is piracy and piracy is stealing from me!" type guys -- it may be that digital information simply does not have monetary value. One of the long-standing rules of the marketplace is that the value of a thing is what that thing will bring. If no one will pay for it, you can't make money selling it. It's like the dorks who want to privatize the water supply -- this shit falls out of the air, people.

Digital bits are trivially easy to copy. No encryption scheme can hold when you've got physical access to both the encoder and decoder. People are by and large unwilling to give up their rights of property (to own that which they've purchased, to view it at the time and in the manner of their choosing) in order to ensure digital profitability. Maybe it's simply time to step back from this "glorious revolution" and re-evaluate what we think we're doing, as a society.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Anonymous Coward]

He broke a US law while in Russia, you clueless retard.

Re:Jury nullification

[Weezul]

Yes, you are correct that a jury can not change the law (that would be moronic), but a jury can chose not to enforce a law that the defence convinces them is mearly wrong (not just unconsitutional). The question is can a jury do this legally.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all about cash flow, and protecting those who supply it to the government. DMCA is designed to protect and centeralize production and distribution of Digital content. If it's not centralized it's harder to collect tax. If you have to pay AGAIN to view something, the government gets to tax you again and the company gets to charge you AGAIN. The government IS a corporate intity and grows and freeds just like any other corporation. It is a monopoly on power it's only limited by the Constitution, which it pretty much ignors anymore.

If you want stupid laws like DMCA not to come out of washington then fight to put government back in it's constitutional box.

The constitutions SOLE propose is to LIMIT the scope of power of the US government NOT to protect your rights.

Read the bill of rights and constitution, then read it again until you understand WHY this is important. You lve in a republic not a democracy, democracy is good for big government to easily extort money from the citizens. Republics are evil and limit government ability to extort money from the citizens.

Re:A good thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

>(c) write out 3 checks for $50 each to your congresspeople's re-election fund.

Well, I for one think it's a good idea and would love to do it..... except for one thing....

... the last time I heard about a foreign national giving funds to US politicans, it turned
into a major political issue.

Remember, not everyone here live in the US.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[The Roach]

>
Isn't that a nice thought? And let us just take it one step further... Hmm... also, 'it might be' is a reason, 'it might be used for illegal purposes' at least is a valid reason nowadays, unlike the days of Sony...

The death penalty on Timothy McVeigh surely hurt those people who might have read books he might have written later. They don't get to read these books anymore. Yes, definitely hurting them.
Now, not all of them are located in the U.S.A. - some of them are Europeans. Germans, for example. In Germany, the Death Penalty is illegal. Therefore, the death of Timothy McVerigh was a first degree murder according to German law. It had effects on German citizens. I sure hope the executioner doesn't have plans on visiting Germany in the next twenty years. ;-)
Better yet, George Walker Bush jr., though it would have been possible for him to do so, explicitly denied him pardon. This definitely makes him at least an accessory in murder (according to German law), if not even complicity in and conspiring to commit.

When was the next time he intended to visit Germany again? ;-)

Re:Two many times

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

> When did we empower the government with this ability?

We never did. Most of the laws' authority derive from a Rube Goldergian argument based on regulating interstate trade (which purpose was to allow Congress to prevent states from passing laws to interfere with things passing through them to other states.)

Courts, wrongly and stupidly, accept these fantastic chains of reasoning that a kindergartener would be embarassed to call his own.

For example, the federal government passes laws that apply to (non-interstate) hotels because someone doing interstate business might stay there.

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[dpilot]

Too late.

Actually, they used patent law, not the DMCA. But Windows Media Player support was ripped out of an Open Source player many months ago, after legal notice to the author by Microsoft.

I'm also sure the DMCA will be one more tool in their arsenal.

Re:Let my people go

[ichimunki]

What international law is the USA violating? Please tell me, I'll add it to the next letter I send a politician about this. And I realize the DMCA may be an unconstitutional law, but unfortunately the system is built to allow such laws to pass and requires that court cases be tried in order for the judicial branch to find otherwise. Generally laws are only subject to judicial review after such time as they have been enforced. If not, they should be, since issuing injunctions against the enforcement of laws until such time as they have undergone judicial review is in itself a subversion of the Constitution (as it essentially adds another layer to the veto process).

Given the enormous attention given the civil case of the MPAA vs. 2600, and the civil case of the RIAA vs. Napster, one would have to assume that at some point the criminal portions of the DMCA would be enforced as well. I'm guessing that Adobe, as part of their discussions with the FBI, made it clear that they were having a hard time suing a Russian company for violating the non-Russian DMCA by doing something that is entirely legal in Russia, but here was an opportunity to hold the perpetrator accountable by the only means pragmatically available according to the DMCA. Obviously the Feds bought it, since Dmitry is still in jail. Or maybe the FBI was just frustrated that it couldn't find anyone else to arrest at Def Con. In which case, you're probably right. It was completely arbitrary.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Rande]

Better yet, George Walker Bush jr., though it would have been possible for him to do so, explicitly denied him pardon. This definitely makes him at least an accessory in murder (according to German law), if not even complicity in and conspiring to commit.

When was the next time he intended to visit Germany again? ;-)

On official state visits, he'll get diplomatic immunity. ie, yes, he could literally kill someone, claim diplomatic immunity and the worst that would happen is that he'd be deported.

Further irony...

[DreamingReal]

She has GOT to be kidding if she thinks the average consumer has the ability to design tools that will allow them to access there fair use rights. This is idiotic. Most /.ers couldn't even handle this.

And furthermore, even if a person *could* design the tools, (in the case of DVDs) the DVD-CCA licenses the key to decrypt the DVD. Individuals would have to either pay for the license, $5,000 for an annual license (although they may deny you) or acquire it "illegally" (i.e. reverse-engineer). So, in the case of DVDs, there is no realistic and/or legal way for a consumer to write a program themselves (witness Jon Johanson).

So much for that idea.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[jmccay]

Haven't you paid attention to the news? Russia and China both arrest US poeple all the time. Usually on bogus charges of spying.

Sklyarov not only broke the code, but he sold it. I think that is what got hime into the most trouble. As far as breaking a US law while in another country, look at the British diamond cartel nobody from that company (for the exact company's name) can step foot on American soil anywhere because the will be arrested for various laws regarding anti-trust monopolies and some other stuff.
The same goes for Sklyarov. He was selling his method of by passing the security, and that is really what got him in the most trouble. What did was then considered a crimal act of piracy. Every other country in the World would do something similar and they have--except China where piracy if thought of as a good thing.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the DMCA, but this guy is not exactly inocent. It's like pulling the trigger on a gun pointed at someone to test whether the safety works or not. If it doesn't you'll initially get arrested, and you'll have a hard time proving it wasn't your fault becuase you willingly pointed the gun at the person. Sklyarov basically did the same thing when he sold his solution.

Re:Let my people go

[hearingaid]

you don't have to have a choice to be a hero. I don't think Stephen Biko had a choice, for example.

I'm not sure Dmitry stands up to Biko's rather high standard. but you never know. the case is yet young.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[pdcull]

Umm, there was. Of course, he was also accused of being a spy... and possession of marijuana is illegal in the US too, but still... there were a lot of demands made, yes.

Did you see the CNN report of his return, which apart from mentioning how the "Russian authorities accused Tobin of training to be a spy" didn't mention his military and intelligence training. I thought it all rather hypercritical: "It's great to be back in a country where basic human rights are respected and the due process of law is also a respected institution".

Nobody seemed interested in explaining just why someone who has had US Intelligence Russian language and interragation training happened to coincidentally win a scholarship to Russia. IMHO this guy either really was spying or training to be a spy, or was really stupid to think that he could visit Russia without them finding out about his background.

And CNN doesn't make mention of the facts of the case. Makes you wonder who bought them, eh?

Re:Let my people go

[baptiste]

While I agree with you, its not gonna happen and we need this case to go to the courts. This is the first big test case and overall we really need this to expose the DMCA as the fraud that it is.

It sucks for him no doubt. But if his case wins us the repeal or watering down of the DMCA, he'll be a hero.

I figure if the above happens, lets setup a fund for his family & kids and make donations as a way to thank him for his trouble for improving things here. Life can be rough in RUssia, the least we can do is improve his standard of living a bit as a why of thanking him for hte trouble he went through to, hopefully, get rid of this stupid law.

Re:Two many times

[alkali]

Most of the laws' authority derive from a Rube Goldbergian argument based on regulating interstate trade (which purpose was to allow Congress to prevent states from passing laws to interfere with things passing through them to other states.)

You are welcome to hold such a narrow view of the Commerce Clause, but this view has been squarely rejected by the Supreme Court for 177 years. See Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 189-90 (1824).

In particular, this quote from Chief Justice Marshall's opinion might be enlightening:

What is this power? It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Congress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than are prescribed in the constitution. [ . . . ] If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of Congress, though limited to specified objects, is plenary as to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution the same restrictions on the exercise of the power as are found in the constitution of the United States. The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often they solely, in all representative governments.

