Slashdot Mirror
Russian Student Arrested For Revealing DirecTV Secrets
An anonymous reader writes "The Associated Press is reporting the arrest of Igor Serebryany, 19, of Los Angeles for industrial espionage under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996. Serebryany is accused of providing details of DirecTVs 'P4' card technology to a number of websites."
Information wants to be free!
According to confidential law enforcement memos, he is also suspected of starting the "IN SOVIET RUSSIA" cliche.
This has a maximum punishment of 20 years of hard labor building beowulf clusters for Profit!
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
What he did is just as illegal as if I'd stolen a bunch of information on Magellan's tracking software to distribute or use for my company's navigation software. This doesn't appear to be a case where the technology was reverse engineered and published by that means, which should be protected.
You'll note that this is not being described as a DMCA case, but as industrial espionage. And if it's true and he's convicted, he should go to jail like all the other white-collar criminals who do this.
Mitnick finally gets out of jail, Skylov gets amnesty, and now I gotta endure all the "FREE SEREBRYANY" sigs on Slashdot. When will the madness stop?!
Any takers?
We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
The article states:
"Serebryany was charged under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 [...] It prohibits anyone from disclosing trade secrets for economic benefit"
But it does not say wether he sold the info to the websites. If he did, I'd say he's in deep doodoo.
Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous? - Calvin
"It prohibits anyone from disclosing trade secrets for economic benefit, and carries penalties in this case up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Although investigators acknowledge that Serebryany apparently didn't profit from the disclosures, the law bars giving away secrets for anyone else's economic benefit. "
Will the charges hold up under this act?
Yes but every time I try to see it your way, I get a headache.
Why is it that everyone at slashdot feels like they have the rights to any information that is out there?
This person stole technology plans while working at a law firm. He didn't reverse engineer, he stole. This is illegal and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. This is not a case of our rights being stepped on. This is a case of the rights of a company to trust that when they disclose something to a law firm that it won't end up all over the internet.
Yet anoher example of the weakest link in security being the human link.
I've followed DirecTv's skirmishes with hackers for a few years and have always believed that Dave's (DirecTV / NDS) house of cards would crumble from the inside. It's simply a matter of how many people have access to the keys.
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
Serebryany obtained the documents while working part-time at a law firm in California that performed legal work for DirecTV.
I'm -sure- they had to have had a non-disclosure agreement in place, especially working with a law firm. They guy broke the law and stole coroprate trade secrets. He should be arrested.
Now if he'd bought himself a DirecTV receiver and reverse-engineered the thing himself, and then got arrested, I'd scream "foul!". But come on... this is no Dmitry Skylarov case. This sounds like a case working the way the law should work.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
What I want to know is how did he get the information in the first place
RTFA!
"Serebryany obtained the documents while working part-time at a law firm in California that performed legal work for DirecTV."
"In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
Listen people. You do the crime, you do the time. Would we be whining if he was arrested for stealing DirecTV's CEO's car? How about their money? Why are these documents any different?
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
From the article:
"Serebryany obtained the documents while working part-time at a law firm in California that performed legal work for DirecTV."
Sig:
Barbeque is a noun. Not a verb.
he stole it out right. if some guy robs me I would hope that he gets the book thrown at him.
What if he stole the book?
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Since he obtained the documents working for a law firm, and I have a hard time believing a law firm wouldn't make an employee sign an NDA, this guy should fry.
No sympathy for those that distribute trade secrets. Intellectual property is far too valuable to ignore cases like this.
My 2.5 cents.
-- People who hate Windows use Linux. People who love UNIX use BSD.
"Who knows, he could be a jerk?! But he didn't get any money for his trouble, so I'm more inclined to think he's not that bright."
So we only lock people up when they are intelligent? What fantasy land are you living in? He committed a crime, period, whether he's a nice guy is irrelevant.
Mitnick cracked their system, stole the docs, but they were in e-book format, so he used Slyarov's software to decrypt it.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
I could understand treating international industrial espionage as a criminal matter; I don't think you can get someone extradited to face a suit in civil court, which is where this is normally resolved. But the guy lives in the US. Why isn't a suit good enough? Has disclosing a trade secret been considered criminal until recently?
Reading a (slightly dated) article on the legislation being used to prosecute him, I'm not even convinced that requirements of intent are met in this case. Who was he hoping to provide economic benefit to? Do the satellite hackers sell mod chips?
Java: the COBOL of the new millenium.
