Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sklyarov Clarifies Circumstances of Release, Testimony

Posted by timothy on from the build-a-bridge-out-of-'im dept.

*ZiggyP0P* writes: "We remember hearing how Dmitry was let off and released (so he can finally go home) but how he had to cooperate with the government in the prosecution of his employer as a plea bargain. Turns out that this was all a lie by the Justice Dept. Skylarov has released his own statements which explain what exactly happened. He has entered into no legal plea bargain and he is still employed by Elcomsoft (even though the justice dept called him his former employer)."

79 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. What?! by Legion303 · · Score: 5, Funny
    The government lied? Stop the presses!

    I'm glad for the opportunity to see exactly where they lied, though. Thanks, Dmitry.

    -Legion

    1. Re:What?! by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, the government often speaks out of the side of their mouths. However, this is blatant and obvious miscoduct.

      There should be some inquiry into this matter.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    2. Re:What?! by renehollan · · Score: 2
      And this is the same government that wants to flaunt the constitution that gives it any sense of legitimacy?

      Give me one good reason why one should not take up arms against such a monstrous institution.

      Never mind... I can think of two:

      1) This was probably dreamed up by some power-hungry flunky and does not reflect on the government as a whole. As much as seeing myself write those words makes me want to retch, even the government deserves the benefit of the doubt.

      2) Taking the law into one's own hands is an act of vigilanteeism: never a good idea unless there is widespread support for one's position (and the mechanics and institutions of the supposed law corrupt).

      So, I exercise the restraint that all law abiding people do, but remain ever watchful. It is a painful lesson that one can't simultaneously love the principles of the constitution and the institution empowered to defend it.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    3. Re:What?! by Syberghost · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, the government often speaks out of the side of their mouths. However, this is blatant and obvious miscoduct.

      There should be some inquiry into this matter.

      Moderators: If you have to look up any of the terms I've used, don't moderate me. You're probably confused.

      So, if we don't know what "miscoduct" is, we can't moderate you? :-)

    4. Re:What?! by sjames · · Score: 2

      So, I exercise the restraint that all law abiding people do, but remain ever watchful.

      I also exercize restraint. Part of that is because individual actions have a nasty way of hitting the wrong target (innocent bystanders tend to be the only people really hurt), Have a tendancy to mete out punishment greater than the crime, and in an environment where the government is primarily corrupt, they will simply spin the whole affair into more excuses to curtail citizen's rights.

      The fact is, this whole incident appears to be part of a pattern of abuses.If the system is incapable of preventing these abuses, and seems unwilling to discipline those responsable for them, then the system is itself corrupt.

      Note that by discipline, I do not mean some sort of meaningless document in a folder somewhere, I mean a criminal trial.

      Unfortunatly, the people ARE doing something about this, and their actions can only lead to violence. They are slowly but continually reducing their respect for the government, it's laws, and it's enforcement.

  2. Backpedal! by chill · · Score: 5, Funny

    Spin spin spin. It looks like the gov't is backpedaling fast and putting on spin in hopes it will all go away.

    "Cooperate" probably means he agreed to take their phone calls.

    Some junior D.A. probably wanted to make a career on a "big, bad, Russian hacker" and found out real life isn't like a Hollywood movie.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Backpedal! by nathanm · · Score: 2

      No, Mueller was in Washington the whole time the Sklyarov case was going on. Did you even read the bio you linked to?

      He started in his position as interim US Attorney in Northern CA in Aug 1998, officially confirmed in Oct 1999. Then he was the acting Deputy Attorney General of the US from Jan to May 2001, when he was nominated as the FBI director. He wasn't confirmed until Aug 2001, and took the oath of office in Sep 2001.

      So, although he was officially the US Attorney for Northern CA until Aug 2001, he hadn't worked there since January.

      Maybe you should actually read the pages you link to before you spread disinformation.

  3. legal action by blank_coil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can he sue for being wrongfully imprisoned? I mean, he was jailed for 5 months, does he get some kind of reparation for his trouble?

    --
    No sig for you.
  4. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Janet Reno, FBI @ Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.

    The gov't has demonstrated not only a willingness, but an eagerness to lie on all fronts over anything that might be potentially embarrasing.

    Why stop now?

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  5. saving face by ryusen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    sounds to me like the gov't is just trying to cover what they finaly realised to be a big mistake on their part... now they need to make it look like they are going easy on him out of sympathy or his "cooperation."

    i also remember in another article (can't remember where), his employer even offered to stand trial in his stead if they released dimitry... i found that to be quite admirable myself

    --

    I believe sex is highly over rated... unless it involves me
  6. Defamation Charges by bstadil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the statement by Skylarov is indeed the "Fact" then he should have a very good case for Defamation charges against the US government. Hope they file this is a Russian court so any claims agains the company will have a local offset. The DOJ made a mistake but they can't admit to that. Anyone found it poetic Justice that Adobe was barred from selling InSIde due to Patent Infringements.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Defamation Charges by FFFish · · Score: 2

      c/InSIde/InDesign/

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
  7. The Best Part.... by spongebob · · Score: 4, Offtopic

    Is how they are trying to use this crap to "teach" a lesson. Know your rights!!!!