Id. at 196-97 (emphasis added). (In other words: the Constitution doesn't mean you can ignore what your Congressman does.)

Re:Let my people go

[psychalgia]

you jackass, its defense contractors convention, not "script kiddies hack atms convention."

Re:A good thing?

[einhverfr]

While I think that it was a serious mistake on the part of DMCA advocates to use a foreign national as a test case. I would rather not see that sort of human cost, but I am glad that they let him out on bail.

This case is great because it highlights the problems with the law in a way that arguably could not be done with an American citizen. The important thing is, we have to win it because of the human cost issue. If we don't then we have a much greater problem on our hands.

Ummmmm...

[FrostyWheaton]

meanwhile i am going to shrug the atlas and sit back and watch them die.

How exactly does one "shrug the atlas"?? I can only assume you are referring to Ayn Rand's book "Atlas Shrugged" in which one character remarked that if he was Atlas, the man who held the world on his shoulders, he would shrug it off, refusing to carry it. You could "shrug like Atlas", or something like that, but "shrugging the atlas" is akin to "setting us up the bomb"

Re:Ummmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Only, it's "set up us the bomb".

If we don't fight

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

If we don't fight, the "O'Reilly Open Source" will have in the future the same negative connotation that DefCon does now. Microsoft, that "upstanding shining star of American innovation and productivity" *cough*, has demonized Open Source, saying it "destroys intellectual property", and hence innovation.

The battle for mindshare as begun. We are being made out to be the bad guys. We react to laws and are always on the "law-breaking" side. Not from our perspective (freedom), but from THEIR perspective (they have the courts/police/gov't/guns on their side).

We need to act, not just react. We need to use the political process and get publicity where WE are taking an initiative, and aren't just fighting the ystem.

Re:If we don't fight

[PaulBu]

(they have the courts/police/gov't/guns on their side)
Hey, some of us (ER) do seem to (still) have guns on our side :)

Re:NY times sucks

[Zeno_1]

Actually it requires you to replace www with archives I know its tough, maybe you should try the converting www to archive for dummies book, i hear it works wonders.. Zeno

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Anixamander]

In the Spring of 1994, an 18-year-old Michael Fay, was caned in Singapore for spray painting cars. Many in the United States expressed outrage at the primitive brutality of the punishment.

You're confusing the issues here...the case of the Fay kid was one of punishment, not crime. The kid broke the law, and deserved to be punished. At issue was how he should be punished. The Dmitry case is not a question of punishement, but of crime...and all signs point to the idea that Dmitry did in fact break the law. A bad law? That is for the courts to decide, and right now Dmitry is the only one who has standing to challenge that law.

If no one is ever charged with breaking a law, the courts are powerless to throw it out. That is one of the reasons so many outdated and silly laws still exist. No one is charged with the crime so it never comes up for apellate review. Dmitry really needs to be convicted in order for the courts to strike down all or part of the DMCA.

Legal assumptions.

[Black Parrot]

You know, it occured to me over the weekend that the present spate of bad laws are based on the assumption that corporations have an entitlement to make a profit on distributing things digitally. And it's that sense of entitlement that results in laws that violate our constitutional rights.

Why don't we chuck out the sense of entitlement, and the laws trying to enforce it, and just tell businesses that if they want to be profitable in the cyberage, they need to come up with a business plan that actually works in the cyberage.

Re:Legal assumptions.

[markmoss]

In reinforcement of that: in American law, copyrights and patents were not established as a fundamental right of the creator, but rather as a right that the creator gets for a limited time in return for making the creation freely available after expiration, and allowing certain non-paid uses before expiration (fair use for copyright, free access to patent archives for patents). There is no entitlement to intellectual property, there is just that deal. "The best Congress money can buy" has already made a joke out of "limited time" in the case of copyright, by tacking on another 20 years or so everytime the first Mickey Mouse copyrights get close to expiring. If the DMCA sticks, they've overturned the original deal entirely: if the copyright ever expires you can legally copy the item, but no one can legally sell you the tools.

Re:Legal assumptions.

[sacrilicious]

...the present spate of bad laws are based on the assumption that corporations have an entitlement to make a profit on distributing things digitally. And it's that sense of entitlement that results in laws that violate our constitutional rights

A simiar related point: another slashdotter once pointed out that despite perceptions to the contrary, capitalism does NOT confer the right to make a profit; it confers the right to TRY to make a profit. This is an important distinction.

How to help

[Curien]

Here's the pertinent FAQ over at EFF. It gives you links to a Paypal account set up for Dmitri as well as links to various mailing lists, web sites, et cetera.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Spring of 1994, an 18-year-old Michael Fay, was caned in Singapore for spray painting cars. Many in the United States expressed outrage at the primitive brutality of the punishment.

The f*cker deserved it. America is growing too soft. People need to be be beat in order to retain order. If you let everyone off because you don't believe in punishment, all you get is a bunch of spoiled little sh*ts who do whatever they want because they know the punishment will be nothing more than a playful slap on the wrist.

We need more tough love in this country.

Re:Jury trial...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's going to be the simple things like

"He's a Russian and a hacker?!"
"Lock him up!"

No contradictions.

[Anonymous Coward]

This will be a short post, but I dont think its been brought up yet in this article.

I think that either there is a contradiction, or the DMCA is just more evil than you previously thought it was. It mentions you can backup your data, but you are not allowed to program a backup utility. -You- are not allowed to program one anyway, you are supposed to purchase one to be legal, of course.

Tell me what you think.

Alienation..

[FordImperfect]

"Ms. Samole said she ended up downloading a pirated version of "Fight Club," which is how she intends to obtain her movies in the future. "I'm completely alienated," she said. "I'm never going to rent a DVD again." Hmmm... thats what people will start doing.. something akin to civil dis-obedience. Nothing would be more frustrating than not able to watch the DVD you bought.. and only a fool will make the same mistake again... Those morons are going to dig their own grave... meanwhile i am going to shrug the atlas and sit back and watch them die.

Re:Alienation..

[Sarcasmooo!]

I wonder how long it'll be before the MPAA, or Ms. Samole's ISP start sending her legal threats based on the information in the article. Maybe the name was fake.

Re:Alienation..

[puck71]

Not sure why the DVD wouldn't play, but we definitely need more "normal" people having problems with the DMCA in order to get things changed. As long as it's only the techno-few who have problems with it, and the general public seems complacent, changes will be very slow in coming. But if Joe Schmoe who rents a DVD and can't watch it on his/her own player, and this starts to happen more and more (which it probably will, with ever-changing drives and copy-protection measures on the drives AND disks), things will happen a lot faster.

I personally own both the Region 1 and Region 2 versions of Fight Club (I'm a big fan), and the Region 1 version plays fine on my computer (the Region 2 one does too, but I only have so many region switches I can do before my drive locks to the last region used, so I don't watch it), so I'm not sure what her specific problem was. But the fact that I can't play my Region 2 (without messing with stuff, which means breaking the DMCA probably) pisses me off because, contrary to what the MPAA will tell you, there is not an equivalent product available in Region 1. I don't see any German dubbing or subtitles on any Region 1 DVDs. This should also be used as evidence, because the average person can understand that not being able to watch a DVD that you bought is bad.

Re:Alienation..

[tkrotchko]

In essence, her computer tried to stop her from watching the emminantly forgettable "Fight club".

Perhaps computers are more sophisticated than we think.

Muddying the law

[Blue Aardvark House]

From the article:

The Library of Congress is now considering whether to recommend other exceptions to the law. Many libraries and other educational institutions want an exception that would let individuals circumvent a copy- control technology in order to copy portions of a work for use in parody, scholarship or criticism -- purposes protected under the "fair use" doctrine of traditional copyright law.

This is the sticking point of the DMCA with me; it strips away whatever bit of fair-use doctrine we once enjoyed. No wonder most people don't like it, no one wants to lose rights they once had.

This is all fine and good, but people still have to prove they cracked whatever encryption in order to make a parody, etc. It makes for more complications in the long run.

It seems to be a poor substitute for examining its constitutionality to see if the law should still even exist.

Re:No reg link

[jidar]

Well yes it does, but it wouldn't be right now would it? Regardless of whether or not you agree that the NYT should be requiring a registration, if the NYT wants to make sure people register to read their article then linking to the article that requires registration is just the polite thing to do.

Re:Let my people go

[hearingaid]

What international law is the USA violating? Please tell me, I'll add it to the next letter I send a politician about this.

Extraterritoriality.

There's a common principle in international law that, with very few exceptions, states should only prosecute people as criminals if their illegal behaviour occurred in the jurisdiction of the state prosecuting.

For example, if a brewer visits Saudi Arabia, he or she should not be held criminally liable for assisting in the distribution of liquour in Saudi Arabia. Only if the brewer brought a bottle of the Cap'n should an arrest be made.

