Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sklyarov Case Opens Today

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the please-use-the-pirate's-entrance dept.

weakethics writes "The trial is scheduled to start today in the case of Adobe/DMCA versus Skylarov/Elcomsoft/right-thinking-people everywhere. The SF Chron has a story about it. It quotes a former DOJ attorney about the impact of the DMCA "I don't think it's had the effect that a lot of people have argued it would have -- with a single criminal case in four years." Who obviously (purposefully?) misses the point: it's about intimidation rather than litigation."

7 of 314 comments (clear)

  1. Using the DCMA against itself by pubjames · · Score: 5, Interesting


    As I understand it the DCMA is supported by the film and music industry because it allows them to create technologies which they can wrap their content in, which are illegal to try to break.

    What happens if we create a file compression/security method that incorporates an original encryption technology, with some mechanism by which you only give out the key to people you trust? We could then put whatever material we wanted on P2P networks, and the film and music industry representatives wouldn't even be able to find out what we were sharing without breaking the law they support. Wouldn't that be a good way of demonstrating the stupidity of this law?

  2. I don't understand... by jaredcoleman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "His supporters believed -- and still do -- that Sklyarov's program represents free speech protected by the First Amendment."
    Can someone explain this argument to me? I honestly do not get it. My understanding is that free speech means that the government can't throw me in jail for saying "DMCA sucks!" But just because I have freedom of speech doesn't mean that I can do malicious things with my speech and expect no consequences. I can be prosecuted for yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre, so why can't I be prosecuted if my speech is malicious in some other way? Also, how can you justify interpreting 'speech' in this broad way? I can't imagine the framers would agree. Just honestly curious, no flame please.

  3. Measuring the effects of the DMCA by asolipsist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As other posters have pointed out, the main effects of the DMCA appear through fear of litigation rather than Federal court cases. A group of us, telecom grad students, wrote a paper on quantitative effects (chilling) of the DMCA on security research. We used the bugtraq incidence list as our source of raw data. We concluded there were some measurable effects, though kinda small.

    (its an academic paper, you have to find some sort of effect right!)

    you can check it out here

    (I know .doc is bad! sorry, lost the pdf version)

  4. Re:I agree by Tom7 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    > The only real effect of the DMCA is that companies can't openly distribute stuff that violates the DMCA.

    I don't think that's really true. The DMCA is used to intimidate and annoy regular well-intentioned folks like myself on a weekly basis. Check out my dmca troubles over a font program I wrote, for instance.

  5. The point is simply this... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Morons will be morons!

    How much simpler can I say it?

    AND...the USA has morons everywhere, from the president on down!
    Who do you think ELECTS the morons? Other morons.
    Or are they the morons after all?
    Why? Because many smart people like us ACT like morons and don't even bother to vote!
    In the last election, 61% of the registered voters didn't vote. I voted. Did you?
    Probably another 20-30% of the people eligible to vote aren't even registered. Are you?
    The DMCA is probably the most anti-freedom law ever passed. We all bitch about it. Did you vote?

    Maybe you people who didn't vote or register are the morons after all.

    Think about it.

    "Evil flourishes when good people do nothing"
    -Edmund Burke-

  6. Re:That idiot is a lawyer by uncoveror · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Reading adobe e-books aloud violated one version of their licence agreement rading e-books aloud to the blind could itself violate the DMCA.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  7. Re:Adobe Is Dead by sakeneko · · Score: 4, Interesting
    adobe will survive long past this silly dmca bs.

    It will indeed. I am a technical writer with well over ten years experience in the field. Among technical writers, FrameMaker is used more than all other tools combined for producing printed documentation. It predominates because it is by far the best tool for that purpose. Microsoft Word was not designed to typeset books, and is not suitable for the purpose. Anyone who has tried to use it for that purpose can testify to that. <wry grin>

    In addition, FrameMaker has some truly wonderful electronic publishing capabilities. I've used it for years to produce fully hyperlinked PDF versions of printed manuals and online help for web-based applications. I have even set up single source documentation systems using it -- systems that allowed me to produce printed documents and online help from the same source files.

    Without FrameMaker or Acrobat, I'd have a much harder time doing my job.

    In my opinion (along with the rest of you), the DCMA is a wonderful example of outright legislative malpractice. The congressmen that wrote it and sponsored it probably deserve to be tossed out on their asses when they come up for re-election. This particular case is an embarrassment and black eye to the United States. Adobe should have known better than to get within a light year of the thing, much less actively work to get anyone prosecuted under it. :/

    But none of that has anything to do with the quality of Adobe's products.

    --

    Catherine