    I think that Neo said it best:
    "How bout I give you the finger and you give me my phone call."

    I still think the biggest punk in the whole process is Adobe...they backed out of the process in order to save some face on thier own knowing full well it was too late to stop the prosecution. grrr....

  8. The begining of the end of the DMCA by Huff · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In a recent article in an English magazine 'Linux Format', it had a sort of guide to the dmca, what it meant etc, some of the things it went on about was that if Sklyarov was released, it could mean that the DMCA could be removed from US law, also being an infingement of the US's first amendment (freedom of speech)

    Mostly though, i think most people should be thinking, 'WHAT HAPPENS NOW'.

    What is the next direction for the goverment, and the anti-DMCA people (people with common sense) and where will this put the SSSCA.

  9. Adobe's Strategy Backfires? by GGardner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Before Dmitry was detained, who had heard of Elcomsoft? Apparently, they had sold very few copies of their software. Not that they'd asked for it, but now they've got more publicity than they could have paid for. I wonder if sales are picking up too? Could it be that Adobe's strategy has completely backfired?

    1. Re:Adobe's Strategy Backfires? by sheldon · · Score: 2

      That's interesting, I wasn't aware Adobe was pressing any charges. Seems I recall them withdrawing from the case, and it's not the DoJ's game.

    2. Re:Adobe's Strategy Backfires? by markj02 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The legal proceedings were started by the AG. What Adobe did is throw their weight around to get the AG to file charges against Sklyarov. Nor did Adobe "withdraw" or change their mind--they merely sent out a nice-sounding press release after the damage was done and there was nothing else for them to do. And Adobe's press release restates their position on copyright and the DMCA. Adobe hasn't gotten any nicer.

    3. Re:Adobe's Strategy Backfires? by Danse · · Score: 2

      I think his point was that now it's a lot more well known since people like he and I (and anyone else that reads the news), that didn't know about it before, know about it now.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  10. All a lie? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Turns out that this was all a lie by the Justice Dept.

    What exactly was a lie? He did enter into an agreement. The government never said that he admitted guilt. Sure, they screwed up the employment status, but that is likely a minor oversight, not a lie. Much more minor than slashdot's "lie", saying that he agreed to testify against Elcomsoft.

    1. Re:All a lie? by nomadic · · Score: 2


      I like slashdot, and I think it would make it an excellent alternative news source, if they'd just put a little effort into it. Of course they're still head and shoulders above the Fox "News" channel.

    2. Re:All a lie? by edinho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the guv'mint did say that Dmitry was a former employee of Elcomsoft, when Dmitry has been and still is employee by Elcomsoft. So they did lie in that aspect.

      However, the more important damage is done by spin doctoring. This is to create a "negative" image of Elcomsoft, by insinuating (inaccurately) that Dmitry has distanced himself from Elcomsoft and "cooperating" with the guv'mint.

      The rest of guv'mint press release is pretty much a spin, really saying nothing. Dmitry has always cooperated with the guv'mint, just by telling the truth. E.g., "Acknowledge his conduct in the offense". That's a spin. If a guy is apprehended for a crime. He is _not_ a criminal until proven to be so. Dmitry has _not_ been proven guilty in court. In fact, for this case, even the "offense" (crime) has not been proven in court. Nothing has been proven in court. In fact, the guv'mint dropped the case against Dmitry. Now, what does that say about the guv'mint's case? Perhas it's bunk?

      Dood, you got to recognize spin when you see one. It is really easy. Spin is everywhere. No, it is not conspiracy, spin is what people do when they want to protect themelves, gain an advantage, etc.


      e.

    3. Re:All a lie? by Hostile17 · · Score: 2

      b) watch Fox news like everyone else.

      It is a sad commentary of our society that Fox New is considered a serious news source. Fox News is nothing more than a PR firm for the Republican party. Further, they don't even try to hide their bias, they are openly condescending to anyone who does not agree with them.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power - Benito Mussoli
    4. Re:All a lie? by Hostile17 · · Score: 2

      The problem with Fox News is they claim to be fair and unbiased, when in fact they are not. If you listen to them objectively for any length of time you will see they have a heavy conservative bias. I am not saying CNN or MSNBC are any better, they are not. Only that Fox is not fair and unbiased and they are openly condescending to anyone who does not agree with them.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power - Benito Mussoli
    5. Re:All a lie? by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

      The problem with Fox News is they claim to be fair and unbiased, when in fact they are not. If you listen to them objectively for any length of time you will see they have a heavy conservative bias. I am not saying CNN or MSNBC are any better, they are not. Only that Fox is not fair and unbiased and they are openly condescending to anyone who does not agree with them.

      I suspect that this is a problem with most major media outlets. The problem is that because governments (especially the US's) are permitting some insane corporate megamergers, you have one company with a very wide reach, and this company will inevitably be biased in such a way that it won't want to report something that would make itself look bad.

      Take the three media outlets you mentioned, for instance. CNN is owned by AOL-Time Warner*, MSNBC is owned both by Microsoft and NBC (which is owned by General Electric, which itself owns an assload of other things), and Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Not a single one of these three stations is independent; they are all owned by a much larger corporation. And as I mentioned, bias is inevitable in this situation.

