Slashdot Mirror
DeCSS: Jon Johansen Retrial Begins
JPMH writes "Jon Johansen is back on trial for DeCSS. Despite the acquittal back in January, the Norwegian Economic Crime Unit (OKOKRIM) is allowed to bring his case back before an enlarged panel of judges. The retrial begins today."
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
In other words, nobody is hurt, financially, by me using Linux and DeCSS instead of Windows and WinDVD. I've paid all my licenses, including my Microsoft tax (actually, I got a free license from a site-license, but somebody paid it, which is really all that matters).
I'm thinking you were trolling, but I wanted to bring this up anyway.
Losely, it's "Oko" for 'eco' (economical) and "krim" for 'crime'.
I think. I'm not Norsk.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Norway has a two-phase court system.
If either party disagree with the verdict at the lower court they can appeal and get a new trial with more judges (and depending on the type of crime, either a jury or a panel of judges)
With the risk of spoiling a joke:
OKOKRIM sound to me like a abbreviation of "Okonomisk Kriminalitet" (the first letter should be an "Oslash") which lead me to suspect that it is the prosecutor for economic criminality.
Just because someone faces trial a second time does not automatically warrant a "double jeapordy" scream.
This is Norway we're talking about, where there is no US Constitution preventing double jeapordy.
The parent post is nothing but troll-bait.
Not to feed the troll, but according to this, Norway has a per capita GDP of $31,800, a Gini index of .26, and $68 billion in exports vs. $37 billion in imports. Not too shabby for a bunch of fjord-huggers -- and they're Gini index sure kicks the US's ass (we're at something like .43)
All's true that is mistrusted
It's an appeal.
The fact that you don't know that you can appeal a decision in most civilized countries reflects badly on your educational system.
Retrial is if e.g. the trial is decleared a "mistrial", or in the case of Norway, normally only if the Supreme Court finds that the lower court were waaay off (normally, they'd correct a sentence themselves, a retrial is basicly only if it'd take up too much of the court's time to do it all over again).
:p
Also, for the people I see making fun of the name, it's really Økokrim, Øko = eco- of economics, and krim of crime... It's just not fucking possible to get slashdot to show HTML character codes
Anyway, I hope they appeal it all the way to the top and fail with flying colors... too bad, that by then the EUCD will probably already be in effect, making the precedent outdated...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Appeals are still double-jeopardy. In the U.S., the prosecution cannot appeal an innocent verdict, while the defense can appeal a guilty verdict as long as they can show sufficient grounds. This is to protect citizens against the possibility of being harassed until they go bankrupt or are found guilty.
This appeal is a perfect reason why "no double-jeopardy" laws exist.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
You cannot appeal an innocent verdict in the U.S. Such an appeal would be considered...
wait for it....
DOUBLE-JEOPARDY
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Good for you, but Linux wasn't the first things on the minds of Johansen and his warez buddies. They had a GUI Ripper out for Windows before the code was even running on Linux.
Also, Johansen didn't really "crack" CSS, he only found a private key that some vendor had stupidly included in their software. All modern ripping software uses a real crack that was developed at MIT, I think. DVD CSS would have broken soon or later without Johansen - it was known to be a weak implementation even in hollywood.
There is no reason to prevent the government from retrying their case once or twice. In Norway the limit is three times. First the Tingretten (lower court), then Lagmannsretten (sort of jury-based, depends .. it may either be a jury, or a combination of judges, some jurors, and some people educated in the field), and finally Hoyesterett (Supreme court). Both the government and the prosecuted may choose to appeal for any reason.
The government may appeal if they lose, or if they don't think the punishment is harsh enough.
Furthermore, if I remember correctly, Hoyesterett may reschedule the case back into Lagmannsretten if it thinks it should be a retrial there, instead of them making a decision. I'm not sure, but I don't think that happens often, unless there is doubt about presented evidence or somesuch. Not sure, really.
In theory, due to your double jeopardy laws, if the accused is guilty and aquitted - he may walk out of the courtroom and then tell the press "They released me, but really - I did do it! Ha! Ha!"
Actually most civilized countries, regardless of your definition, does NOT have protection against appeals to a higher court, only against retrial. You have the concept of double jeopardy in Norway as well, but applied to retrials not appeals, as it is throughout most of Europe, and in fact in most countries with a legal system not originating in from English common law.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
to say he is being prosecuted for "accessing his own property" is simply shrill hyperbole
Shrill hyperbole empathically supported by the previous court, in that case, if you read the deliberation on the aquittal.
sudo ergo sum
These court cases should illustrate to Mr. Johansen and rest of us:
If you're going to crack open the schemes of the corporate overlords, do so anonymously.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Since the Norwegian legal system only has three levels, and appeals will only rarely be heard by the supreme court (the third level) and then normally only regarding matters of law, the burden isn't that great.
