Slashdot Mirror
U.S. To Drop Charges Against Sklyarov
Schmerd writes: "The New York Times has a story saying that charges will be dropped against Dmitry Sklyarov in exchange for his testimony against his employer ElcomSoft." Si adds: "It looks like Dmitri might be home for Christmas. This is not the end of the trial, but it appears Dmitri has been freed, pending certain stipulations." jij adds this breaking news article on the Associated Press wire as well. (The AP story is also at Wired). Update: 12/13 22:23 GMT by T : sam@caveman.org links to a slightly more in-depth AP report at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
The case is continuing in court, but it won't be against Dmitry, just Elcomsoft.
This really is the best of both worlds. We get the opportunity to see the DMCA blown out of the water, and Dmitry gets to go home for the holidays.
In today's agreement, Dmitry will be required to testify for the government and ElcomSoft expects him to testify for their case as well. The story Dmitry has to tell is exactly the same regardless of which side calls him to testify. Dmitry's story has not changed since that day in July, when the FBI arrested him in Las Vegas, and he is quite happy to tell his story again and again, if need be.
- from the planetpdf article
To say that he is going to testify "against" his employer seems to be a bit much. The various articles say that he will testify and that it is unsure which side will call him first.
I for one am happy to know he is free to be seeing his wife and children; I know if I were kept a long time from my soon-to-be-husband Yves for a great part of a year, I would do anything to see him again, and I think you would too.
Sincerely yours,
Chloë
The fact that it was a good test case is probably amoung the foremost of the reasons it was dropped.
Say what you will about evil crackers and hackers who restlessly violate people's property. Dmitry was obviously not one of these people. He wrote a tool to do something that is still quite legal in Russia, and is considered to be quite a scholar and expert by many. Any competent lawyer would have been able to present him as such. He would have a huge chance of getting
The U.S. has zero chance to uphold the DMCA unless they get precident behind it that come from using it to prosecute someone who they can present as having evil purposes... such as any of the alleged DoD crackers arrested this week.
As long as the people who get involved in lawsuits are fairly upstanding individuals, they can't afford to prosecute. Once they come across someone who would probably be sent up the river even without the DMCA, then they'll prosecute.
Just watch...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
I doubt that the DMCA will ever be tested in the US Supreme Court, especially in a criminal case. The corporations who put the law in place won't risk lost profits by letting the DMCA be test against the Constitution at the highest level. They will continue to beat people (and small companies) with it, then they will either get the case dropped or thrown out.
There is something severely wrong with the check and balances system of the US Gov't. Laws don't have to be constitutional to be passed. Corporations (or AG Ashcroft) just have to keep the nconstituional laws from being tested all the way up to the SC. What we really need is a judiciary review of new laws (before they go into effect) which pits them against the constitution.
-JungleBoy
"You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
-Calvin
"...Joe Burton, lead attorney for ElcomSoft, reacted to today's outcome saying "I want to make a statement on behalf of ElcomSoft, my client -- Both my client and I have, since the beginning of this case, maintained Dmitry's innocence on any and all criminal activity. From day-one of the arrest ElcomSoft has been willing to have the Government proceed against them and NOT Dmitry. Burton further states "you may remember that ElcomSoft offered to take Dmitry's place and substitute the company as the sole defendant in this case -- The company knows that neither Dmitry nor they committed any criminal acts and believes that in the end, they will be found innocent of any and all charges the U.S. Government is bringing against them as well...."
you know, this guy has a real class act employer.
"the best safety of the frontier...will be secured by total annihilation of the few remaining indians" L Frank Baum 1890
What does it matter if he testifies against his company? The US can't do a darn thing to them since they aren't in this country. Look at the DeBeers monopoly. Diamonds aren't rare at all, but DeBeers made some strategic agreements with countries to keep most of the supply locked up. Now the DeBeers executives will be arrested if they ever enter this country. That judgement hasn't done a darn thing. DeBeers still operates and so will ElmComsoft(SP?). I think it's just the justice department's way of saying, "Yeah, it's a stupid law, but we'd look stupid if we just let you go, so we're going to ask you to do something stupid so we can save face."
*Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
By that peculiar logic, Hollywood should be jailed and locked up by DEMOSTRATING how to hijack airplanes. I would say that is more appropriate example of DEMOSTRATING, than giving a talk.
Say what you want about legality. The whole point is that this piece of legality is immoral, unconstitutional.
I mean, this is great for Dimitry, but it seemed like a perfect case to test the DMCA against the First Amendment.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Dmitry was the absolute wrong test case. He is not within the jurisdiction of the DMCA, since he did not develop the software on American soil and he did not distribute the software in America. While his employer did distribute the software in America, Dmitry cannot be held responsible for the actions of his employer.
This "test" kept Dmitry locked up on a foreign land away from his family for a crime he did not commit.
The test case needs to be an American citizen, preferably a prominent university professor or researcher, who would publish an encryption circumvention technology, and who would be willing to go to jail in protest of the injustice of the law. This would not show contempt for the law; rather, it would show the highest respect for law.
An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
ElComSoft's chief executive, Alex Katalov, said he was pleased that the company, not Sklyarov, would bear sole responsibility for the charges.
Hands down, Mr. Katalov is the coolest employer I've ever seen. Since Dmitry's arrest, he had been front-and-center, doing what it took to get Dmitry free regardless of the risk. Thomas C. Greene raised this issue in an article in The Register a while back and it got my attention. But I am very impressed that he continued to put responsibility on his company when Dmitry would have provided a convenient scapegoat.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Boy, that'll be fun!
Senators and Congressmen aren't that stupid, nor are Hollywood lobbyists.
My understanding was that it was trafficing in access control circumvention devices he was charged with, and that offense was committed by his employer, and was unrelated to his visit in the US.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.