Sklyarov, Bunner (DVD CCA) Hearings Thursday

Seth Schoen writes: "On Thursday, in San Jose, CA, free speech supporters can enjoy a double-header in Federal and State courts. At 9:30 in the morning, Dmitry Sklyarov is expected to be arraigned before a U.S. Magistrate Judge, and there will be a preliminary hearing in U.S. v. Sklyarov. sf.freesklyarov.org has details on the time and location. Thursday afternoon, about a mile away, a California appellate court will hear arguments in DVD Copy Control Assn. v. Andrew Bunner -- Bunner has appealed the trial court's preliminary injunction against him. He's asked the appellate court to overturn the injunction, which forbids him to post DeCSS code pending a trial. (This is the "California trade secret" DVD/DeCSS case, separate from the New York DMCA case.)" Update: 08/21 09:27 PM EDT by michael : According to the EFF, the Sklyarov hearing has been postponed until next week.

"Sklyarov is represented by Joseph Burton; Bunner is represented by the First Amendment Project and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The EFF Sklyarov/Bunner media release has time and location information for this hearing, too. Both hearings will be open to the public; please dress nicely if you attend. You can probably attend both, because the Sklyarov hearing should be over before the Bunner hearing starts. The Federal court (N.Dist.Cal.), for the Sklyarov case, is on the 5th floor, 280 South 1st Street; the State appellate court (6th App. Dist. Ct.), for the DVD CCA case, is at 333 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 1060."

Interestingly enough, the Washington Post ran an editorial knocking (if not actually blasting) the DMCA, with Sklyarov the example of what's wrong with the thing. Jerry Pournelle's column in Byte takes a slightly different tack, but raises the same troubling questions. (Thanks to fredistheking and SgtChairebourne for the links.)

Comments

We must not forget

[friday2k]

and /. and even the Washington Post are helping. There is too much at stake for the whole community, science and simply the people that this must be taken the whole way through. Protection of digital content is understandable and needs also our support. If music, videos, games are pirated all the time, at some time there will be no more music, videos or games. We all know that. But if people pointing out flaws in standards are punished it will be much worse. Science will suffer. Innovation will suffer. The industry must understand that this case is not about piracy. It is about fair use. And the work of people like Niels Ferguson or Dmitry Sklyarov might actually help the industry to find a standard that protects the owner's rights and does not restrict fair use of copyrighted material that I and everybody else out there purchased!

Re:We must not forget

[gnovos]

If music, videos, games are pirated all the time, at some time there will be no more music, videos or games.

Do you really think that? Are you saying that there are no artists who enjoy playing music just for fun? Are there no writers who write stories becuase they love making worlds come to life? No game designers who just want to create some fun and/or bragging right for thier friends?

Honestly, I think the absolute best possble thing for the creative fields would be if the corporate element just vanished. Sure you wouldn't see nationally-known artists making millions in front of 50,000 seat auditoriums, but is that how you want to appreciate music?

I would seriously prefer local groups, making realistic money (money like a school teacher would make), playing good, interesting, original music to the current sludge that comes out of the entertainment machine.

Fame and money is not a right. It is a strange abboration that somehow grew out of the machine-like corperate quest for money. Just look around at the real world. You don't see world-renound lecturers shouting out scathing political commentaries to hords of screaming fans who paid $139 for a seat. You don't see scientists mobbed by teenagers when they step out of thier stretched limos.

It would not be a terrible thing is the score was evened out a little.

Re:We must not forget

[AvatarADV]

Not every art form can be reproduced by four guys in a garage!

I work in the anime industry; good example. Anime -is- a corporate art form. Large companies employ vast numbers of artists in a collective endeavor to produce a single finished product, adhering more-or-less to a very limited number of creative visions. This isn't like music, where a garage band can sound better than a touring rock group, or like software, where an agglomeration of independent workers can evolve a working code base. It -would not exist- if it wasn't somebody's job to make it.

Even on the micro scale... I know my job can be reproduced by somebody working with a home computer, especially because I use more or less the same tools they would. But I also know that the hobbyists out there don't -do- as good of a job as I do, simply because I'm paid to sit here and put the time in, and they aren't. Even the most dedicated otaku start to glaze over after the fifth subtitling pass.

I'm not saying that the DMCA is a good law. Heck, we don't even -use- CSS if the licensors let us get away without it. But not everybody producing good art is looking for fame; some of us just want a paycheck, so we can spend our time making art and not flipping burgers. They have to get paid too!

Re:We must not forget

[The_Sock]

Hobby or not, you would be surprised at how anal people will get over detail when something is their baby, their pride and joy.

The people who do it because they love to are the type of people I'd rather have making the music I listen to, writting the books I read, the programs I use, building the house I live in (yes, believe it or not, some people (myself included) love physical 'labour'), fixing my car, or doing anything for me.