Add to that that Norway has a public defender system where private practising attorneys take on cases at the governments cost if you can't afford an attorney (as opposed to having dedicated, underpaid public defenders), AND that it is fairly easy to get awarded damages if you are aquitted and the court finds that the government prosecuted you without good reason, and you have a reasonable compromise.
As an example regarding the public defender system, I was refusing military service (which is mandatory in Norway) years ago. The first step then is for them to get the police to take a statement and ask you to confirm whether or not you will accept the decision from the Department of Justice regarding whether or not to transfer you to civil service. I refused.
The next step then is to ask the court to confirm the decision of the Department of Justice. In that case, I was given a partner in one of Norways most well known and prestigious law firms, with 30 years experience in defending people refusing military service, as my public defender, cost free. (I didn't really need him though - I got the court to throw the case out on a formality on my own accord, but he was a cool guy to talk to anyway :) )
Nononnononono, it's not the Norwegian Supreme Court here (Hoyesterett). State court maybe. The legal systems are set up quite differently.
When life hands you lemons, grab the salt and pass the tequilla...
wrong
You can appeal any verdict in the US. You need to have a reason to appeal though, such as a potential mis-trial, tampered evidence, new evidence, etc. If there are no anomolies or grounds for retrial, the appeal is denied.
Larry Flint was found innocent and the prosecution appealed to the supreme court, which upheld the decision.
Know the laws before quoting them.
-Ab
Nothing fails quite like prayer.
OT Question: Don't the major linux players (IBM, RedHat, um.. Dell ect.) distribute some sort of linux DeCSS DVD player? Why are they not being hunted down and sued by the MPAA?
Nope... every linux distro I've used (Redhat, Mandrake, Debian, SuSE) has not included dvd playback. Often they'll include a video player like xine, which has support for dvd playback, among other things, and the dvd codecs will not be included. You can find them pretty easily if you look but they aren't released by any of the major linux players and usually have to be found on sites outside of the US.
Yes, the prosecution can appeal a decision in the Norwegian court system. Note that this isn't a new trial, it's an appeals process. But I think we and the USA has a completely different understanding of how the justice system should work, and why double jeopardy should/shouldn't exist. I'll try to explain:
In the American system, it's all about finding the one trial that'll get them acquitted, be it that the jury that is so biased, incompetent, stupid, subjective, easily influenced, prejudicial, scared of sending innocents to jail or otherwise inept that they can't manage to find a man guilty even when the evidence should have been sufficient. Or through lack of experience on part of the judge and the prosecution, making the legal proceedings be of an inadequate quality.
I guess the reasoning is that if one jury is able to see reasonable doubt, there is reasonable doubt. In theory, it sounds like sound legal thinking. However, I can think of so many other reasons why one specific jury may find reasonable doubt where there is none. In the US, that seems to be acceptable, but I think most other places it'd be seen as a flaw, if the evidence was in fact sufficient (another matter altogether if the evidence is insufficient, both of us use "innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt").
In Norway, and I might add in quite a few other countries, we instead realize that trials are not perfect, and that judgements may be too excessive. This can go both in favor as well as disfavor of the defendant, and in extremes leading to aquitting those that by the evidence should have been guilty, and also in some cases sentencing the innocent. In particular, I'm thinking about sentences that get overturned in a higher court, though technically you're not sentenced until the judgement is final.
Instead, we base our legal system on competence. A higher court, with more/better educated judges, a full jury, is considered to be more competent, and so a more accurate instrument of justice than a lower one. That is, that a higher court will make less incorrect decisions, putting more guilty in jail, and freeing more innocents.
Now ask yourself this: If you were checking if a product was inside a specification, would you use one fairly accurate measurement, or many less accurate ones and reject it if one is outside the acceptable limits? I think the Norwegian system works great, it's just that some laws are completely nutty and sentences are overall too low. But that's a completely different discussion...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
"If you ask me, there should be no point in a DVD at which you cannot skip ahead, fast forward, or hit menu to get out of the current section of the disc."
David Lynch setup the DVD version of Mulholland Drive almost exactly like this. You could fastworward it in "seek" mode, but hardly any other mode. It didn't have any chapters to skip to and from.