However, the United States (like some other countries; say, Turkey) violates this rule all the time. Anytime Cuba is mentioned, for example. So I wouldn't hold your breath.

Re:No reg link

[Hobbex]

I'm guessing that they would probably get in trouble with NYTs legal department if they did. For a while the registration free server was called "partners" making it quite clear that only NYT partners were allowed to link to it.

Yes, it is stupid as fuck to put pages on the web and tell people they can't link to them, and yes it is ironic as hell when it is regarding an about sanity in Internet laws, but you can never overestimate the the level of hyporcrisy possible from corporations...

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[nathanm]

What does this have to do with copyright?

This has everything to do with copyright. The moment a work is fixed in any medium (paper, tape, film, etc.) it is copyrighted. That means as soon as an e-mail is sent or a word document is saved, it is copyrighted. Granted, John Doe the office worker probably won't sue anybody for decrpyting an e-mail, but a corporation could use this angle in a lawsuit.

Re:I love this part

[Shardis]

rofl, you're kidding right? Although you don't see this type of cheap copy protection anymore, I've very easily "hacked" (rolls eyes) many game CD's just by changing a few lines of some config file so I didn't have to insert the damned CD every time I played. I've done this probably to well over 20-30 games. Just make sure all the configs are looking for info on your "c:" drive instead of "d:" or higher. Piece of cake.

Fuck That Moderator.

[jcr]

That was NOT a troll. I am completely sincere in this, and I will not be doing ANY business with Adobe until they have made amends. As far as I'm concerned, they have a long way to go to make up for the damage they've done.

-jcr

Re:Fuck That Moderator.

[rkent]

That was NOT a troll. I am completely sincere in this

LOL... I'm sure, but I hate to break it to ya: any post whose subject includes "fuck them til they bleed" is by nature a troll. Or maybe more appropriately a flame. Part of maintaining a civil, productive discussion is the "productive" part.

Disclaimer: I am not "that moderator." But I don't disagree w/ him.

guidance

[www.sorehands.com]

But the judge can guide the jury by controlling the evidence that is admitted.

Re:guidance

[David Hume]

But the judge can guide the jury by controlling the evidence that is admitted.

What you say above is abolutely correct. The judge may do so, of course, at the risk of reversal on appeal.

What the judge in a criminal case cannot do is order a jury to find the defendant guilty, or enter a judgment of guilt, by the equivilant of summary judgment, directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the vedict in a civil action.

Re:I love this part

[Anonymous Coward]

"Many of the people I know can come up with a program to do it themselves, without being in the business of doing it," Ms. Peters said.

She has GOT to be kidding if she thinks the average consumer has the ability to design tools that will allow them to access there fair use rights.

well, she didn't say the average consumer. she said 'many of the people I know'. hell, if you run the copyright office, you probably know quite a few intelligent people.

Re:No software needed to backup Adobe ebooks

[cs668]

If that is true then lets see you copy one from your desktop to your laptop. I can imagine having my desktop die and then what good is my backup copy? It can only run on one install of the ebook reader.

Re:I love this part

[Decimal Dave]

"Many of the people I know can come up with a program to do it themselves, without being in the business of doing it," Ms. Peters said.

Hmmm... Sounds like she just exposed herself as being part of some sort of hacker ring. Better watch out for the Feds, Ms. Peters; it's their job to put away people like you.

ACM Declaration

[NullPointer]

This is a bit off topic... The ACM has filed a declaration in Federal Court in support of the Felten case. As someone else said in response to another article along the same lines, their position on the DMCA makes me proud to be a member.

Dmitry KQED Broadcast at 9am PDT

[byoungvt]

Links to the show featuring EFF vs AAP are here: http://sjrally.n3.net sorry about the repost, wanted to get the time up there!

Re:A good thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if there's a way to write to Sklyarov and to donate money for his defense? Even if the charges are dropped, which I certainly hope for, I'd consider that money well spent (a small compensation for mental pain and suffering).

Good point, but. . .

[Salgak1]

. . .the American Citizens and Permanent Residents being held in the People's Republic of China are being held on ESPIONAGE charges: while 99.999999999 percent sure these are trumped up, you can't really make an espionage charge equivalent to the (unspoken, but DMCA bottom line) charge of pissing off a Corporation.

But, even still, the hypocrisy is astounding. . .

Re:Let my people go

[Hard_Code]

"If he was so completely unaware of the potential for his situation to go this way, then I'd have to ask who invited him here without giving him some background and pointing out some potential risks."

Yeah, I mean, who really abides by international law, or their own constitution these days?...

Re:I love this part

[hbo]

Maybe she should be heading the Patent Office instead. Her "friends" could help them get a clue.

No reg link

[pgpckt]

http://archives.nytimes.com/2001/08/13/technology/ ebusiness/13NECO.html?0813inside

Can't article submitters please take the easy step of replacing www with archives? It works every time.

Re:No reg link

[Anonymous Coward]

how about this: bite me

Re:No reg link

[sqlrob]

So you block by the referrer. If you have an open server on the net, what happens is your own fault.

Re:No reg link

[tregoweth]

Until it gets used widely, and then NYT changes it to something else or disables it. At least this way the first person to post the registration-less URL will get some karma...

This cauight my eye, first paragraph

[kindbud]

...the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a 1998 law that some legal experts say extends rights to consumers even as it effectively prevents them from exercising those rights.

Hello? Those rights already existed - it's called the 1st Amendment. The DMCA even has language expressly affirming those rights to fair use. Here is an article that is critical of the DMCA, yet is still full of pro-media-conglomerate bias! How can we win this when even our "friends" are getting it wrong?

Good to have a test case.

[Nonesuch]

Dmitri should have known that he was at risk for being arrested- he took the chance of taking actions that put him at risk for being prosecuted for DMCA violations, then flew to a hacker conference in the USA to talk about the exact actions which were in violation of the law.

The best test case for unconstitutional laws are people who have volunteered to publically break the law in order to fight it, but sometimes people 'volunteer' less explicitly, like Dmitri...

Re:A good thing�

[Enigma2175]

A case like this is exactly what we need to have this law rewritten in a way that makes more sense.

I don't think this is a good test case, because public opinion is already biased against Sklyarov. I have seen numerous stories referring to him as a "Russian Hacker" such as Russian hacker released on bail after U.S. arrest (06-Aug-01) and Hacker supporters ask Adobe to aid in defense (02-Aug-01). Even if the article explains that what he did was legal in Russia, the sentiment is already turned against him by the title. "Hacker" has become a Bad Word(tm) to the majority. While the /. crowd might not see such an evil meaning, the general public certainly does. I think we would be much better off with an academic (like Prof. Felton) as the defendant in the test case, rather than a "Russian Hacker".

Re:A good thing?

[COAngler]

In that vein, here's a suggestion: (a) get out your _manual_ typewriter and write a letter to your three members of Congress explaining your views on this situation (b) contribute $100 each to DS's legal defense fund and a fund for his family's well-being (c) write out 3 checks for $50 each to your congresspeople's re-election fund.

FWIW, a $50 check isn't that impressive. Instead, they look at voting records to see how seriously you should be taken. If you vote in primaries and local and off-elections, they'll give you a LOT more weight than someone who just shows up in November in even-numbered years. And if you don't even vote in those, don't bother writing. Non-voters tend to be ignored.

Besides, Diana DeGette (D-CO) is my congresscritter. I'm not going to give her a damn dime.

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[Pootie Tang]

a) Breaking encryption isn't illegal across the board. Only if the encryption is used to control access to copyrighted works. If the encryption exists for some other reason, break away.

b) There is a specific exception for interoperability.

c) Even excluding B, it's illegal to make a device whose PRIMARY purpose is to circumvent copyright control restrictions. If the primary purpose is something else, like an email client/server or a file sharing client/server or an office suite, then it isn't covered by the DMCA anti-circumvention clause.

I can't believe the number of posts that don't understand this (specifically, part A)

What I'm wondering is...

[James Foster]

What I'm wondering is, what exactly do they want with Sklyarov?
I mean, he broke *US LAW* whilst IN RUSSIA... and now they're prosecuting him in the US.
After taking that into account... what do they hope to achieve? Its unlikely that he has much money that anyone can sue him for... so they just want to keep a prisoner, basically?
What if Russia arrested and held an American for breaking a Russian law whilst in America?!? I bet there'd be a helluva lot of demands going on by the US.
The US seems to have a lot of double standards in terms of what it expects from other countries contrasted with what it allows other countries.
The DMCA is only part of the deal.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Relic of the Future]

What if Russia arrested and held an American for breaking a Russian law whilst in America?!? I bet there'd be a helluva lot of demands going on by the US.