      * I still haven't figured out why the hell the FTC allowed that one.

      --

      I pledge allegiance to the flag...
      of the Corporate States of America...
  11. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by ryusen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And if we really think our own government is so evil, why are we still here?

    personally i don't think our government is evil... just filled with greedy incompetents...
    why are we still here? mostly because we are spoiled and complacent (and can't spell)

    Why is it that, when it's the Government's word versus some cracker's, everyone always wants to believe the cracker?

    this this case i believe the "cracker" simply because he's being charged with breaking a law that doesn't apply in his country... this is about as silly was an american gun maker/seller being arrested in japan for making/selling guns in the us...

    --

    I believe sex is highly over rated... unless it involves me
  12. Link to FULL TEXT of Skylarov document by Seth+Finkelstein · · Score: 5, Informative
    It would be helpful for the discussion to be informed by

    The FULL TEXT of the document regarding Skylarov

    Further, deponent sayeth not (at least in this message ...)

    Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

  13. Kudos to Elcomsoft by r_j_prahad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everytime I read yet another update to this semingly never-ending ordeal, one thing that remains constant is what a wonderful employer Elcomsoft must be to work for. They've stood by Dmitry's side beginning with day one, they're still hanging in there fighting for him, and their CEO even offered himself up in a bizarre "hostage exchange" scenario.

    I hope all of the employees of Adobe are truly embarrassed about this.

    1. Re:Kudos to Elcomsoft by arkanes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'd think someone who reads slashdot would know more about it, but lets make it perfectly clear - the product is not illegal in Russia. And having a CEO offer to take personal responsibilty for something when a subordinate has been blamed is pretty fucking unheard of ANYWHERE.

    2. Re:Kudos to Elcomsoft by Gid1 · · Score: 2

      I agree... it's good of Elcomsoft to step in. However, did Dmitry break US law by writing the code in question, or did Elcomsoft break US law by distributing the code?

      <ianal>

      The claim is presumably concerned with the distribution of a circumvention device, by the hosting of the application on a US server. If Dmitry merely wrote the application on his employer's equipment in Russia, then I can't see any way he could be guilty under US law.

      I can see a way that he could be seen to violate the license terms he must have accepted to be able to reverse engineer the format, but that's a civil charge.

      I'd say the alleged crime was to upload that program to the US server, thereby distributing a circumvention device in DMCA jurisdiction -- something his employer did. In which case, Elcomsoft are definitely responsible.

      [Okay, if Elcomsoft is a small company, it was probably him doing the uploading!]

      </ianal>
    3. Re:Kudos to Elcomsoft by r_j_prahad · · Score: 2

      And still I think you miss the point--I don't believe the CEO was trying to save a person per se, instead he was defending the legality of his companies actions. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd be glad to read it.

      Every action by Mr. Katalov in this case has appeared to be nothing other than sincere personal concern for one of his employees. I doubt you have even a scrap of evidence to the contrary, so I won't waste my time asking you for any.

      I hope I never become as cynical as you.

    4. Re:Kudos to Elcomsoft by Gumshoe · · Score: 2

      I was replying to this,

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=25273&thresh ol d=3&commentsort=3&mode=thread&cid=2748115

      The poster said that an employer backing up an employee is
      unheard of anywhere. I replied with the sentiment that it isn't
      so strange in places where the rule of money isn't sovereign.

      The fact is, Skylarov was employed by a company to do a job. He
      did his job so well that he was arrested for his efforts (under
      dubious circumstances). I personally don't find it surprising
      that Elcomsoft should support their employee in the way that they
      did. I would be alarmed if Elcomsoft and Skylarov lived in the
      West and this happened however.

  14. Maybe missing the point by bstadil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe I am putting words in your mouth that you never meant but it seems to me that going back to the "Source" is not quite valid. The issue at hand is the perception that he had admitted "wrongdoing" that is perpetrated by the DOJ / Press release. We have seen again and again the government's refusal to protect its citizen, let alone a foreigner, from its own misconduct. This got to stop.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Maybe missing the point by Seth+Finkelstein · · Score: 2
      Maybe I am putting words in your mouth that you never meant but it seems to me that going back to the "Source" is not quite valid.
      On the contrary, I would argue that the primary source material is the most valid and important document to examine. Otherwise, we are proceeding here from a reporter's excerpting and intepretation of press releases.

      Statements and press releases aren't legally binding. But the "Pretrial Diversion Agreement" (to give it the formal name) is a formal court document, binding on both parties.

      The issue at hand is the perception that he had admitted "wrongdoing" that is perpetrated by the DOJ / Press release.
      This is where things get slippery. The word "wrongdoing" does not appear in the DOJ press release. Nor "misconduct". They talk about admitted his conduct and his conduct in the offense. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't want to get into this too much. But it seems the argument revolves around exactly what this signifies. But the above document at least lets us know exactly what was admitted and agreed on all sides.

      Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

    2. Re:Maybe missing the point by bstadil · · Score: 2

      Statements and press releases aren't legally binding

      That was the point I was trying to make.
      Is there any doubt in your mind that the "impression" left with the public at large is that he did something wrong, repented his errors (Just using the word Conduct is enough for most people to consciously or sub-consciously adding "mis- " in front) , and now is ready to testify against the bigger evil name ElbrusSoft that was trying to "profit" from a crime.

      Don't think for one second the addition of Former Employee was a harmless mistake. It was done very deliberately and might I add very cleverly. These guys have lots of practice.

      As others have pointed out the DOJ realized that they had a good chance of blowing the DMCA on this one so they dropped the legal ball against Skylarov while using the subterfuge of a dishonest press release to keep the public opinion misinformed. I posted a comment about possible Defamation charges against DOJ, and I think that somewhat was on my mind when I commented on your posting. I am not arguing that you are wrong per se, just that the picture is a bit broader.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
    3. Re:Maybe missing the point by Seth+Finkelstein · · Score: 2
      I'm interested in trying to figure out what this all means, rather than who is winning the PR battle of perception. The DOJ is presenting it one way. The defense, understandably, is presenting it another way. The import of the agreement seems to me something which is just too complex to sum up in a simple sound-bite. It's not formally a plea-bargain, as he didn't agree he was guilty. But the charges weren't dropped either, he could still go to trial if he was later ruled not to be in compliance with the arrangement (unlikely, perhaps, but conceivable).

      There so much politics and spin involved, it is very difficult to determine the truth. I got slightly burned somewhere else in being misperceived as critical of Dmitry, because I didn't think this was nearly as big a legal concession as many people seem to believe. I wish there were some commentary and analysis from independent criminal lawyers.

      As others have pointed out the DOJ realized that they had a good chance of blowing the DMCA ...
      I don't see this. I don't see it at all.

      Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

  15. Challenge to DMCA by sabinm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This actually means two things

    1.Dimitry will not face any charges, nor will have a felony record.

    2.Since this is not a case of testifying against Elmsoft, this means that a challenge to the DMCA is still possible, with a legitimate corporation with relatively large coffers defending itself.

    So really, the tech-culture gets its day in court without any criminal reprecussions and we get a constitutional challenge to a very unconstitutional law.

    Way to go, DOJ, I knew you were on our side!

    --
    http://cincyboys.blogspot.com/ Everything Cincinnati. Including the word 'Finnih'
    1. Re:Challenge to DMCA by Uncle+Warthog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Dimitry will not face any charges, nor will have a felony record.

      Unfortunately, this isn't what this means. What the government has said they're doing is defering prosecution until a later date.

      They've said they'll considering dropping charges after a year or after ElcomSoft is tried, whichever comes later, only if he has met his "obligations". If he hasn't, they'll just place him back on trial in a year or whenever the ElcomSoft trial is finished, whichever is later. The wording of the government agreement seems vague enough that they could simply change their minds at that point, making up some "obligation" he didn't meet.

      The challenge to the DMCA is still possible but may not be able to go very far considering the fact that ElcomSoft is not a U.S. corporation. (At least I'm pretty sure they're not. Does anyone here know for sure?)

      There is still plenty of chance of criminal repercussions from all this. There will still be a trial against ElcomSoft and there could still be one against Dmitry as well with possible convictions coming from both.

  16. Song for Skylarov (reprise) by kitts · · Score: 5, Funny

    Young man,
    there's no need to feel down
    Because your plane
    back home can't get off the ground
    I said young man,
    Get comfy in your new town
    There's no need to be unhappy.

    Young man,
    There's no place you can go
    I said young man,
    Until you cough up some dough
    You will stay here
    until you've served all your time
    For your insignificant crime.

    It's fun to stay in the U S of A,
    Because of that old grand D M C A
    For cracking DVD's,
    Or an e-book or three,
    You'll get jailed for eterniteeeee...

    It's fun to stay in the U S of A
    Because of that old grand D M C A
    For proving to the world
    That our encryption's a toy
    You'll get jailed with all the boyyyyyyys...

    --
    -------------------------------------------------- ----
    charlton heston is more of a man than yo
    1. Re:Song for Skylarov (reprise) by nagora · · Score: 2
      If ever a comment merited a score of 6, this was it.

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  17. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by nyet · · Score: 2

    Why is it that, when it's the Government's word versus some cracker's, everyone always wants to believe the cracker? Doesn't the Justice Department have a lot more to lose by lying about this?

    No. This is business as usual for a PR agency (government or otherwise). This is what PR agencies do (government or otherwise). It is INDIVIDUALS who have most to lose if they make the slightest mistep. Lives and families have been trashed over much less, but corporations and government institutions do it daily, and nobody really cares.

    Hell, the PURPOSE of a corporation is to protect member individuals from the law, much like what happens in a government institution, where there are multitudes of ways (yes, even legal ones) to CYA.

  18. Another reason for civil disobedience by argoff · · Score: 4, Informative

    This proves two things:

    1) It must be obvious to everyone that the DMCA is unconstitutional

    2) DMCA type laws are never going to go away till we attack the root of the problem, copyrights

    Unless you think that we're going to conjure up a propaganda machine the size of the movie industry, or that the government will suddenly start protecting liberties again, civil disobedience is the only way to go.