Good grief, it says right in the article that he worked for a lawfirm that handled DirectTV legal issues. He had access to these documents because of his job.
The only issue is which law he was arrested for breaking. It is the toughest of such laws and is meant for people that take these actions with the intention of monetary benefit. He didn't benefit monetarily. However, the law apparently also says that you can't give trade secrets to anyone else that will benefit from them monetarily either. So there is the assumption that he gave it to people that will use it for monetary benefit.
He broke a law and deserves to be arrested. Did they choose the right law? That's for a jury to decide.
As a few other posters have already said, it looks like this kid just straight-up stole information DirecTV. That's illegal in any country, and I'm going to say he'll probably be treated nicer than he would be had he gotten caught in a number of other countries.
What's funny is that Slashdot is reporting this as a YRO article... I'm pretty sure industrial espionage isn't on anyone's list of rights...
The government needs to find the answer to #2 if they want to prosecute him under that law. Now, they could wait until modified chips start be sold assuming the information he took actually helps such a device to be created. Even if it could, how could they have enough proof to say that the circumvention device actually benefited from his leaked information? Innocent until proven guilty. At least, that's the way it's supposed to work.
Take a deep breath and read the story before going off here (unlike the editors who post these stories)...
The guy *worked* for a legal company that had access to sensitive company documents. He *stole* the documents, then released them to the underground web sites.
This was not some clever hacker sitting in a basement and figuring a bunch of stuff out with a soldering iron in one hand and scope probes in the other.
How would you feel if some clerk at your university office did the same thing with your class transcripts? Some waiter posted your charge card number? Some guy at the help desk of your ISP sold your email account and password to a company that writes spammer distribution programs?
There are legitimate issues with the DCMA and similar legislation and common law that *really need* to be hammered out. Waving guys like this around as "little guy getting stuck by the man" is the *worst* thing we can do for sensible legislation.
Mathematically impossible requirements are technically not against policy.
He **STOLE** the documents from his employer and sent them to web sites that specialize in the hardware/software to make fake cards to steal DirecTV programming.
Unless he's brain damaged, I'd have to assume that he knew exactly what he was doing.
Is breaking an NDA a criminal act? Breach of contract is normally something handled in civil court. You might be made to pay damages, but you won't be going to jail for it. Or perhaps I don't understand how things work in the post-DMCA America.
Java: the COBOL of the new millenium.
good to see this defined as what it is, not DMCA.
fact is, they are very clearly breaking the law, very deliberately, and they make a considerable sum doing so. the one i knew, earned about 50k in a year. i am glad the asshole is not part of my life anymore. a real pathetic schmuck too, so worried about IRS that he spent it all on toys (stereo, new machines) and strippers, then sat around and said he couldn't afford rent, or couldn't find a job because he was just unemployed and not reporting his Stolen income. he was 27 at the time.
sad to see a 19 yo kid getting stomped on. 19 yo kids just see the law as something to break anyway.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
RTFA
What does a teenager committing brazen theft have to do with My Rights Online?
Surely it is a black and white situation.. He stole something. Even with the "ignorance of the law being no excuse" argument, he should have realized he was doing wrong.
Semper ubi sub ubi
That is if you are a Russian living in or visiting the US. There is an instant distrust extended to foreigners living in a strange land. But the US has no monopoly on bigotry. I've been on the receiving end of that deal in Russia.
I'm a Republican who loves Russia. I lived in Russia for two years after high school and graduated with a degree in Russian.
As far as this case goes, it's going to be a difficult one for both the prosecutors and the defenders. In order for the prosecution to win, they'll have to prove that Igor Serebryany was trying to steal secrets for his, or someone else's profit.
It seems that the Corporations would have had a better case by going after the law firm that breached a contractual relationship of trust. Bringing the feds in was not the best move. Igor will not finish his education here, even if he wins the case, and that is the really sucky part of this whole deal.
You're joking right? Sure he's 19, but he's working at a lawfirm for Christ's sake, with access to confidential and sensitive information. Not that bright? Hell, I need to move to his neighborhood and apply for some jobs since they're just giving them out to anyone that asks, regardless of qualifications.
I suspect he had full knowledge of the fact that what he was doing was wrong and against the law. Sure, he's only 19 and God knows a 19 year old male's cup o' common sense does not runneth over, but this does not mean that he should be let off the hook, or granted leniancy even. If that were the case then why not change the law to allow for people below the age of 21 to be tried as children? He took a chance with something and failed, I have to assume that someone working at a lawfirm would have some clue of the potential repercussions...