IIRC, he disapproves of the chaptering system as he wants the audience to see the film as a whole and not be able to skip around... I haven't seen his other movies on DVD format, but I've heard that he did this with many other movies as well.
But, legally, do you *have* to watch the FBI warning at the beginning of the movie?
No, you don't, legally. My fiancee has a bonestock DVD player purchased in the US (Philips I think?) that will let you fast forward over anything (FBI warning, ads...).
Hmmm, those words granting limited power to the federal government and further protecting against state government excesses may be ignored when dealing with non-citizens or U.S. citizens abroad.
I think his point was that, currently, you cannot hit menu (on licensed players) or fast forward during certain parts of the DVD, like the FBI warning scene. This is an example of the issue at stake (sellers of DVDs being able to dictate the way they may be viewed). It's not the most important one, since those scenes at the beginning last a few seconds, but if (once) ads make it into DVDs, it will become more important.
If you cannot break the encryption to do view content in another manner, you will not be able to skip what they don't want you to skip.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
There is clearly a lot that is not pretty about the U.S. justice system, e.g. pleabargaining, Bush's suspension of Habeas Corpus in Guantanamo (although I doubt the Supreme Court will stand for it), sometimes incompetent public defenders, racist juries,... I could go on and on. However, the protection against double jeopardy is one of the good things. People keep including the sentence from the 5th amendment and doing their own legal interpretations of it. Just so everyone is on the same page, in the opinion of the Supreme Court: '[T]he Double Jeopardy Clause protects against three distinct abuses: [1] a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; [2] a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and [3] multiple punishments for the same offense.' U.S. v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 440 (1989). There was a case recently in Thailand where a Dutchman was aquitted of a drug offense, then kept in prison for 5 years and then given a life sentence on appeal. That strikes me a manifestly unjust. It flabbergasts me that this is acceptable practice anywhere.
"The problem is that you DON'T OWN IT."
Yes you do.
"The content creator is licensing it to you."
No they dont.
This is the first sale doctrine. Ownership of a copy is not the same thing as copyright. You own a copy and may dispose and/or do whatever you want with it, unless it is specifically limited by copyright law. You can watch it, sell it, give it away, lend it to someone else, do weird ceremonies over it or destroy it. What you cant do is pretty much copy it or rent it out.
Much as I'm sure Disney and co would love to get there eventually, we're not there yet.
and being pro open source would make him a good guy? we all "know" that *nix is the os of choice for crackers (or any other power user for that matter)...
from what i recall on the news from back then (and yes inm from norway) he got some machines grabbed by the polices and atleast one of them where running linux. as for writeing or not writeing it: he wrote the gui, before that it was just a lib. without a ui a lib is worthless.
as for how it got out, i dont care. the fact is that it happend. and i dont belive he claimed to have cracked the CCS on his own, that was media that claimed (around here they cant tell a irc client from a P2P program anyways)...
allso, he just made a "hammer", its how its used that defines the legality in my book.
hell he isnt even being tried on copyright violations, he is tried on a law that at first was made to handle someone else reading your mail and got expanded to cover satelite encodeing systems (of all things)...
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
I think you are wrong about that being a very bad thing for the trial though:
1. There is no jury consisting of 12 drawn people that would swallow the "Johansen has a blatant disregard for copyright" line. In this case there are seven persons; three "academic" judges, two experts (one from academica and one from business) and two other judges.
The actor can bitch as much as she wants about moral, personality and "hurting business" but they will to a large degree ignore that.
2. A trial like this in Norway is much more focused about technicalities, evidence and motive that moral and personality.
3. If the actor draggs in the iTunes case that might backfire as a sign of lack of evidence or unrelevant material.
Some newspaper mentioned that Okokrim really don't have any new evidence. They are running more witnesses this time. One of them is a gentleman from your beloved MPAA. I don't think it will work. Getting him to mourn about their "economic loss" because of DeCSS and linking that to DVD-Jon can become difficult.
I'm fairly confident that Okokrim will loose this case.
Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.
That was technically a different charge of "violating Rodney King's civil rights." It's bullshit--anyone could see they were being retried for the same offense, but since there seemed to be an interest in keeping the teeming underclasses from burning the rest of LA, it stood. I'm sure the same would happen again if someone managed to offend a sufficiently well-connected corporation. There's more than 1 intellectual "property" law, after all.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
There are ads on DVDs right now. Buy or rent a Disney DVD and you'll see tons of them - and you can't (easily) skip them either. This technique is also used to show standard commercials - I've seen lots of them in rentals.