  19. Shame on us by volpe · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I hope all of the employees of Adobe are truly embarrassed about this.


    I'm embarassed about this, because my government is making our country look like an ass.

  20. Sigh... by sheldon · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's one thing to accuse the government of being corrupt. It's quite another to pin the blame for this corruption on the very parties who tried to clean it up.

    I'd very much appreciate you explaining each one of these incidents.

    I'm very much curious what you think Janet Reno did that was wrong. The only thing I can recall is her listening to the Republican appointees in the FBI when she first took office. Thus begat Waco. Both her and President Clinton apologized for that, and cleaned house in the FBI.

    What always amazes me is how ignorant, stupid and partisan Republicans are. This idiot is trying to pin the blame for Ruby Ridge on the Clinton Administration when the event occured in '92.

    But I'll bet back in '92 if it had gained any news coverage this moron would have claimed we shouldn't criticize the FBI because that's not patriotic.

    It makes me want to puke just thinking that my family has died protecting the rights of scum like this.

    1. Re:Sigh... by elefantstn · · Score: 2
      What always amazes me is how ignorant, stupid and partisan Republicans are.


      Whereas the Democrats are paragons of virtue and cooperation. Bullshit. Where do you get off?

      This idiot is trying to pin the blame for Ruby Ridge on the Clinton Administration when the event occured in '92.


      All the poster did was list Ruby Ridge in his list of government mistakes. He didn't blame it on anyone. Little jumpy, are we?

      But I'll bet back in '92 if it had gained any news coverage this moron would have claimed we shouldn't criticize the FBI because that's not patriotic.


      Oooh, a straw man argument. Clever!

      It makes me want to puke just thinking that my family has died protecting the rights of scum like this.


      Not me. The only way to preserve intelligent conversation is to let people say stuff that's as stupid as they want.
      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
    2. Re:Sigh... by elefantstn · · Score: 2

      Maybe you should, too, dumbass. Here's a hint: if an argument starts out with "You probably think...," there's a good chance it's fallacious.

      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
    3. Re:Sigh... by BrookHarty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Government in general is corrupt. It takes large amounts of money to run for office, and the steady of stream of favors just perpetuates our corrupt republic. District attorneys need to have high profile cases for promotions, Police departments need to take houses and cars from citizens for their police budgets. Senators and Congress are to busy with campaign funding, and re-elections. Judges plan for cushy jobs with law firms and big businesses when they are off the bench.

      Dmitry was lucky that the government didn't want to continue with the case, the feds could of pushed it and won. Busting (Imaginary) hackers helps everyone in our corrupt government.

      -
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. - Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

    4. Re:Sigh... by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "Whereas the Democrats are paragons of virtue and cooperation. Bullshit. Where do you get off? "

      No, Democrats are just smart enough to know when they are lying.

    5. Re:Sigh... by InsaneGeek · · Score: 2

      Hmmm...

      I did not have sexual relations with that woman

      I don't really give a shit whether or not he was boinking the old intern, but when he comes out on national TV and lies directly to every single American citizen... well that's where I take offence. Go around fucking dogs for all I give a shit, but don't fucking lie to my face...

    6. Re:Sigh... by chill · · Score: 2

      That was supposed to be a separate list -- not necessarily associated. I wasn't trying to imply the Clinton administration was responsible for Ruby Ridge -- that was the FBI mishandling.

      The FBI need cleaning before Clinton got into office -- it just got worse. Not necessarily his fault, as it took a lot to clean it out.

      My original post (lost by Slashdot) had the preface (8-10 years), which would have been correct in referring to Ruby Ridge. I was sloppy in retyping it.

      Sorry, I'm not a Republican.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    7. Re:Sigh... by sheldon · · Score: 2

      Don't ask... Don't tell...

      The question should have never been asked. But apparently you are just a sheep for your Republican masters.

    8. Re:Sigh... by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "Anyway, to say such a thing as a democrat puts you just as ignorant and partisan as a Republican."

      If you can prove to my satisfaction that people who listen to Rush Limbaugh are not ignorant, stupid and partisan, I'll gladly recind my statement.

      "Not to mention the fact that anytime you put a label on yourself as democrat or republican, you're being partisan, and as a result, in my mind, ignorant."

      There's nothing wrong with being partisan, and being partisan does not make you ignorant. Generally quality partisanship comes from a standpoint of knowing what you are talking about, which is the case with me when it comes to political discussions.

      No, my complaint with Republicans is that they are stupid, ignorant and partisan. It's that combination which is extremely hazardous to our nations well being.

      Oh, and I'm not a Democrat so much as an anti-Republican.

    9. Re:Sigh... by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "The FBI need cleaning before Clinton got into office -- it just got worse. "

      No, it became signifigantly better after Clinton took office.

      The two incidents you refer to with the FBI were the fault of the Republican appointed officials. After Clinton came into office and appointed Louis Freeh, the FBI(and ATF) began a process of clean up.

      What I object to is that you've fallen like a sheep before the slaughter to the Republican bullshit where they refuse to take responsibility for their failures and instead blame it on Democrats. This has been a constant theme for the past 9 years of trying to tie both Ruby Ridge and Waco to Clinton and Reno.