Umm, there was. Of course, he was also accused of being a spy... and possession of marijuana is illegal in the US too, but still... there were a lot of demands made, yes.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[markmoss]

The Russian gov't ought to put out a warrant for the FBI agents involved -- and particularly the guy that's up for head of the Federal Bureau of Idiocy -- for kidnapping, and press the case before the World Court. Grounds (1) the questionable jurisdiction for arresting Skylarov (his program is quite definitely legal in Russia -- and copy protection that does not allow a backup copy is illegal -- and I haven't seen any evidence that Skylarov was in control of whether his program could be sold to Americans), (2) they apparently shuttled him around after the arrest so as to avoid a bail hearing for TWO WEEKS, blatantly in violation of the US Constitution. They ought to be indicted here for kidnapping & conspiracy to violate civil rights, but you aren't going to see a federal prosecutor going after other federal agents... If the FBI can arrest a foreigner for violating US law in another country, it should be possible to try them in another country for acts committed here that violate the laws of BOTH countries.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not if you allow the government to operate outside it's juristiction. If government isn't following the law what makes you think the will recogize your rights?

Everyone keeps talking about what rights they have but seem to be missing the point that you ONLY have these rights as long as it doesn't effect the government. IE the goverrment shits on our liberties everyday and no one notices.

Walk into a court room with the constitution and tell the judge the government is in violation of your constitutional rights. He will laugh at you and tell you that you are not a party to the contitution, get it out of his court room. Ask an attorney to raise a constitutional matter in a civil suite.... He'll laugh and explain that not how the law really works.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Kwikymart]

"ruthless Cossack hackers."

Hopefully they dont bring their horses along

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Dun Malg]

Nobody seemed interested in explaining just why someone who has had US Intelligence Russian language and interragation training happened to coincidentally win a scholarship to Russia.

None of that training is particularly unusual. If the military trains you as a linguist, there are really only three jobs you'll end up in as an enlisted schmoe: 98G-Voice Intercept Operator, 98C-Intelligence Analyst, and 97E-Interrogator. I myself was trained as a Russian linguist by the US Army. I initially was going to be an "interrogator", but that job title is quite misleading. A military "interrogator" is actually little more than a translator with some extra training in interviewing people. Interrogation only happens if POWs are captured in wartime. I chose to become an "analyst", which is far more spy-like but still not really noteworthy. Most people in Military Intelligence don't go on to become CIA agents. Most of us decided that the military is a crock and left after our enlistments were up. I don't find it at all surprising that this guy decided to pursue the one interesting/useful thing the military taught him (the Russian language) and earned a scholarship to go to a country where he could expand that knowledge.

In short, don't assume that just because someone was once in the military that they are forever a slavish toady of the US intelligence machine bent on spying for their country to thwart the "red menace".

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Warning! Grammar flame ahead...

I mean, he broke *US LAW* whilst IN RUSSIA
...
What if Russia arrested and held an American for breaking a Russian law whilst in America?

"Whilst" is only to be used in the same sense as "although." If you want to indicate that two events simply occurred at the same time, use "while."

Stop trying to sound educated. You're not fooling anybody.

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[hey!]

The US precedent was set some years ago when a Japanese company was criminally prosecuted for fixing prices. The price fixing took place in Japan, but the legal theory was that it harmed US consumers.

Another example is the embassy bombers, who plotted the crime (although technically the embassys were US territory, they're still on the hook for conspiracy, right?).

The problem is there are some instances where most people would agree that a degree of extraterritoriality in laws makes sense -- the question is how much and where.

How would you feel about the Achille Lauro hijackers being tried under US law?

Sklyarov affected US citizens by writing his program (albeit whether this is for their good or ill is a matter of opinion). Therefore legally, if the case is thrown out because Sklyarov is Russian and the act was performed in Russia, then it would apparently set new precedents, which IMO would be a good thing. There has to be some limit on the degree to which a country can hold the citizens of other countries responsible for violating its laws. Are US citizens to be bound by the laws against blasphemy of Iran or political agitation in China? Do all the laws of the US including the DMCA apply to everyone around the world, despite their having no consent in the drafting of such laws, nor the consent to being governed by those laws implied by residency? Is visiting a country tantamount to consenting to have all your past acts governed by its laws?

It's a hell of a can of worms. A Sklyarov victory could be very important even if DMCA itself is not overturned.

<punditry>

Re:What I'm wondering is...

[Anonymous Coward]

He never personally sold it, he did it for his employer!

Corporations exist to protect individuals from direct liability...

Re:Good to be arrested?

[TeraCo]

So ultimately, the money that you grudgingly give to your government is being diverted away from worthwhile projects to keep someone who repeatedly destroyed your stuff in jail?

Roll on corporal punishment, say I.

Lets "make an example of Adobe" to the other corps

[Anonymous Coward]

Until and unless they do something more than say, "Oops, we're sorry we called in the jackbooted thugs, but it's of our hands now, and gosh, we really wish they would just let him go!", I say Adobe deserves to be on all of our shit lists, even above MicroSquish.

Sklyarov should sue Adobe for millions for having him falsely arrested and "make an example of Adobe" to the other corporations, just as they so often try to do with "pirates". The lesson being that fucking with people wrongfully will cost you and your shareholders BIGTIME dollars. Losing money is the only things corps will understand.

NY times sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

It requires free subscription.

Dont go there

COPYright vs ACCESSright

[dpilot]

It seems to me that in this whole debate, we need to make clear the difference between COPYright and ACCESSright. That's the real rub about the DMCA, it legally transforms copyright into accessright, and gives the copyright holder new controls not previously granted.

It is supposedly about preventing unauthorized copying. But in reality does little to prevent it and puts the publishing industries in the driver's seat in a new way.

The REAL fear here is if we get to the point where all 'media player devices' (not necessarily related to Microsoft media player) play only DMCA-encumbered media - where you can't even play non-access-controlled media if you wanted to. Then free speech and discourse necessary for democracy are in deep trouble.

Adobe and other corporations wat him let go.

[Anonymous Coward]

Adobe no longer wants Sklyarov prosecuted. And I'm sure, neither does the MPAA or RIAA. The reason is that they know that the first challenge to the DMCA in court will results in its weakening, affirmation of user's rights, or total dumping of the DMCA (see the MPAA vs Sony/Betamax trial for an example of this).

Corporations love powerful but unconstitutional/illegal laws like this that they can use to beat people over the head with. However, if the person has the time or resources to mount a strong defense, the corporations will "back down" and let this one trouble maker go so that the law stays in full force and on the books so they can use it against the next guy.

Fortunately in this case, the US gov't is going to force the issue.

Re:Adobe and other corporations wat him let go.

[sphealey]

"Adobe no longer wants Sklyarov prosecuted. And I'm sure, neither does the MPAA or RIAA"

This is more than a bit naive, I am afraid. Adobe is trying for the best of both worlds here: intimidating anyone who seeks to reverse-engineer their code, AND endear themselves to the anti-DMCA crowd as being "reasonable" and "open to negotiation". An iron bar wrapped in a happy-face marshmallow.

Same with RIAA: if charges are dropped now, intimidation is successful without taking the risk of the law they purchased being overthrown.

sPh

Re:Adobe and other corporations wat him let go.

[dveditz]

If Adobe really wanted to make amends they would have at least paid his bail and replaced his plane ticket home. They didn't.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[jheinen]

"Many in the United States expressed outrage at the primitive brutality of the punishment. Even President Clinton expressed his dismay and criticized the punishment as cruel and close to barbarism and torture"

Hah! This from a country that still routinely murders its own citizens. So where does execution fall on the "barbarism" scale? Is is more or less barbaric than caning? I know that I, for one, would rather be caned than executed.

Re:Jury trial...

[popoutman]

to allow blind people to read these e-books. Imagine THAT testimony in front of a jury!

To sway juries, especially in really technical disputes, is to not bore the average joe and jane soaps on jury duty with the relevant technical details (but those need to be put on the record and explained in a non-condescending manner to the jury) as long as the details can be reasonably easily understood by explaining in non-tech language (if that is not an oxymoron).

Was there no facility to output ebooks to a braille-friendly output? Strange omission on the part of the writers...
From an outsider, this case and related antics are disturbing - especially as I may end up living in the States for a number of years after I graduate...

./configure

[abe ferlman]

A lot of bad laws have stuck around for longer than the DMCA has yet, but the more this kind of analysis is seen, the sooner sanity can be restored.

tar -xvzf dmca.tar.gz
cd dmca
./configure
creating cache ./config.cache
checking for extra includes... no
checking for extra libs... no
checking for a BSD compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether legal environment is sane... no
*Exit with error code 1

Re:Jury nullification

[wiredog]

The Supreme Court is an appellate court.

Can you see the parallel...

[jitenpai]

...in the first paragraph here?

Re:Jury nullification

[plague3106]

Yes, but that doesn't change the that ONLY the SC can say a law is unconstitutional.

Re:Is anybody else

[ethereal]

I get a lot of "Invalid Form Code *random text*" errors, myself. It seems to be gradually occurring more and more often.