Fry him ... sure, it only takes 3 minutes to reboot, but my tivo is a linux box - sacrificing uptime makes baby jesus cry.
Is -how- he got caught I love a good forensics story. I'll bet all my karma that he u/l'ed those docs right from the law firm. :)
.gov that deals with sensitive info. Its unfortunate at least b/c no one that young will ever be given a chance to prove their worth at that law firm again.
Seriously though, this may hurt anyone under the age of 25 trying to get a job outside the
BOSTON SUCKS!
Why am I inclined to think that if he was an American teenager, he wouldn't have been arrested? It would have just been, "now junior, just give us back those codes and we won't tell anyone about your little hacking escapade, and we won't put you in jail, either".
There's a totally obvious economic benefit here. He gave the documentation away, in the hope that others would be able to get satellite TV for free. Getting something for free, that would normally be paid for, possibly expensively, is a definite economic benefit. Doesn't get any more cut and dried than that.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
He committed a very blatant crime. He's getting everything he deserves, I'd say. If anything the only reason that I would say this sucks, is if the taxpayers have to support him while he's incarcerated. Hopefully they'll just put him on a slow boat back home.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
As a Canadian who has a DirectTV dish and receiver and loves watching "grey market" TV, I hope there are more guys like him at DirectTV. Sure dealers of the hardware and those in the US are getting arrested in droves, but the Canadian end-user is apparently never bothered by the law.
What I do isn't in the moral good-books, but I can't imagine paying for the piles of crappy programming that are offered by DirectTV or the Canadian equivilants -- I watch the NHL games the the occasional movie, and would pay a reasonable fee to do it above-board, but I can't seriously imagine shelling out hundreds per month to do it.
FYI -- Canadians CAN'T subscribe to DirectTV due to Canadian laws, as the government feels that we should be using the alternatives in our own country. However that doesn't stop a wackload of people from watching "grey-market" TV -- it isn't illegal, but you can't actually legally subscribe to it. It's really a very strange situation.
what's so amazing about this "P4" techonology that no one has been able to crack it yet? Has it only been on the market a week? Or is it just really that good?
The HU cards still work and the P4 cards are still relatively rare (they've been around for ~6 months, but only come with really new recievers or in the mail if your HU card gets fried), so there hasn't been much time spent on cracking them yet. If it seems like they're going to turn off the HU data stream, you can bet your ass that some hotshot DirecTV cracker out there would figure out how to crack the P4 stuff.
Please. My rights do not included theft of trade secrets. There is no kid genius reverse engineering their encrytpion scheme. He stole the documentation via his employer, and gave this information away/or sold it, not clear on that part.
Guy deserves to go to jail, plain and simple. No rights have been violated other than DirecTV's and the law firms.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Because The Man is keeping us down with his trade secrets! Because IP has no intrinsic value because it is not a physical object! Because it's not stealing if you copy something you do not have a legal right to copy! Because we all want your stuff for free! (Touch our stuff and we'll send in the GNU-Goons to break your kneecaps!)
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
"What would have happened if Henry Ford had not come up with standardized parts"
Well, nothing really, because he didn't. Sam Colt did.
Other things Henry Ford didn't come up with include the car, the assembly line and mass production.
He was a strong believer in trade secrets though, and the sort of guy who wouldn't hire lawyer if you stole one from him. He was more inclined to hire a thug to beat your head in with a baseball bat.
He was also a primary participant in one of the longest, nastiest and expesive patent busting cases in American history.
Go figure.
KFG
Well, maybe not *that* big, but ABC News is reporting that he actually worked for a digital IMAGING company that was contracted out by the law firm to create digital copies of these sensitive docs. Adjust arguments appropriately knowing that he didn't work for the law firm.
Sometimes it helps to search for alternative versions of the story.
Intelligent Life on Earth
- This guys stole, and deserves to be punished, and
- The slashdot crowd is going to try to make this guy into a martyr/hero
Then I look at the comments here at slashdot, and all of the top moderated comments says, more or less, "this guy stole, and deserves to be punished." Most also anticipate the same overreaction. And I'm sure it is out there, in some of the lower moderated comments, but on the whole, it looks like we're having the same sane reaction, even as each of us assumes he or she is the only sane one around here. Interesting, I thought.You're forgetting the statutory requirement to announce "What a country!" every hour on the hour.
How can you say there's no economic benefit, to getting something for free, that you would otherwise be obligated to pay a sum of money for?!?!