      I'd be curious if you can come up with an incident similar to Ruby Ridge(or Waco) which occured after 1993. I cannot remember any, despite the fact that more criminals were imprisoned during the Clinton years than during the Reagan/Bush years combined.

      The most serious thing that I recall happening was the McVeigh screw up with the papers, but while a mistake it was nowhere near as serious and purposeful.

    10. Re:Sigh... by InsaneGeek · · Score: 2

      Actually I'm not a Republican, but you are blinded by your one true GOD (i.e. the Democratic party) views that you can't have any kind of sensible conversation...

      So what you're saying it's OK to lie to questions that might be negative? Hmmm that's a real easy way to make all problems go away, Somalia... I never knew about it, I was out golfing... I did not know that we had any dealing in Somalia.

      Now what Clinton should have said is "that yes I have had relations with my intern, and it's not illegal for me to do so". And then let the issue drop by the wayside, instead of getting on nationaly TV and lieing directly to my face, hell lie in court and face purgery but DO NOT go on national TV and make a statement to all American people that is a complete and blatent lie.

      And to apeasy your true GOD belief... any Democrat good... anybody else (Libertarian, Republican, Independant) is evil. Let's reelect Gary Condit for Congress, he's a Democrat he can do no wrong.

  21. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by InsaneGeek · · Score: 4, Flamebait

    You have it so wrong, please actually think about the facts before spouting off, like some brainless slashdroid. Using your analogy it would properly be stated like this...

    An American gun maker/seller being arrested in
    Japan for making guns in the US & selling them in Japan.

    If his dumbass company would not have had their servers located in the US, it would not be an issue, but because the servers were physically located in the US, it is breaking the law *IN THE US* (download from Chicago, and the credit card transactions occur from a town in Washington, both IN THE US). That's what all the mindless droids don't get, it's not that it was created in Russia and somehow we are locking up people who do things legal in their home country when they come to the US. As long as they don't do their shit *in the US* then we don't do shit (and looking over history we haven't done anything until they physically bring it to the US). This was the entire point of Sealand (Havenco) do your shit in their country where just about anything is legal and other countries can't touch you, because your doing transactions physically in another country.

    Sheesh, sometimes people really need a cluestick to the head.

  22. wordsmithing by nhavar · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Notice that the original state statement mentions that he admitted to his "conduct" not "misconduct". Meaning that basically he admitted that he wrote a program that cracked the adobe file, not admitted that what he did was wrong. The second point is that he agreed to aid in the prosecution, well maybe he agreed to testify and the prosecution wants to use that testimony but that doesn't equate to him actually agreeing to "help/aid" the prosecution.

    personally I think that the government is going to jerk around until enough people forget about this. I think in hind sight they do not want this very high profile case to go to court, likewise none of the media companies want it there either. They want this law to sit on the books for awhile and become "accepted" before anyone tries to test it. I'm sure another year from now we'll here some snippet blurb saying that the govt and elcomsoft entered into a "Plea" agreement where elcomsoft agree's not to sell the product in the US in exchange for the small slap on the wrist or "deferred" sentencing. What a joke!

    --
    "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
  23. If absurd US laws are applicable in Russia... by evilpaul13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why was Dmitry arrested? "His" program was under US Copyright Law a "work for hire", and therefore he never owned it in the first place.

    1. Re:If absurd US laws are applicable in Russia... by rhdwdg · · Score: 2

      Could you hire me to murder my boss? I could do it without fearing prosecution!

      We're not talking about a civil proceeding here.

  24. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by InsaneGeek · · Score: 2

    On the indictment releaser by the DOJ list the places that they physically host their servers in the US where someone in California acquired all of the software from Elcomsoft completely within the US.

    Page 2 Lines 26-28 & Page 3 Lines 1-4
    Page 4 line 1-2

    http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/can/press/assets/apple ts /2001_08_28_sklyarov_ind.pdf

    There are mutliple things to blame here:
    Elcomsoft for actually doing their transactions within the US.
    Clinton & Congress for passing the DMCA
    but you hit the head on really who's to blame, Adobe. But, the one group who I'd really not put any blame on is the DOJ. The law was technically violated, Adobe called up the DOJ and essentially forced them to hall him in (the law was technically violated, and that's their job). The reason why Adobe probably first called for a criminal case, was to prevent him from leaving the US, so they could procede with a civil suit against him (kinda twisting & perverting the law to their own use). Adobe saw what a bad publicity wreck they made and tried to sweep it under the rug, only problem is once the DOJ has filed against you, you gotta go through the entire process (painful as it may be, it keeps corporations & powerful people from being able to try and circumvent the law with powerful friends).

    I personally think that the DMCA paints with too broad of a brush, but when people complain without having the proper facts it hurts everyone else who is trying to change things, since the same groups of people are stating two different things. If the people on the same side trying to fight the law can't get things straight then both sides tend to lose credibility. Which is why I was a bit curt with you earlier.

  25. Waco? by jdavidb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I live in Texas, and I still don't think the govt did anything legally wrong at Waco. All I know is, a bunch of nutties with guns were down there plotting to eventually kill me and my family, and a bunch of govt agents got themselves shot trying to take them out before they all killed themselves.