Tonights SJRally Latest on Dmitry

[byoungvt]

as usual I will have pictures and info up from tonights rally ASAP. Also Dmitry is the topic of a KQED radio program at 9AM Featuring the EFF vs. AAP. I will put the streaming link up for the broadcast on my site! http://sjrally.n3.net> BJY

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[pieterh]

Up to now, the law has been used by media companies to protect copyrighted information. But a law can be used imaginatively once the precedent has been set. Let's imagine that MS define their Passport protocol as 'copyrighted information' and then start to prosecute people who try to reverse-engineer it. Then, they use this protocol in various places in Windows - e.g. in file sharing and email.

At what point does this scenario get unrealistic?

No software needed to backup Adobe ebooks

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a red herring. If you want to back up your Adobe ebooks, you just copy them the old fashioned way. 'cp' would be fine. 'gnutar' would be just peachy. You can even restore them onto your PC and you're good to go.

Adobe *tells* users to back up their ebook data files before upgrading the reader. That would be rather silly, if it weren't possible.

The only problem is that Adobe makes it a pain in the ass to make your ebooks readable if you change PCs. No decryption software necessary.

By the way people talk, you'd think that Adobe ebook files *can't* be copied, *can't* be backed up, and *can't* be made to work on another computer without some cracking software. This is not the case.

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[pieterh]

It's good to hear that Microsoft are not quite that sneaky. It would be shocking to learn that they were involved somehow with the MPAA.

About MS using the DMCA to their advantage, has anyone actually thought about this, e.g. done a small study into the potential issues in (e.g.) a standard Linux distribution?

Re:A good thing?

[rabidcow]

100,000 people?
You're talking about a fifth of the people that might read your post.

You're gonna need a helluva lot more persuasion to get one out of five people to write a typewritten letter and donate $100.
(...and do you really think that many people have working manual typewriters? That's funny!)

Re:Good to be arrested?

[FamousLongAgo]

People keep talking about Dmitri being held under awful conditions -- but does anyone know what his actual situation is?
As far as I remember, he is out on bail -- where is he staying, who is with him, can his family get a visa to come visit him?

I'm sure a lot of us would be willing to pitch in with some donations to help out. Does anyone have the scoop? Anyone out there actually meet with Sklyarov? I will be happy to translate Russian->English if necessary.

Many posters have gone on and on about the brutal imprisonment Dmitri is being subjected to -- it would be nice to replace some of that conjecture with actual facts.

Re:Let my people go

[Hostile17]

While I agree with you, I also want to remind that Dmitry did not have any choice as far as I know, which pretty much does not make him a hero

While it does not make him a hero, it does make him a Martyr, which I am sure means nothing to him, but to us it is everything. Every oppressive government fears is a Martyr, because they can be a powerful figure to rally around, and this is what turns a few peasents into a fanatic army.

Two many times

[Overphiend]

The government decides to make a law that keeps us, not from breaking a law, but from having the choice to break the law. They say this tool could be used to break the law; therefore you should not have access to it. You are not responsible enough to make the decision on your own. When did we empower the government with this ability?

Need to be careful with this case.

[Anemophilous Coward]

We need to have as many technical and scientific minds work with the lawyers of the EFF all through this case. This being the first case testing this abomination of a law, we need to make sure that it is rightly patched and/or overturned. We don't want to fall for a 'quick fix' that seems to be better, when in the long run the law still favors the wrong side. Make sure the lawyers know what to get fixed and how to fix them properly for the benefit of everyone.

I'm sure the media cartels are grinding their gears to find the right obfuscated solution that may satisfy people now, yet still retain the draconian measures currently in place. Just getting his release is not enough, the law must be made right.

- A non-productive mind is with absolutely zero balance.
- AC

Re:Good to be arrested?

[TWR]

You believe that torture is an ethically justified response to vandalism?

How about you let me vandalize your stuff, and then let me know what you'd like to do to me. I'm sure that some defintion of "torture" would be met by your words.

The fact that some children do not value other people's stuff means the children's parents have failed. The real solution is to punish the PARENTS. Once a few parents are punished, we'll see parents in general start to teach children a bit of respect for other people's stuff. Of course, if it's an adult who is the vandal/thief/whatever, then the adult should get the punishment.

A better punishment than caning would be to work at hard manual labor until you've earned back an amount equal to the cost of damaged goods. All in favor of having teenage vandals cleaning cesspools, raise their hands...

-jon

Re:Jury nullification

[Danse]

So why do people get tossed in jail or off of juries for doing it?

Do we dare combat the DMCA?

[rao]

I sometimes think that we don't dare stand up against the DMCA. After all its, the entertainment industry that keeps us entertained. Oh what do we do to kill the idle hour? What did we ever do before game consoles, CDs and DVDs.

I frequently read about the DMCA on Slashdot. I've yet to see a Slashdot poll that musters support against it. When all the complaining is done, we all go home to our games, movies and music. The editors here make grandiose statements about "evil corporation X" and then post a review about "X's cool new gizmo". We condemn Sony's role in the SDMI initiative and then go on to say "Oh I can't wait till PS/2 hits the US markets".

Here's a link to a letter I wrote to Malda and Rusty. Nothing came out of it.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2001/7/31/20314/1 524/20#20

Why isn't there a collective, organized protest against DMCA and its lobbyists? Don't we think that its possible to live without the offerings of corporations? Its time to consider this thing seriously, and chip away at it, each day, relentlessly. Keep journals. My journal entry would read, "Today, I would have done X, but for the DMCA. I can't wait until the day that we'll be rid of it".

If we're so weak that we can't resist cool toys, then perhaps we deserve the DMCA.

-rao

From the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

Marybeth Peters, the chief of the United States Copyright Office, said that the exception was still meaningful, even without a market for anti-circumvention devices, because it allowed individuals to figure out for themselves how to go around a technological control measure. "Many of the people I know can come up with a program to do it themselves, without being in the business of doing it," Ms. Peters said.

Arrest these proto-crackers at once! The DMCA demands their blood!

Good to be arrested?

[DiveX]

While sitting in your warm bedroom or at your cool office saying how great it was that he was arrested so that the law can be challenged in court, Dmitri is most likely sitting in a one room cell with little but a cot, metal toilet, and TV down the hall. His family is most likely sick with worry since they realize that there is little to nothing that they can do. Any time an American (born or recent addition) is imprisoned for a crime in some foreign, there is often a public (US) outcry. In the Spring of 1994, an 18-year-old Michael Fay, was caned in Singapore for spray painting cars. Many in the United States expressed outrage at the primitive brutality of the punishment. Even President Clinton expressed his dismay and criticized the punishment as cruel and close to barbarism and torture. I really doubt Dmitri is glad to play a small part at the legal challenge of the DMCA. If you were in that position, your lawyer would most likely suggest (and you would accept) that if you can be quietly get let off with time served and a small fine that you accept it. If my lawyer were to suggest, 'we're going to fight this until your bitter end', then I'll be asking for new representation. Poor Dmitri is being used as a pawn by both sides. Corporate America is using him to scare the programming community into submission (i.e. you're next) and the community is using him to strike down a law.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[meldroc]

Dmitri is most likely sitting in a one room cell with little but a cot, metal toilet, and TV down the hall.

Great argument except for one thing... Dimitry is out on bail, crashing with a Russian friend in California.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

> In the Spring of 1994, an 18-year-old Michael
> Fay, was caned in Singapore for spray painting
> cars. Many in the United States expressed
> outrage at the primitive brutality of the
> punishment

Although many in the United States expressed admiration. Someone just busted the windows out of a neighbor's car parked in the street. Three or four swats with the cane (import a Singaporian caner, please) would be the right thing to do, morally and ethically.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[Mr. Slippery]

Someone just busted the windows out of a neighbor's car parked in the street. Three or four swats with the cane...would be the right thing to do, morally and ethically.

You believe that torture is an ethically justified response to vandalism?

Caning is not a matter of a few "swats". It is a whipping that often breaks the skin, administered by specially trained torturers. It is a violation of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

(For some inexplicable reason, a lot of the news coverage around the time of the Fay case had video of rattan shinai (kendo swords), which have nothing to do with the 4-foot-long whips made of water-soaked rattan which are used for this torture.)

Government-administered beatings are not a solution to any problem.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[cthugha]

If you were in that position, your lawyer would most likely suggest (and you would accept) that if you can be quietly get let off with time served and a small fine that you accept it. If my lawyer were to suggest, 'we're going to fight this until your bitter end', then I'll be asking for new representation.

Remember that if he does plead, he'll end up with a criminal record, which comes with its own set of headaches. He'll almost certainly never be allowed back in the US (not that he would necessarily want to, but the nature of his employment may require it) and he may face other travel restrictions in other countries. If it were a purely civil matter, then things would be different.

Re:Good to be arrested?

[weave]

This from a country that still routinely murders its own citizens. So where does execution fall on the "barbarism" scale?