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Here is 18 U.S.C. sec. 1831 for your own eyes, but it looks like he only had to "know" that it would benefit a foreign gov't, agent, or instrumtality. To me I think the intent of this statute is to prevent espionage of the overseas variety, but good lawyers make their money fleshing out the grey areas like this when it's the person that is foreign. Who knows if he wanted to benefit foreign gov'ts; to my mind I think he just wanted free DirecTV. DirecTV has just been plagued by these hacked cards so long, I think the reason they're bringing charges under sec.1831 is they've done some serious lobbying to help bring out the big guns to make an example of some people now.
here's the statutory goodness...
1831. Economic espionage
(a) In General.-- Whoever, intending or knowing that the offense will benefit any foreign government, foreign instrumentality, or foreign agent, knowingly--
(1) steals, or without authorization appropriates, takes, carries away, or conceals, or by fraud, artifice, or deception obtains a trade secret:
(2) without authorization copies, duplicates, sketches, draws, photographs, downloads, uploads, alters, destroys, photocopies, replicates, transmits, delivers, sends, mails, communicates, or conveys a trade secret:
(3) receives, buys, or possesses a trade secret, knowing the same to have been stolen or appropriated, obtained, or converted without authorization:
(4) attempts to commit any offense described in any of paragraphs (1) through (3); or
(5) conspires with one or more other persons to commit any offense described in any of paragraphs (1) through (4), and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of conspiracy.
shall, except as provided in subsection (b), be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.
(b) ORGANIZATIONS.- Any organization that commits any offense described in subsection (a) shall be fined not more than $10,000,000.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Yes, it was industrial espionage, yes he deserves to go to jail, etc. etc., but all he had to do was to sit on the information for a few months until his job expired and then release it through an anonymous remailer in Norway.
As a guy sitting in Canada, who is not allowed to subscribe to Direct TV, we have to pirate it to watch the Sopranos on HBO. And it annoys me that this guy could have been of huge assistance if he just held things close to his chest and then released them after a few months when he was long gone from the firm.
By the way, for those who care: the Canadian government originally said that Canadians could watch Direct tv all they wanted because DTV didn't have a licence to broadcast here. Now the supreme court has said "Nope" because although they don't have a licence here, it's "wrong" but we still aren't allowed to subscribe because DTV doesn't have sufficient Canadian contend.
So now approximately 200,000 Canadians have been made criminals in one stroke of a pen.
The baby's fine -- please stop sending business cards.
Lots of people are saying "He broke the law, so fry him", but you don't really mean that, because the consensus around here is that some folks who break some laws (i.e. bad laws, laws we don't like) are heroes who don't deserve frying. But this law is a law preventing theft, and since we all agree that theft is bad, and we don't want our stuff stolen, we basically like this law.
But in this case, what he stole was a description of technology that is going to be used to stifle the flow of information. Somebody could argue that this property doesn't deserve to be protected from theft, and that anybody who steals from the information-rich to give to the information-poor doesn't deserve to be punished.
If this doesn't prove that the law is bad in general, it proves that this application of this law is protecting an unjust institutionalized system of information as property, when information isn't and shouldn't be treated as property.
If you treat this as an act of civil disobedience, in the style of MLK, then let the system arrest and punish the guy, so that the system reveals its own injustice to anybody who happens to be watching.
I'm not sure I buy it myself, but I think it is a serious argument to consider, and so I'll throw it out there, since nobody else seems to be.
I'm sure you got the card to upgrade you from a P3 to a P4 card. My guess is that you have an older series 1 DirecTV/TiVo unit still using a P3 card, and they decided to upgrade you. I too recently got a new card in the mail, due to the fact that my standard Hughes receiver was using a P3.
However, I also got a series 2 Hughes HDVR2 DirecTV/TiVo receiver for my birthday, and that one came with a P4 card.
It seems that a lot of people are bitching that this shouldn't be under YRO. Personally, I think it's good just so people see, in opposition to those doing good and getting nailed, what real online (or otherwise) crime is like and how one can get fried.
If anything, this is useful just so that similar idiots don't get the idea that they can get away with this. Cracking hardware at home for your own use is one thing, giving out the info so millions can cheat a company out of legitimate profit is another.
This one comes out as Economic Espionage, because the individual stole trade secrets and then published them to the masses. He's not publishing the info to make better use of the product and he didn't even decode the info himself, so what we have is just one dumb kid who thought it would be a good idea to help people steal programming.
It's nice to see the slashdot crowd is quick to point out that this guy is dirty, as it goes to show that many know the difference between crime and getting screwed by big corps.