    It blew my mind how conservative talk radio immediately tried to picture these guys as, "Just peaceful, churchgoing, religious folks exercising their 2nd amendment priviliges.

    --
    Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
    1. Re:Waco? by chill · · Score: 2

      Ordered not to use incendary devices. Said they didn't use any incendary devices. Video tape showed they did. Video tape disappeared -- FBI claimed it was accidentally destroyed.

      Years later, after Congress Supoenea the tape (told it was gone) and others asked for it -- it showed up. Oops.

      It wasn't the basic action against the Branch Davidians, it was lying about how it was handled, etc. for YEARS.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  26. and sometimes deadly? by small_dick · · Score: 2

    I think the contents of this webpage are a bit extreme, but the USA has probably contributed (directly or indirectly) to the deaths of large numbers of people, at home and abroad, in the name of greed and control. Unfortunate, but probably true.

    I hope one day the USA will return to the Constitution and lawful behavior, and perhaps even start visualizing utopia again.

    --


    Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
    See my user info for links.
  27. Who's spinning who? by davidebsmith · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Joe Burton says that the DOJ statement "is a cleverly crafted statement that promotes the notion that Dmitry admits wrongful conduct and has entered into a Plea Agreement with the U.S. Government."

    But the DOJ statement never uses the term "Plea Agreement", nor does it claim that Dmitri admitted to "wrongful" conduct.

    Dmitri claims that he is not cooperating with the government.

    But in the Diversion Agreement he agrees to testify if requested by the government in the case of United States v. Elcom Ltd., agrees that any statements he makes may be used against him in a prosecution for obstruction of justice or perjury, and waives most of his constitutional rights in exchange for a promise that he will not be prosecuted if he lives up to his end of the Agreement. Not cooperation?

    And ElcomSoft says that Dmitri's testimony can only be supportive to their case and they only want Dmitri to tell the truth.

    But of course, ElcomSoft is still a defendant facing criminal prosecution in this case, and criminal defendants always claim that when the true facts come out, they will be shown to be innocent.

    So once you cut through the spin that Dmitri, ElcomSoft and the EFF (none of whom are neutral, disinterested parties in this case) put on it, the only real undisputed inaccuracy in the DOJ statement is the bit about the "former" employer. Which is probably a misreading of Dmitri's statement in the Diversion Agreement that "continuing through July 15, 2001, [he] was employed by" ElcomSoft.

    Remember that PR works for both sides, folks.

    1. Re:Who's spinning who? by edinho · · Score: 2, Informative

      Context: The U.S. Attorney came up with a spin that is making Dmitry look like a guilty person that is being let go in exchange of incriminating evidence against Elcomsoft.

      It is true that DOJ never uses the term Plea Agreement--that would be outright lie, and not a "mistake" like the "former employee" incident. What they did was to make it _sounds_ like ("promotes the notion") a plea agreement. And I totally agree with Burton on that one. What Joe Burton said was to counter that spin: that there was _no_ plea agreement, that it only sounded like a plea agreement. I don't see it as a spin, it was rather to counter what people (very likely) might conclude in a careless reading of the US Attorney press release.

      If you consider the counter as a spin, well, pretty much everything is a spin, maybe except for math.

      As for the "mistake" of "former employee", if the US Attorney can misread "continuing through July 15, [he] was employed by . . . Elcomsoft" as Dimtry is no longer an employee, well, the lawyer that wrote that press release must not be paying attention. Just imagine, a US Attorney lawyer persecuting such a high profile case, and don't even know if Dimitry still works for Elcomsoft. They must be either stupid, careless, or purposefully misleading.

      Also, Dimitry's statement of "not cooperating with the government" should be taken in two context:

      • To counter the misconception that the implication of "cooperation" means to say things in favor of US Attorney that will make Elcomsoft look bad. I.e., to spin against Elcomsoft.
      • The very next line he says that he will only tell the truth, and I would gather that that's is what he meant by "cooperating" with the US govt., and he did sign the agreement saying that he _will_ cooperate with the government.

      From my reading of the various press releases, and the history of the case as recorded in places like slashdot (the paragon of unerring reporting :-), the aggression and the spin is being done by Adobe/govt. The defendents has been behaving in a very honorable manner: no ratting, no firing, no disavowal. If the press releases from the defendents are considered as spin, then there is not much under the sun that cannot be classified as spin.

      Cheers,
      e.

    2. Re:Who's spinning who? by horza · · Score: 2

      and waives most of his constitutional rights in exchange for a promise

      And this is the argument *for* the former democracy USA? If I was scared sh*tless in a foreign country I would sign anything.

      Phillip.

      --
      Property for sale in Nice, France
    3. Re:Who's spinning who? by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      >in America the constitution only applies to
      >citizens

      Such a common belief and so very wrong.

      The US Constitution stands as a fundamental line in the sand which separates the powers of government from the rights bestowed upon mankind by powers beyond government and the laws of man.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  28. Accepted. by nyet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Truthfully, I was nodding when I read your original post. Our founding fathers had the luxury to flee to a completely new continent (albiet one populated by some pesky indigenous peoples that needed wiping out). We, however, have no such luxury. When people say idiotic things like "love it or leave it" they don't think to ask "leave for where?"