Note the number of books titled 'The Joy of _____' and the severe lack of books titled 'How to Make Money doing ______'. (On a side note, notice the number of spam letters that are about 'How to Make Money doing...' and the lack of 'The Joy of doing...' spams)

People who view it as work are the ones I'll avoid. A good hobbyist/employee does his work for the love and joy of doing it. A good creator loves to create, so he/she creates. They do not create because they feel the need for money. They will put more into a creation then anyone who views their job as work.

These people view the job as the benificial part, and the money as a nice bonus.

This is not to say if you get paid, you will not do a good job. If you can find a job you love, and don't view as work, then more power to you. You're in the right field for yourself.

And this does not break down around what you may consider menial jobs, such as a janitor. I've met janitors who love their jobs. In high school there was a janitor who loved being around the kids (And he wasn't a pedophile, what's this world coming to?!). He didn't want to teach, he just loved the atmosphere, the people, and loved doing the job. I used to think this was very strange, until I grew up. I got a job I love doing and though some may think someone programming their routers or ensuring the server they keep their work on keeps their work as a lower life form (I don't know, you may not think of people like that, some do, not accusing you of anything), I quite enjoy it (Especially seeing the people who do think of me as a lower life form begin to weep when all their hard work is gone, because some strange bug (triggered by something he did of course) wiped out his home directory. (Miraculously every other users home directory was left unscathed. I'm a spiteful bastard.)) I enjoy my job. I fix computers for free for some people. It's not so they owe me something, it's not to show off my 'k-rad skillz', sometimes it's because she's hot but... I just love to solve the problem and make it work once again. These people pay me back however or not, doesn't matter to me.

In short, if you love doing something, you'll do it very well. If you do it very well, you will be well compensated for it, both monetarily, and more importantly, spiritually.

Re:Jailed Under a Bad Law

[squiggleslash]

As someone who seems to get sucked in (yeah right) to US vs UK threads, I can tell you that the DMCA is a godsend. Now, we can answer "Ha! We heard the government took all your guns away" with "Yeah, that's not true anyway, but even if it was, at least we don't risk arrest when playing DVDs on Linux machines!"

(Actually, as I'm in the US at the moment, it's not much of an argument. It's my laptop I'm not allowed to play CSS encrypted DVDs on. Bastards. Still, there's a few outlets like Criterion who put out quite a few region free and CSS free DVDs, but they're few and far between.

*sigh* The DMCA. Designed to protect Hollywood from nasty evil hackers who, but for that wonderful law, would be going into video stores right now and giving Hollywood their money. Stupid gits.

Adobe's lawyers are quite busy!

[sdo1]

This link from sf.freesklyarov.org shows that Adobe is a pretty busy company when it comes to swinging the lawyers about.

I see two other Adobe Systems, Inc. cases on there plus the Skylarov case (which Adobe isn't officially involved in, but it was their actions that brought about the arrest.

-S

Re:Adobe's lawyers are quite busy!

[sharkey]

--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?

All the words starting with "n", apparently.

You reap what you sow....

[gnovos]

For decades the dominant media-marketriod elite
have been carefully cultivating the western mind. We have been taught that shiny, colorful, noisy things are good. We have slowly developed a powerful, salivating passion for these things. It is more important for us to buy the latest CDs, the trediest clothes, the fastest cars, at an easy 1000%-10000% markup over thier cost to produce than it is to pay the rent, or buy groceries. It is a far graver misfortune to our minds to miss one "very special" episode of Friends than it is to miss out on a national election.

Considering all the coaxing, training, and brainwashing that they have given us, it is any wonder that we feel perfectly justified in getting out hands on that sweet, sweet intellectual property by any means?

The Anti-dmca Index

[Anonymous Coward]

The most recent version of this document can be found here:
http://www.anti-dmca.org/dmca-index.html
________________________________________________ __ _________

1. Amount Cornell University Library pays for subscription to "Journal of Applied Polymer Science": $12,495.00

2. Amount charged to University Libraries for subscription to "Journal of Economic Studies": $13.40/page

3. Number of people who find the $13.40 per page ironic: 3 out of 4

4. Number of Project Gutenberg Etexts converted by voluteers: 3,551

5. Current "Cost" per Etext based on 3,481 texts: $2.87 per text

6. Number of Scientists worldwide boycotting Corporate Science Journals beginning September 2001: 26,000

7. Number of college and research institutions "Declaring Independence" by publishing themselves: 200

8. Number of days DMCA arrestee Dmitry Sklyarov spent in jail: 13

9. Number of jails he spent them in: 4

10. Amount charged to taxpayers for those 13 days: $4,000

11. Window of time Microsoft and the American Association of Publishers (AAP) can engage in
their cooperative Internet surveillance program: 24x7x365