Slightly behind prison rape I would guess...

"The horrors experienced by many young inmates, particularly those who are convicted of nonviolent offenses, border on the unimaginable. Prison rape not only threatens the lives of those who fall prey to their aggressors, but it is potentially devastating to the human spirit. Shame, depression, and a shattering loss of self-esteem accompany the perpetual terror the victim thereafter must endure."

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Farmer v. Brennan

Re:Good to be arrested?

[tomlouie]

Personally, I think that if judges are allowed to give Cruel & Unusual punishments, we'd have fewer crimes and fewer people in jail.

Re:Let my people go

[Anonymous Coward]

At the 1997 World Women's Conference the first speaker from England stood up:

"At last years' conference we spoke about being more assertive with our husbands. Well after the conference I went home and told my husband that I would no longer cook for him and that he would have to do it himself. After the first day I saw nothing. After the second day I saw nothing. But after the third day I saw that he had cooked a wonderful roast lamb."

The crowd cheered.

The second speaker from America stood up:

"After last years' conference I went home and told my husband that I would no longer do his laundry and that he would have to do it himself. After the first day I saw nothing. After the second day I saw nothing. But after the third day I saw that he had done not only his own washing but my washing as well."

The crowd cheered.

The third speaker from Australia stood up:

"After last years' conference I went home and told my husband that I would no longer do his shopping and that he would have to do it himself. After the first day I saw nothing. After the second day I saw nothing. But after the third day I could see a little bit out of my left eye."

Re:I love this part

[Dunedain]

Most interestingly, manufacturing a circumvention device for use in your own home is still illegal under the DMCA. It allows their use for security research and backup purposes, but not their manufacture. Similarly, it's legal for a child to smoke a cigarette in most places -- but it's not legal to give him one or leave one where he could get it.

The meaning of "Malfunction"?

[mcfiddish]

Last fall, Congress adopted the library's recommendation that when the copyright safeguards malfunction on "literary works, including computer programs and databases," that an individual has legally purchased, the person be allowed to use technology like the software Mr. Sklyarov developed to regain reading access to the work.


Can this be used as an argument for DeCSS? The encryption on DVDs is so weak that it "malfunctioned"?

It's a stretch, I know.

Re:The meaning of "Malfunction"?

[Anonymous Coward]

>The encryption on DVDs is so weak that it "malfunctioned"?

No, but DVD is "broken" in Linux, so Decss is used to "regain" read access.

Smiliarly, the CD protection scheme has a broken ECC for CDROM...

Re:Someone is going to do it . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Zug's don't exist.

Let my people go

[T1girl]

Would someone please just let this poor guy go home to his wife and kids and sort this all out later?

Re:Let my people go

[TV-SET]

While I agree with you, I also want to remind that Dmitry did not have any choice as far as I know, which pretty much does not make him a hero.

Did he have any chance not to be arrested? Guess no. Could he choose the date of the hearing? Nope. Etc, etc,etc.

The only thing is for sure - DMCA sux :)

Re:Let my people go

[sphealey]

"And I realize the DMCA may be an unconstitutional law, but unfortunately the system is built to allow such laws to pass and requires that court cases be tried in order for the judicial branch to find otherwise. Generally laws are only subject to judicial review after such time as they have been enforced. If not, they should be, since issuing injunctions against the enforcement of laws until such time as they have undergone judicial review is in itself a subversion of the Constitution (as it essentially adds another layer to the veto process)."

Of course, the oath of office for a congressperson requires him/her to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States' and 'bear true faith and allegiance to the same'. One could argue that passing a bill which is known in advance to contain unconstitutional language is a violation of this oath.

I know - politicans don't think that way. Or as Boss Tweed used to say, "an honest politican is one who stays bought". But it does bother me just a bit.

sPh

Re:Let my people go

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there a point to Re-stating What is already a universal sentiment? Please learn of the guidelines before posting, YOU are only adding to already overwhelming amount of noise on this site. Thank you.

Re:Let my people go

[ichimunki]

Dmitry must have had some clue he was in something of a grey area when he decided to come to America to present his work at a hacker convention (I mean, it's Def Con, not the O'Reilly Open Source convention, after all). If he was so completely unaware of the potential for his situation to go this way, then I'd have to ask who invited him here without giving him some background and pointing out some potential risks. He's Russian, he should have an understanding of what it means to go against the political will of the local secret police (in our case, the FBI). That the Russian secret police don't give a damn about copyrights (in part because their laws are different) doesn't mitigate the fact that the secret police in the USA do-- and are not known for how they treat Russian computer experts.

But he is a hero either way, because the definition of "hero" does not always require the subject to have high-minded, lofty goals at the outset. He is quite possibly going to be central in overturning this law, or he will be one of the most obvious victims of it-- in a way that Eric Corley can never be. I fully expect "Free Dmitry" to replace Mitnick references... at least the new rallying cry will have a more ethical foundation.

A good thing�

[stilwebm]

I think it is a good thing Sklyarov was arrested. I mean, it would suck to be arrested, no doubt. But it was going to happen eventually, sooner than later. A case like this is exactly what we need to have this law rewritten in a way that makes more sense.

One step ahead of you!

[TrentC]

We need to have as many technical and scientific minds work with the lawyers of the EFF all through this case. This being the first case testing this abomination of a law, we need to make sure that it is rightly patched and/or overturned. We don't want to fall for a 'quick fix' that seems to be better, when in the long run the law still favors the wrong side. Make sure the lawyers know what to get fixed and how to fix them properly for the benefit of everyone.

OK, I'm on it! Let's see...

Bugzilla Helper
Product: Digital Millenium Copyright Act
Component: Creation and utilization of access-control circumvention devices, legality of
Platform: all
Operating System: all (especially open-source OSes)
Build ID: 1998-10-28
URL: http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=sklyarov, http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=sdmi
Summary:
I am allowed to use an AC-circumvention device, but not allowed to create or distribute one, even if it is to be used for legitimate purposes; this sets up a feedback loop that short-circuits the effectiveness of full-disclosure security practices, consumer-rights advocacy, and exercise of First Amendment rights.
Description:
According to the DMCA, I am allowed to use an access-control circumvention devices to gain access to works which I have the "legitimate" right to ("legitimate" in this sense is defined as "rights which I have paid money for and have not been unilaterally revoked by the copyright holder" but excludes the featureset known as "fair use doctrine" and "expiration of copyright"); however, if I create an access-control circumvention device, I can be prosecuted in the United States as a criminal and/or civil offense. Furthermore, describing how to create an access-control circumvention device is an offense, even if the device is used in a manner that complies with the DMCA.
Reproduces:
Sometimes, but not others; effect seems to depend on whether the "criminal" is a foreigner, an academic, or considered to be part of a "hacker organization" or the "open-source movement" (the latter two are erroneously treated as synonymous by the court system).
Steps to reproduce:

1. Discover that an access-control mechanism protecting copyrighted works is inadequate or flawed
2. Write an academic paper or technical article detailing the flaw/inadequacy
3. Delvier a presentation or create a software application that exploits the flaw/inadequacy; software can be of proof-of-concept quality, though being distributed commercially by a company operating in a country where such products are not illegal increases the chance of triggering the DMCA bug
4. Get arrested by the FBI or threatened with civil action by a large multinational company whose "livelihood" is threatened by your discovery

Actual results:
In one case, a team of academics was bullied into canceling a presentation showing the ineffectiveness of a proposed "watermark" introduced into a digital music file as part of the SDMI initiative. In another case, a Russian programmer was arrested by the FBI as he was leaving a hotel where he had given a presentation exposing the weakness of encryption used in an Adobe "e-book reader" program.
Severity:
Critical: DMCA hangs offenders with presumption of guilt, fails to prevent leaks, and causes users to lose data and companies to spend large amounts of money trying, to paraphrase Bruce Schneier, "make water not wet".

Mean moderation!

[rkent]

Shame on this moderation! If someone posts useful info as AC, for the love of God, mod it UP! It can't possibly be whoring.

Re:Excellent parallel.

[Skuld-Chan]

Makes me wonder what would happen if Microsoft made the same tools Elcomsoft did - would adobe go after them?

I mean look at the gallery of DeCSS - the only reason they went after 2600 was not because they did anything wrong, but because they knew they could probably win.

Re:I love this part

[Kwikymart]

You are giving one scenario out of a possibly millions. If it wasn't for the reverse engineering of Xing DVD player, we probably wouldnt have Free DVD players now. Do you think that the average consumer can reverse engineer Xing and learn how it works? What if we didn't have the luxery of Xing? I bet there would only be a handful of slashdotters even capable of doing such a thing. I suggest you start speaking from your brain from now on instead of your ass.

Re:A good thing?

[sqlrob]

The only "fair" person in jail would be the congress critters that voted for it, or MPAA/RIAA/APA members. That's also the only way to get those organizations to change their stance. An effective boycott just isn't going to happen, so personal involvement is the only other option I see.