    Another continent ruled by ogilarchy and the same corporations as every where else? Bummer.

  29. Idiot by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Credit Card Fraud is illegal in Russia. Chances are, if something isn't illegal just about everywhere (such as murder, real theft, etc) then it probably isn't a big deal.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  30. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    can we pressure the Russsians to round up and arrest any/all Adobe employees in the country and lock 'em up?

    No. We can't.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  31. No by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    He was in jail for a couple weeks. then they let him out on bail.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  32. My prediction has come true. by Crixus · · Score: 2
    Well, I hate to pay myself on the back but I called this one THREE MONTHS ago.

    I predicted that he would be let go without a trial, and here is my original comment from the September slashdot thread:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22120&cid=2371 611

    (there's not supposed to be a space between the 1 and the 6)

    Saw it coming.

    Rich...

    --
    Ignore Alien Orders
    1. Re:My prediction has come true. by Crixus · · Score: 2

      May the fleas of one thousand camels infest your sister's underwear.

      --
      Ignore Alien Orders
  33. Re:Skylarov rates high on the Trust-O-Meter, eh? by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 2

    An AC wrote:

    > I think that the US backed out of the Dimitry case in order to defend
    > the DMCA which would in all likelyhood not have withstood supreme
    > court scrutiny.

    You may be right. Usually the reason laws don't withstand supreme court scrutiny is because they are unconstitutional. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land; any law that violates it has no right to exist. It is not the place of the Department of Justice to defend possibly unconstitutional laws from the Supreme Court just because special interest groups like them (BSA, RIAA, MPAA).

    > I think this was a wise move because the DMCA is a powerfull tool to
    > protect our national intellectual property

    1) It isn't "our national intellectual property", it's Adobe's property, and Adobe has dropped the charges and asked for the man's release.

    2) It doesn't matter how powerful a tool it is. Our national Constitution is far more important. You know, the document that waxes eloquent on freedom of speech and the press?

    > in countries such as Russia
    > and China where there is no respect for US law.

    What?!? Do you mean the US doesn't actually rule the world? That other countries get to have their own governments? Imagine that!

    Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay!
    New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!

  34. I'm sick of this! by Sj0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You americans should be sick of your governments behaviour. Lying? Urging the people not to question their government? Regular people being harrased for just that thing by the Secret Service and FBI? You my freinds are living in a totalinarian police state. Enjoy living in 1984 for the rest of your life. Personally, I never cared for being forced by the government to think their way and being threatened by a federal agency to do so or "you are in line with the terrorists", but I'm in a country which is still required by law to allow it's people to question government. I'm in a country where satire against the government(and corporations) is still allowed. I'm in a country where the person who gets the most votes in an election is the winner. In short, I don't live in the USA.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  35. No such luck. by Malcontent · · Score: 2

    People have spent years on death row in this country and haven't been reimbursed one cent. Apparently when the justice system frames you, sends you to jail, ruins your life for ever they don't even owe you an apology.

    That's our society!

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  36. Re:How's this for EFFORT? by Malcontent · · Score: 2

    Man homosexuals are some sick bastards. I thought raping little boys was bad enough but this is the product of a truly vile and sick bastard.

    I used to feel sympathy for their plight (after all it doesn't seem fair to discriminate agains them) but stuff like this makes me rethink those positions.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  37. Re:The Fact Remains by Mandelbrute · · Score: 2
    what the fuck are you talking about when you say the US has jurisdiction in these matters worldwide? take your head out of your ass and consider how the US could possibly be justified--and how other countries would allow it--
    US law has been applied from the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli for an awfully long time - but before the last 50 years it was usually only enforced in the US's personal pond of the Caribean. The US has considered everything outside the USSR and China as it's juristiction for 50 years, and now you are expected to obey US law there too.
  38. Re:SO WHAT!!! by Legion303 · · Score: 2
    What part of "it was not only legal, but an obligation in his own country" did you miss?

    And let me save you some trouble: *he* didn't sell it in America, the company he worked for did. How many times do we have to whack this dead horse?

    -Legion

  39. Re:SO WHAT!!! by Legion303 · · Score: 2
    By way of analogy (again), if you were executed in Afghanistan because your company had a woman CEO, would you accept that as "within their rights"?

    After all, you knew full well what you were doing when you hired on with a company with a woman CEO.

    Or were you just trolling the dead horse a bit more?

    -Legion

  40. Re:SO WHAT!!! by Legion303 · · Score: 2
    You are taking an extreme view in a fairly clear cut case. Adobe is a company with interest wordwide... Afganistan is is a terrorist country that is being delt with.

    In Russia, it is illegal for Adobe to restrict their file formats as they are doing.

    Not so long ago, Afghanistan was a favored country. You failed to see the analogy, you failed to understand Russia's legal standing on software (even after it was explained to you), and you failed to understand a single word I've written.

    [...]

    I'm not thats tupid.

    I beg to differ. I'm leaving this horse to you.

    -Legion