You can find good info on the DirecTV hacking scene at PirateDen and HackP4.
A lot of these people are ligit suscribers to DirecTV service. They see this as a game, release files to the public and see what Dave counters with. Its your typical hacker scene, more about bragging rights than free TV.
That is not to say it hasnt caused a black market to spring up. There are lots of scammers out there trying to rip people off. Just search eBay or Google for HU 3m some time.
Str8Dog
using System.Darkside; public
It depends on how they "discovered" it. If they took a Coke can and were able to discover it through chemical analysis and deduction, no. If they worked for a law firm that represented Coca-Cola and then published a confidential document on a website where Pepsi execs could see it, yes.
P4 was suspect from the day it was released by DirecTV, since the card was produced by the same people who released 3rd generation card that was also hacked because of leaked information.
Before the P4 card was out, plans for a 5th generation card that will be produced in house by DirecTV were already started. This alone discurages hackers, anything they discover now already has a limited life.
...it's a matter of scale. As an issue of fact-well, looks like he did it so far. As an issue of law, if he did it he certainly broke the law.
... odd... that US industrialists go to jail so rarely,despite scandal after ripoff that goes back years and results in billions transferring ownership *illegally*. They always seem to be able to skate with a fine someone else pays, like mr and mrs six pack with their friday afternoon "donations" to the 401k scam stock market.
Now here's the ironic part-the same US government prosecuting him uses ECHELON and stolen promis software and a huge base of satellite intercepts, under the ocean cable taps, etc to "steal" all sortsa goodies, inclucing "industrial secrets" that I have ZERO doubt wind up in the hands of 'connected ones" to high levels of government.
But we ain't seeing any of that get "prosecuted" are we?
Coupla weeks ago, a slew of top level wall street brokerages had to pay 'fines" for insider trading-like "crimes", said fines now being paid by-investors money, other people's money. There was zero jail time involved with any of these gents-why? Easy answer there-they are solid citizen uber fatcats, so their "industrial espionage" that made them and their drinking buddies rich is "less" of a crime than this kid's.
Which is worse, which one should result in jail time? I think it's
Oh well, crime is crime, moral of this story is,for one who might have criminal intent, do it in a BIG WAY then it's called "government" or "business", then it's a lot more acceptable.
Where's the information he stole posted? Purely for scientific research, of course.
Secifically, this case should not hold water because Huges obviously did not hold it's trade secrets close enough. See the act itself, quoted here,
(3) the term 'trade secret' means all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering information, including patterns, plans, compilations, program devices, formulas, designs, prototypes, methods, techniques, processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or intangible, and whether or how stored, compiled, or memorialized physically, electronically, graphically, photographically, or in writing if --
(A) the owner thereof has taken reasonable measures to keep such information secret
What were these trade secrets doing in a law firm? What was that law firm doing handing them to an intern?!!! Did that intern sign anything binding him to non release of information? Details like this are very important.
This case may be the begining of a very real shift in "intelectual property" law. It's a very small step from jailing this intern, who may have been under no contract, to jailing you and me for picking up a paper on the street. Such a broadening of trade secret "protection" will eliminate the need for patents as all technology will be under protection, without the benifits of public disclosure.
Those are a few issuse that you might be worried about.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Ok what were talking about here is a charge that should relate to stealing trade secrets on behalf of a foreign power.... In this case it seems like a simple breach of confidentially.
... if they're so darned secret why were they sent to an outside law firm? If they were going to patent them they'd have to publish anyway if they weren't why did they send them to their lawyers ?
This of course assumes that he did indeed steal the documents
It's possible that his working for the same lawfirm was purely concidental and they're using that link in order to bring criminal charges.
Either way this is a law meant for spies not crackers. It seems like a major sledgehammer job.
Incidentally they refer to DirecTV's "NEW" access cards - I've had directv for nearly 5 years and still have the original access card. Are these the new ones they're talking about ?
All new equipment is being supplied with P4 cards. Any new activations requiring an access card will get a new P4 model.
That's recent then. I bought and had my reciever activated 3 months ago and they activated the HU card that came with it. I only have a P4 because my HU card decided to stop working after the power switched off and on seven or eight times in rapid succession during a lightning storm.
Check out this link. Note that it says
Now, this is Arizona-specific, but I suspect it is similar to other states.Bruce
Bruce Perens.
http://www.asu.edu/counsel/brief/privilege.html. Sorry!