12. Number of AAP members who apparently support the Internet surveillance program: 250

13. Number of "companies" which control the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA): 4

14. Number of Executive Directors who appear to control the DVD Copy Control Association: 1

15. Amount one company charges for eBook encryption security: $3,000

16. Number of letters one must rotate the alphabet to decrypt that book: 13 (ROT-13)

17. Amount recovered in recent "software raid" conducted by BSA.org against Minneapolis Company: $260,000

18. Number of disgruntled employees who may report you to the BSA resulting in a "software raid.": 1

19. Number of Irish software companies currently being sued by BSA.org: 7

20. Companies BSA represents in those cases: Adobe, Autodesk, Macromedia, Microsoft and Symantec

21. Number of cities included in July 2001 BSA "Truce" Campaign: 5

22. Number of states which experienced Raids conducted by FBI on July 24 commended by BSA: 9

23. Number of proported jobs lost from software piracy in study conducted by BSA.org: 109,000

24. Amount an eBook customer may be fined for a backup not permited by the Publisher: $250,000

25. Amount of time that customer might spend in jail: 5 years

26. Number of restrictions placed on "Alice in Wonderland" (public domain) eBook: 5

27. Maximum penalty for reading "Alice in Wonderland" aloud (possible DMCA violation): 5 years jail

28. Maximum penalty for having a "pirate" copy of "Planet of the Apes": 10 years jail/$2M fine

29. Average sentence for commiting Rape: 5 years

________________________________________________ __ _______________________________

Information provided by anti-dmca.org
________________________________________________ __ _______________________________

Please feel free to email, post, print, etc. this information.

Additions, contributions and comments are welcome here:
http://www.anti-dmca.org/dmca-index.html

This index actually contains a scrambled (stenanographically hidden) version of
Britney Spear's new single. However, we can't find the key so we're not quite
sure it's there either.

Harper's Interactive Index
http://harpers.org/harpers-index/

________________________________________________ __ ________________________________

Sources

1. http://www.englib.cornell.edu/displays/stickershoc k/car.htm
http://www.math.berkeley.edu/~kirby/journals.html# App1
2. http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/jppage.htm
3. Quick and simple poll
4. http://promo.net/pg/nl/0105.html
5. http://promo.net/pg/nl/0105.html
6. http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org/
http://www.genomeweb.com/articles/view-article.asp ?Article=200172219199
7. http://www.arl.org/sparc/DI/
http://www.createchange.org/
8. http://www.fresklyarov.org
9. http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/08/10/12241.htm l
10. Some multiplication
11. http://www.microsoft.com/ebooks/das/antipiracy.asp
12. http://www.microsoft.com/ebooks/das/antipiracy.asp
13. http://www.lemuria.org/decss/hal2001.html
14. http://www.lemuria.org/decss/hal2001.html
15. http://www.download.ru/defcon.ppt
16. http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/rot13/
17. http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08 -06.680.phtml
18. http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011 ,2799089,00.html
19. http://www.bsa.org/ireland/press/newsreleases//200 1-08-02.682.phtml
20. http://www.bsa.org/ireland/press/newsreleases//200 1-08-02.682.phtml
21. http://www.bsatruce.com/us/indexjuly2001.phtml
22. http://new.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-07 -25.678.phtml
23. http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/epub/faqs.asp
24. http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/epub/faqs.asp
25. http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/epub/faqs.asp
26. http://www.pigdogs.org/art/adobe.html
27. http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/dvd-discuss -faq.html#ss2.4.6
28. http://www.politechbot.com/p-02293.html
29. http://www.sharon-herald.com/localnews/recentnews/ 0005/ln050400h.html
________________________________________________ __ ___________________________________

Disclaimer: By reading, viewing or disseminating this information you
agree to hold the creators harmless.

This information is protected by the US Constitution. All other contracts
are null and void.

License: You may do anything you want with this information as long as
it is reproduced in it's entirety.
________________________________________________ __ ___________________________________

News for nerds...

[sulli]

From the findings of fact on Bunner:

Andrew Bunner first became aware of DeCSS on October 26, 1999 through a
discussion on the news website slashdot.org.

So someone learned something from this site!

Re:My God respect intellectual property

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure this will get modded down as Flaimbait or whatever, but I don't care.

No, it will get modded down because it's entirely off-topic.

It's stupid that people think they can break copyright laws and be set free by the open source fairy. That's not how it works.

And apparently it's stupid for people to think they can follow the law which specifically allows for certain exceptions such as interoperability (DeCSS), and it's absolutely stupid for people to follow the law in their home country, then get picked up in another country where they followed the local law while they were there, but something legal they did while in their home country is illegal to do in the other country (Skylarov). You are right on one thing however: Following the law and expecting to not get jailed when you happen to annoy somebody with lots of money appears to not be the way things work.