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[cvd6262]

Good point, but I don't think it's true.

Jim Taylor (the foremost authority on DVD history and tech) tells that the MPAA was not too worried about CSS being insecure because they had already penned the DMCA (not by that name), and had a senator to introduce it.

Jim Taylor also predicted that CSS would be cracked much sooner than it was. He was offended by Hollywood's "shocked, can't believe it" attitude when it happened.

In short MS might use the DMCA to their advantage, but they're not the ones who came up with it.

Not the first

[Anonymous Coward]

Incongrous, you say? Like, allowing marijuana use for medicinal purpose but making a crime to grow it?

Re:Jury nullification

[Anonymous Coward]

"Not guilty, because that law is moronic." is a valid decision by a Jury.

Re:DMCA and Microsoft...

[ckd]

A small voice asks... what happens when Microsoft encrypt their email protocols, network file sharing protocols, office document formats, and then start prosecuting programmers who try to hack these protocols, say... to allow Linux to interoperate with Windows.

You mean like what they did when they first "released" the spec for Microsoft Kerberos with a click-wrap license, then asked Slashdot to remove un-clickwrapped copies (or links to same), and finally made most of the info available without the clickwrap?

Yeah, they'd never do anything like that.

[POLL] Anyone here believe Adobe wants to help us?

[Anonymous Coward]

Adobe is trying for the best of both worlds here: intimidating anyone who seeks to reverse-engineer their code, AND endear themselves to the anti-DMCA crowd as being "reasonable" and "open to negotiation".

Even the most brain dead troll here knows that the megacorps are out to screw the consumer as much as possible. Screwing us is PROFITABLE!

Re:Is anybody else

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember: it's a "CmdrTaco is a fucking idiot" bug, not a "perl is a piece of shit language" bug.

OR maybe it's both.

Computer Law...

[snadsnad]

It is going to be a long time before laws involving computer useage are perfected. I shouldn't even dare to say perfected because our current laws are still flawed; and the worse thing is that there are many more fine lines to cross with computers.

What Happens to Libraries with the DMCA

[cs668]

I know that this seems far fetched because ebooks have not become popular. But, if in the future they did become the only way publishers released books libraries would not be able to lend them.

The DMCA seems to criminalize the library that might someday exist.

I love this part

[pgpckt]

Marybeth Peters, the chief of the United States Copyright Office, said that the exception was still meaningful, even without a market for anti- circumvention devices, because it allowed individuals to figure out for themselves how to go around a technological control measure.

"Many of the people I know can come up with a program to do it themselves, without being in the business of doing it," Ms. Peters said.

She has GOT to be kidding if she thinks the average consumer has the ability to design tools that will allow them to access there fair use rights. This is idiotic. Most /.ers couldn't even handle this.

What she is suggesting would be like if wrenches were illegal, but you could make your own to fix your faucet that is leaking. "We believe the average consumer will find a way to make the wrenches they need." Sorry, but most people do not have the knowledge, expertise, or equipment to make wrenches. If you think most people can write code that will crack encryption, you shouldn't buy that new Lexus you have been looking at. Why not build you own car?

Re:I love this part

[rking]

Sounds like she should be a witness for the defense in the DeCSS cases. She could explain to the court how easy it is for people to circumvent CSS without DeCSS, removing any justification for banning it.

a common skill?

[l2718]

From the times article:

Marybeth Peters, the chief of the United States Copyright Office, said that the exception was still meaningful, even without a market for anti- circumvention devices, because it allowed individuals to figure out for themselves how to go around a technological control measure. "Many of the people I know can come up with a program to do it themselves, without being in the business of doing it," Ms. Peters said.

So, according to the US copyright office, hacking e-books is a common skill? In fact, a neccessary skill to excersize our rights?

Re:a common skill?

[aonifer]

So, according to the US copyright office, hacking e-books is a common skill? In fact, a neccessary skill to excersize our rights?

Yes, but it's a skill that you are not allowed to learn from anyone else.

Re:a common skill?

[Anonymous Coward]

Great TV ad.... Have you hacked any e-books/DVDs today? You will.

I like this one....

[Flower]

Allan Adler, vice president for legal and governmental affairs at the Association of American Publishers, has an explanation. "There is no device that can distinguish between a fair use and a non-fair use,"

I beg to differ. I have the perfect device to distinguish fair use. It's called a brain. I have greater faith in its capability than in any access control scheme Big Media may come up with.

Re:I like this one....

[Danse]

If I distribute copyrighted info and don't get caught, how long is the statute of limitations? I know the term limit is anywhere from 70 years on up depending on who created it, but that usually isn't the same as the statute of limitations.

Re:I like this one....

[StrawberryFrog]

. I have the perfect device to distinguish fair use. It's called a brain.

Though that works in principle, it generally fails in practice - for e.g. 99.9% of Napster downloads were not fair use.

Re:I like this one....

[the_2nd_coming]

or how about benefit of the doubt?

we have criminals running around steeling and murdering, why? because we give people the benifit of the doubt so as to allow freedom for the much larger majority that is law abiding.

if we handeled common crime the way they are handeling copyright infringment, everyone would have an ankle braclet that told the police where they are going and they would be required to debrief the authorities as to what they did while they were out. with this solution, common crimes would almost dissapear because everyone is treated as a criminal who is on parole.

stop treating everyone like a copyright infringer and focuse on those that are distributing pirated materials (since that is what has always been illiegal).

The thing I liked the most about it...

[Rimbo]

...was that the mainstream press is starting to see the anti-DMCA point of view, and to write about it. The fact that they're supporting the "little guy" is more than gravy, but we geeks have known all along that the "little guy" is who is hurt.

Seeing the Sklyarov tale picked up by the Times in this light can only bode ill for the DMCA. I hope this is a continuing trend, and not a blip on the radar...

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[Ravn0s]

Buh-bye to Samba / Mandrake! Seriously, it's coming already with XP and .NET 0,1 - my two bits

Re:DCMA and Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the Circuit City Divx people went on record that they thought CSS encryption was crap, and that was one of the few reasons they got any support whatsoever.

There may be another reason

[wiredog]

A couple of weeks after Adobe goes after Skylarov a virus that attacks pdf files comes out. Coincidence?

"Adobe has managed to make enemies of people I would not care to have as mortal enemies." -- Jerry Pournelle

Just explain to them in layman's terms

[browser_war_pow]

Explain to them that the law is stupid because byte-for-byte copying is unpreventable when you have the real production equipment. Explain to them that Adobe used encryption that was so sad that an Algebra student in high school could probably write a better algorithm to protect the eBooks with. Explain to them that there cannot legally be a DVD equivelant of the VCR. Show them that what Sklyarov did was legal in his country, the jurisidiction where it took place. Then remind them that this is the exact same thing that China does to our people when they criticize their policies in America them then go on business trips there. Put it in those terms. That will show them that we have become the very thing we once deeply opposed: a police state. If the facts are explained to them in those simple terms then Adobe/the gov's lawyers will have two words haunting them in their back of their minds for the duration of the trial: "jury nullification"

Is anybody else

[InfinityWpi]

Having trouble posting? I've already hit the ASCII art filter and the "this has already been posted" filter... apparently I posted something 270,000 hours ago that this duplicates... and having "..." counts as ASCII art...

DMCA gagging crypto researcher

[Jacco de Leeuw]

Crypto expert Niels Ferguson was at the HAL2001 festival yesterday, speaking about AES/Rijndael vulnerabilities. At the end of his presentation, he wanted to add a personal note.

He said that he had done some research on some topic (unfortunately I could not hear what it was about). He said he would go to the US next week for a conference and he feared being arrested if he would publish. Since he had mouths to feed and rent to pay, he said he could not afford to take the risk. So he decided to not publish his research. He urged everyone to protest against the DMCA which affects him as a non-US citizen. He did realise that at the HAL he was preaching to the choir...

Some little known facts about this case

[ben_tarval]

Here are some little known facts about this case - at least ones which I haven't seen covered in the media, or on the Free-Dmitry mailing lists.

Dmitry's company made an extremely smart move in hiring Joe Burton for their lawyer here. He's the same one who represented Kelly Goen and Phil Zimmerman when they were being investigated by the Grand Jury for PGP.

Joe Burton is arguably the best lawyer in the world for this case. Not only is he experienced in this area, he's an ex-Fed prosecutor (IIRC) and knows all the people involved on the Government side of things. He also believed strongly in the rights of people to use strong cryptography, and represented Kelly and Phil for free.

IMHO he's a rare bird; and I wish we had more like him.

Here's another extremely little known fact about the PGP case. Joe wouldn't touch handling suing the Feds involved with a ten-foot pole for violating Phil and Kelly's constitutional rights on Freedom of Speech with PGP. Apparantly he's still a little too close to some of the Feds to do this.