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
The student, identified as Igor Serebryany, 19, of Los Angeles, was accused of sending over the Internet hundreds of sensitive documents describing details about DirecTV's latest "access card" technology - credit-card devices controlling which of the company's 11 million U.S. subscribers can view particular channels.
The P4 and all other DirecTV and Dish access cards are Smartcards, not magnetic strip cards like credit cards. The Amex Blue and one Visa card are also smart cards, but credit cards in general are not, and Blue still has a mag strip. Sattelite access cards do not use mag strips.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
A couple of things bother me about this. Why is a federal prosecution needed, when California already has strong laws against trade secret theft? Why did federal prosecutors need high-level approval in DC to apply this law, unless the DoJ knows that the law is overbroad and easily abused? Why did a law firm even have these documents, unless there was already some dispute about them? How are the feds going to prove economic espionage when that entails proving economic benefit, when the Russian did not economically benefit and it is not clear how anyone else might have economically benefitted either?
in my day we had to actually work to crack a system. social engineering, scopes, reverse engineering. Not kids today, they just steal the documantation and call themselves hackers.grumble grumble, mutter, wheez
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Of course the mechanism by which he obtained the information is important. Reverse engineering is legal (in most cases) because it relies only on publically available information. The technical documents he stole were not public information.
Allow me: The big dishes have been using a system that has been uncrackable since the day it was introduced with much noise from the underground claiming it'll be cracked in days... weeks... months... um... someone??
A common pattern in the threads below is a sense of incredulity that something other than civil remedies are available for misappropriation of a trade secret. Criminal responsibility for trade secret theft is actually quite common, and there are statutes in most states addressing same.
Usually, DA's have better things to do than to prosecute causes for which civil remedies provide adequate deterrence, relying instead on the private actions to keep honest folks honest. But every now and then, civil remedies fail to adequately encourage good behavior -- particularly when the defendant is effectively judgment-proof -- and a state attorney may decide to try to get someone's attention.
At any rate, the Economic Espionage Act is simply a Federal law against theft of trade secrets. The remedies are tougher than most analogous state laws, but so are the reqirements. No doubt, the language is somewhat different from uniform acts, but it is hardly anything new or special -- and chances are that if it weren't applicable, one or more state laws would also be relevant.
>The big dishes have been using a system that has been uncrackable since the day it was introduced with much noise from the underground claiming it'll be cracked in days... weeks... months... um... someone??
;-) stupid supreme court...
:) It still isn't particularly popular, though.
I thought VC was cracked surprisingly fast -- seems to me it was something like a year after it was released, maybe less (I wasn't doing any of this stuff then -- too young). I have a few 018 rev boxes with the extra work done to them sitting about the house... Not that I'm allowed to use the damn things.
VC-II+ is cracked too, but the people who did it have no interest in releasing any product or plans (yes, feel free to call BS on that one -- it really doesn't matter much anymore).
Anyways, VC was never popular with most consumers (probably due to the fact that nobody wanted a BUD in their backyard). I think about 1-million boxes were sold, which isn't much considering that was for all of North America.
Anyways, the satellite piracy industry has matured, IMHO, to the point where there's very little chance a worthwhile signal will go uncracked. The money to be made is simply too high for the top-tier people to just tuck tail and go home...
The only consumer signal I know of in North America that remains untouched is StarChoice's, since they use DigiCipher... It seems like pirates don't want to touch that with a 10 ft. pole (probably for VERY good reasons
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
I think everyone is missing a fundamental point here: The dam that is technological content protection or access control can be easily burst... as shown by this case (especially if any infringing technology shows up) and the DeCSS case. The development of DeCSS allowed content to be copied by the end-user (even if poorly) and, once the program was out, there was no going back... In this light, it doesn't seem that hard to imagine the entertainment industry advocating draconian legislation like the DMCA, CBDTPA, and the Berman Bill. Yikes...
"Receiving stolen merchandise" and trade secrets are not reconcilable.
Specifically, trade secrets aren't stolen property, if they are disclosed, they are merely disclosed.
One only obtains intellecutal property protection under the law as a result of self-disclosure of what would, otherwise, be trade secrets. The protection is given in exchange for the disclosure, to ensure, like the secret of making red glass from raw materials, the information is not lost: i.e., to propmote progress in the sciences and useful arts.
The industrial espionage act under which he is charged was not intended to target individuals who were disclosing in order to disclose (e.g. disgruntled ex-employees), but was in fact intended to be brought to bear against people who obtained their positions *in order to* disclose for some other comapnies economic benefit.