The law is there and it is there for you to respect.

This one's too easy. Niggers to the back of the bus, the law is there for you to respect. I'm your Lord and I have conjugal rights to your wife, the law is there for you to respect. Your religion is against the law and the punishment is death, the law is there for you to respect. The fact is that some laws do not deserve respect, and these laws should be changed or stricken.

Copyright laws protect people who need to make a living.

No, copyright laws (at least in the U.S.) encourage the production of arts and science by establishing limited monopolies on their reproduction, whereas in a free market there would be less incentive to produce. Some artists and scientists can make a living off this limited monopoly, others cannot, others don't need it, but establishing a source of income is the effect, not the cause, of copyright, and the copyright is not a protection but a grant from the government.

You have no right to steal their property or circumvent protection of intellectual property so you can get free stuff.

True that I have no right to steal intellectual property, but offtopic as stealing IP has nothing to do with watching a DVD that I legally purchased on my FreeBSD-based DVD player, or printing a portion of an E-Book that I legally purchased to read on the bus to work/school. Circumventing protection is still legal in the U.S. as long as one does not tell anyone how to do it, and that is legal almost everywhere else.

No matter what you package it under, 99% of all so-called "free speech" trials against prominent open sources are about people who want free stuff.

First this is an exaggeration, as I don't think there have been enough trials for there to be 99%. Also, few of the computing free speech trials have been against open sourcers, and I can think of none against any open sourcer who was prominent before the trial started (save Randall Schwartz's case, which was less about free speech and more about office politics).

Of the major such cases I can recall at the moment, the Communications Decency Act (later repealed) outlawed all obscenity on the Internet (meaning I wouldn't be able to tell you to fuck off for your stupid post without being fined and/or arrested); the Church of Scientology was suing people who had distributed its copyrighted documents after the Church had publicly and under oath denied certain things about its organization that the documents proved to be true, making the knowledge in the documents a matter of public interest. Whether the public interest outweighed the copyright is a matter of opinion, as courts in Scandinavia decided for the public interest while courts on the Continent decided for copyright; Skala and Janssen produced an essay on the form and quality of Cyber Patrol's product, along with tools that would allow an owner of Cyber Patrol to access the list of websites that are blocked, an index that by judicial precedent is not a copyrightable work. The judge in his decision against the two declared that they were trying to start a second Nazi Holocaust, so no danger of partiality here; Felton, a professor who had to sue to get a paper released without being sued himself; and DeCSS and Sklyarov; And in various ridiculous domain name cases, the undercurrent in the ones that draw outrage is that somebody registers a domain which is either a common word, their name, or a trademark of their company, and they get sued out of it by someone else with deep pockets who usually either already has a domain name and/or risks no confusion by the existance of the other name. Only one (Scientology) case of these involved a genuine infringement of copyright, and in that case the infringers who saw the work as having no value did not want free stuff, but wanted the information contained in the documents to be public knowledge because they saw a danger to the public in not having the knowledge.

Mitnick, Napster and MP3.com don't count because they're not about free speech. Kevin Mitnick was a crook who was the first defendant in the history of the United States to be denied a bail hearing. In addition, the prosecuting attorneys heavily inflated the damages they claimed he had caused to ridiculous levels by claiming the development cost of producing programs he had copied as the cost incurred by his copying them, after others had already copied and distributed the same software. In the Napster case the company contributed to copyright infringement by advertising its service as a place to get free files. During trial, the RIAA alleged and the judge appeared to believe that Napster was itself making copies of the music files, while in reality files are copied from one user to another an Napster only keeps an index of filenames and users. Furthermore, Napster has shown good faith by removing users who illegally provide files that someone else has copyright for whenever they have been asked to do so. MP3.com was distributing copies of music without a license because they were too dumb to understand copyright laws, which is pretty open and shut.

Here's an idea: If you want information/whatever to be free go make something and give it away for free. You can put a Public liscence on whatever you make, and give it away however your heart desires.

Sounds like that open source movement you're deriding in the first paragraph.

You cannot give away things that are not your own intellectual property. You are damaging people who need to make a living and those of us who pay for the software.

Agreed, but offtopic.

So in conclusion, if you want information to be free, go make some and make it free. Don't steal others'.

That's what Johansen, LiViD, and their DeCSS supporters did. That's what Skala and Janssen did. That's what Felton did. Skylarov made his own information, but chose to sell it rather than give it away. All have been sued, threatened with suit, jailed, or threatened with jail time for doing what you recommend. That's why people are concerned for their rights, and that's why you are offtopic.