But I still think he's the best person for handling the criminal case. I would personally choose another for handling the civil-rights violation countersuit against Adobe and the Feds though. It will be interesting to see who's the best lawyer for this one.

That's not the DMCA..

[Tom7]

What does this have to do with copyright? The DMCA is about writing software which defeats protection of *copyrighted information*. It is a law bought by the media companies to keep you from using their content in ways they do not have control over.

The DMCA is a bad law, but let's get our facts straight so that we can fight it most effectively. It is not productive to fanatically distort the law into some kind of root-of-all evil monster.

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[Molf]

Under current copyright law, a work is copyrighted automatically upon creation.

This post copyrighted by me, (C)2001. It is held as a sequence of binary digits, rather than human-readable physical text; anyone attempting to circumvent this method of content protection by converting these digits into readable text must do so only with my explicit allowance. Any anauthorised reading of this post is a crime in the US under the Digital Millanium Copyright Act, and will be treated as such.
Have a nice day.

Re:That's not the DMCA..

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

In order to have a copyright on it, you must put "(C) Copyright 2001, by [your name here]" somewhere on the document. This gives you the copyright on it. Posting something (or emailing) without a Copyright notice on it, effectivly makes it Public Domain.

This is a common and dangerous misconception. Whereas it used to be that to have copyright you had to use the (c) and register it, this is no longer true, and hasn't been since (I believe) 1989. See, for further info, "10 Big Myths about Copyright Explained" (http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html).

Excellent parallel.

[crovira]

The DMCA tells you that if your vehicle is broken, its illegal for you to make or own a wrench to fix it or to hire a mechanic.

Furthermore, its illegal for you to look under the hood.

That would be a brilliant defense. Cuts through the technobabble BS in a couple of sentences.

BTW: People who spend real money, like a couple of mil for a package, get all the tools, all the source code. There is no DMCA.

The DMCA is only being pressed on by penny-ante people over penny-ante ephemera. Its basically against the consumer.

The (RI & MP)AAs members pollute the environment and beg you to buy the record or come to the theatre now but six months later, its in the deep discount bin as a last gasp halt on its way to the landfill. Where it belonged in the first place.

Perfection?

[_anomaly_]

Do you really expect perfection from the US government? Of course the first several times a law is first used to bring someone to court will result in changes, or at least reflections and debate. This is at least one Good Thing(TM) about the judicial system. Doesn't mean the DMCA is any easier to swallow...

Jury trial...

[sdo1]

As much as I'd like to see the charges tossed out now (I doubt that DS wants to be a pawn in this... he probably just wants to go back to Russia), going to trial could be quite helpful. Unlike the 2600 trial, this one could easily be painted in a better light.

One of the things his software is capable of doing is to allow blind people to read these e-books. Imagine THAT testimony in front of a jury!

And what would Adobe's representatives say when they take the stand? (and you can be sure that they will) They backed off once. Will they say "No, this hasn't hurt us." Or will they backtrack once again and call for him to be put in jail. Surely their calls to have him released will enter into the testimony?

No jury of "average" Americans will be able to wrap their heads around the technical issues of the DMCA. It's going to be the simple things like "this software allows blind people to read e-books" that will sway them one way or the other.

-S

Re:Jury trial...

[TWR]

Was there no facility to output ebooks to a braille-friendly output? Strange omission on the part of the writers...

The problem is that eBook technology includes flags to indicate how the book can be used. One of those flags is "read aloud." This is supposed to tell Text-to-Speech software for eBooks to not read these books.

It's all sick, really. The idea that you can't use something you bought any way you want is nuts, but that's what we get for turning it all over to the lawyers and the suits.

-jon

Re:A good thing?

[sphealey]

"I wonder if there's a way to write to Sklyarov and to donate money for his defense? Even if the charges are dropped, which I certainly hope for, I'd consider that money well spent (a small compensation for mental pain and suffering)."

Since the Internet started to become widely popular (say around 1994-1995) I have watched a number of on-line political hoo-haa's. The furor over the Communications Decency Act I & II comes to mind.

In all of these cases I have noticed a common thread: lots of people are willing to hit the "R" key in the e-mail program and contribute a fresh rant to the discussion. Very, very few people are willing to actually DO anything that might make a difference.

OK guys, this one's important. This is pretty much a key battleground in the future of on-line rights.

In that vein, here's a suggestion: (a) get out your _manual_ typewriter and write a letter to your three members of Congress explaining your views on this situation (b) contribute $100 each to DS's legal defense fund and a fund for his family's well-being (c) write out 3 checks for $50 each to your congresspeople's re-election fund.

Now, if in 6 weeks or so I see $10 million in DS's defense fund and 150,000 letters received on Capitol Hill, then I will think that on-line activitism means something.

My prediction: $10,000, a couple of hundred letters (remember - typewritten, hand-signed, stamped, and mailed). Net effect: ZERO.

sPh

English

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Given that he was giving a speech at Def Con, I'd say his English is fine.

Re:English

[gilroy]

Not to disparager Sklyarov, but if you've attended any major research conferences, you know that merely giving a talk makes no implicit statement about your command of English. I'm not saying this as a bit of Know-Nothingism; it's simply true.

Re:Don't worry

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, God..I do hope you are kidding......

Need an amendment

[Anonymous Coward]

One could argue that passing a bill which is known in advance to contain unconstitutional language is a violation of this oath.

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment to the effect that any congresscritter who votes for a law, which is later found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, forfeits the right to run for reelection.

Re:Jury nullification

[alkali]

And any state court, too. The Supreme Court's decision on that subject -- if there is one -- is of course binding, however.

You're no John Galt.

[Anonymous Coward]

You pathetic, illiterate little loser. "Atlas Shrugged" involved the inventors and captains of industry refusing to have their works exploited. You, the spoiled, misbegotten offspring of the first world, who can afford to purchase said DVDs, but instead STEAL them, are in fact BOYCOTTING the actual producers. YOU are denying THEM the revenue they should earn having risked their own capital, and invested their own time and labor. Go stand in a corner until you understand basic economics.

More DMCA violations!

[agilen]

Ms. Samole said she ended up downloading a pirated version of "Fight Club," which is how she intends to obtain her movies in the future. "I'm completely alienated," she said. "I'm never going to rent a DVD again."

Arrest her! She is a hacker-theif!!

Re:Jury nullification

[Anonymous Coward]

"The question is can a jury do this legally."

In a criminal case the jury can do whatever it damn well pleases. The judge and prosecution would like that they not know that.

Jury nullification

[wiredog]

You most certainly *do* have the right to decide if a law is legal when you are on a jury.

Actually, you don't. If a jury votes "not guilty" in a case, the law is still on the books, and still enforceable. All the jury decides, in a criminal case, is guilty or not guilty. Wether or not the law is constitutional is decided in the appellate courts.

Re:Jury nullification

[Weezul]

They seem to always ask on drug cases, but not murder.

We all have the same views on murder. I would still vote not guilty to a guy accused of possetion (and I've never even smoked pot). It's the only moral thing to do when they have mandatory minimmums which remove the judge's sentencing discression.

A good PDF decrypter.

[Mike McCune]

Who needs Elcomsoft to decrypte PDF files? Ghostscript is free (in both senses of the word)and works just fine:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/

Uhm, no.

[Inoshiro]

Straight from 2600: "SKLYAROV RELEASED ON BAIL AFTER THREE WEEKS"

So the little scenario you pointed out is not happening, at least not right now.

And even if Dmitri is unhappy about being a pawn, well, Adobe made the choice for him. Now he has no choice. Adobe, meanwhile, tries to play both sides off the middle by going, "ohh, sorry, we really didn't mean it." I swear they put out ROT13 just because they wanted to arrest someone and prove that the DMCA makes life for corporate america safe.

Don't worry

[briggsb]

Congress has already passed legislation to remedy the situation.

DCMA and Microsoft...

[pieterh]

A small voice asks... what happens when Microsoft encrypt their email protocols, network file sharing protocols, office document formats, and then start prosecuting programmers who try to hack these protocols, say... to allow Linux to interoperate with Windows.

What if the whole affair about copyright and fair-use a red herring designed to distract attention from the real game: making it illegal to write software that competes in any way whatsoever with Microsoft's own work.

The Perfect Defense

[AlpineR]

Try this approach, Dmitri:

Fight fire with fire

AlpineR

Irresistible Borg reference; ignore at leisure

[Vulture_]

We are Slashbots of Borg. Your website's signal-to-noise ratio will adapt to service us. Meaningful posts are irrelevant. Resistance is futile.

Re:A good thing?

[Vulture_]

Yeah, and he'll probably have AIDS as a result of getting gang raped in prison. Not my idea of humane, especially since the prison officials seem to unofficially condone prison rape. It's not as bad as beatings, starvation, sleeping in a 3-foot-square box, in 120 degree weather, or going 3 days at a time without water, but the summary execution is arguably preferable to having AIDS for the rest of your life.