Even so, such a law is arguably un-Constitional, on the basis that Trade Secrets are not permitted any Constitutional protection, unless they are disclosed in the form of a Patent.
Therefore, Trade Secrets are not "merchandise", per se.
Remember that the supposed Trade Secrets of AT&T were in fact the bsis of the AT&T/USL lawsuit against BSDI, and, later, BSDI, and the follow-on Cease and Desist letters USL sent to the 386BSD, FreeBSD, and NetBSD projects (this was prior to the 1996 Act), and those lawsuits came to nothing, and no "Receiving Stolen Merchandise" charges were ever files against DEC, Apple, IBM, Cisco, etc., who had taken and used the Net/2 sources in the commercial products that form the basis of today's Internet.
-- Terry
Such a broadening of trade secret "protection" will eliminate the need for patents
Oh really? Nowadays, United States patents are primarily used not to obtain a monopoly on an invention in exchange for public disclosure but rather to obtain a monopoly on an invention that is obvious to anybody who looks at the product. Just look at Amazon's "one click shopping" patent on sending billing and shipping information along with a request to buy. It's so simple and obvious given the product's outward appearance that anybody could hack up a clone.
And look at some of the other bad patents found by the League for Programming Freedom: drawing and undrawing an image with XOR, topologically sorting statements in a spreadsheet program, and other things that any competent software engineer could have come up with after looking at the problem for ten minutes.
Large corporations in the United States use patents to 1. stop copying, and 2. stop independent invention. The disclosure of the contents of a patent is almost redundant in 2003.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Here's why this may be about your rights...
This is about the disclosure of a trade secret by an employee of an employee of a company being prosecuted as if it were an act of industrial espionage by a person employed by a foreign power in order to harm the U.S. industrial base relative to foreign competition.
There are several problems here:
1) We don't know if he had legal access to these documents, prior to the disclosure, in the course of his normal work responsibilities, as assigned by his employer.
2) We don't know if he's the original discloser, or if, assuming he did *not* have legitimate access, the original discloser was someone who left a CDROM sitting in the lunch room, instead of maintaining physical control over the information, as required by due dilligence... making them the discloser.
3) Trade Secrets have no constitutional protection. This is on purpose. To obtain constitutional protection, you have to file a patent, and agree to lose that protection after the patent expires. The lack of protection is intentional, to encourage disclosure.
If he went out of his way to steal the documents, that's one thing. If it's simple disclosure, however. which seems likely, then the amount of recourse is (intentionally) limited to damages to the company, recoverable from him personally.
In any case, now that the information is disclosed, it's disclosed: it's in the public domain. The company has the right (in the U.S.) to file patent, up to a year following first public disclosure. Foreign patents, except for Japan, are now impossible -- if they weren't imposssible as software patents everywhere else (except Japan, again), anyway.
Personally, I doubt he had to violate the law to obtain the information, and I doubt that he profitted from the disclosure, and I doubt foreign companies will profit from the disclosure. So this is a likely an attempt to bludgeon him for the disclosure, using an inappropriate law.
On the other hand, it's likely that no one will hire him for an NDA position, ever again, even if he didn't violate NDA through the disclosure (by being a person who picked up a CDROM that was not dilligently stored or protected by someone else). That's as it should be.
In any case...
The reason that makes this about your rights, is that Trade Secrets are not Constitutionally entitled to the level of preotection that is being attempted to be enforced in this case.
We should be wary of any attempts to increase legal protections for Trade Secrets, without some benefit to society, in trade (and that's what Patents and Copyrights are intended to do). Permitting a company to obtain (in effect) patent protection without the disclosure required for patent protection is simply wrong.
-- Terry
This from the New York Times: "The card is designed so that even if you know everything about it, you still can't hack it," said Marc Zwillinger, the lead lawyer for DirecTV's anti-piracy efforts.
Am I mistaken, or isn't that a little like saying "I Tripple dog dare you"? Can the DirectTV people seriously believe that this is possible? And furthermore, who's more foolish, the guy for stealing info that is irrelevant (whether it truly is unhackable, or it is hackable and thus would be hacked anyway), or the company for believing that they have done anything but get a whole bunch of new people working on the DirectTV hacking project. Or maybe it's slashdot... YRO? Give me a break, the last thing we need to do is turn people who are blatant criminals into populist heroes. If I rob a music store at gunpoint and get sent away on an armed robbery charge, are my rights on line being infringed upon by the evil machinations of the RIAA?
Associating something like this with YRO makes those who fight the good fight look bad. Don't think you can elevate this blatant theft into some grand crusade, all you can do is make the crusaders look like thugs.
I'm sorry, but did you pay to send that satellite in to space? Did you pay for its technology or sustain any personal loss because someone else put it there? Do you donate to programs that are trying to compete by putting their own satellite in to space for public domain?
Money makes the world go round. (and satellites)
this is my sig, there are many like it, but this one is mine.
The technology to develop satellites and launchers comes from and is heavily subsidized by the "defense" industry. Everyone who pays taxes in the USA is paying for those satellites.
I did indeed get it wrong. Backwards in fact.
Honre Le Blanc gets credit for the *idea* of standarized parts, although the concept was one of those things that was "in the air" at the time. When Jefferson was in France he met Le Blanc and was taken with the idea. He brought the idea back to America and ended up being the driving force in getting Whitney his contract.
Whitney made *standardized* parts, but they weren't truely interchangable. The manufacturing process at the time wasn't sufficiently precise to make the parts truely interchangeable. That is, they still required hand filing and fitting.
Colt was the first to refine the *manufacturing* process to a level that actually let you take any part off the shelf and simply install it in a new gun with no hand fitting required and it was this concept I had in mind when attributing credit to Colt.
KFG
Posting credit cards in a wallet you've found is not the same thing as posting trade secrets that you've found.
... nothing.
The reason for this is that trade secrets are not protected by law, but credit cards, which are non-bearer financial instruments, are. Using a credit card that does not belong to you is fraud. Providing the credit card to someone else to use is being an acessory before the fact to a fraud. Using a disclosed trade secret is
Consider a classic trade secret.
You are a trucker for a company. That company issues to all its truckers, under non-disclosure, a map of 50 short-cuts. This is a business advantage for the company issuing the list.
Now your cousing from out of town is going to come visit you. He tells you the route he's going to take. You say "Oh, turn left on Cottle Road, instead of going straight, and you will save 40 minutes!".
Now this Trade Secret has been disclosed.
Enough employess share similar information with their own relatives, and all 50 shortcuts become public knowledge. The highway commission periodically measures traffic flow, and repaves all these shortcuts into two-lane routes, to accomodate increased traffic, and this, itself, encourages more people to use it. The entiretly of the trade secret is lost to cometing trucking companies, with no action on the part of those companies.
So... is everyone who turns left on Cottle Road guilty of "receiving stolen property"? Or is it just truckers who turn left? What about truckers who *live* on Cottle Road... are they allowed to turn left to go home?
Trade Secrets maintain value only because of their secrecy. You can't hold the recipient of a disclosure responsible for receiving the disclosure, since at the moment of disclosure, the information is no longer secret -- and therefore no longer a Trade Secret.
The law provides *some* remedy; specifically, it permits collection of estimated damages from the disclosers themselves -- based on a breach of contract, not based on any legal protection for the Trade Secret itself, as a matter of law and public policy.
In point of fact, the law encourages disclosure, as a matter of public policy, and provides legal protections, in the form of copyrights and patents, in trade for such disclosure, in order to encourage it.
Attempts to extend equivalent legal protection to Trade Secrets is *wrong*, as a matter of public policy.
-- Terry
They're just quoting a movie, "Office Space".
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
[Possession of small amounts of drugs] is not a crime; it may be illegal, but it shouldn't be, and as far as I'm concerned there's nothing criminal about it.
If a fellow can go to jail for committing an act, then by definition, the act is a crime. The "illegal but not criminal" acts are those acts that can get a fellow sued in civil court but can't put him behind bars, such as patent infringement and trademark infringement.
you have no right to perform something created by another without the permission of the creator.
Do you have the right to perform "The Lord's Prayer", first published by Jesus of Nazareth in the first century A.D.?
Do you have the right to perform works created by J. S. Bach?
There does exist a public domain. My question as to the criminality of performing a 1925 work was a crime was an attack directed at the questionably-constitutional Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act.
But do jaywalking, possession of small amounts of drugs that the pharma companies are probably paying the FDA to ban, and infringing questionably-valid copyrights, even though they are crimes, merit a death penalty? I don't think so. I believe that giving the death penalty or even life imprisonment to a mere jaywalker constitutes cruel and unusual punishment as defined by the Bill of Rights. Of course, the RIAA and the MPAA would love to lock up copyright infringers until the copyrights expire, but that's not how the United States judicial system works.
Will I retire or break 10K?