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."

Comments

Most worrying bit::

[rhs98]

Most worrying bit: "If Johansen's acquittal is over-turned on appeal, it will become illegal for Norwegians to bypass DVD region code restrictions or technical restrictions that prevent fast-forwarding over advertisements, or otherwise circumvent digital controls on their own property," said IP Justice Executive Director Robin Gross.

This is really not good for peoples civil liberties at all - it sucks! This will mean lots of people will get sued potenially.

Re:Most worrying bit::

[zerocool^]

Yeah, whether people want to acknowledge it or not, the larger issue for the Norwegian people is:

If you purchase something, and you own it, can the company who created it, but who no longer owns it, put restrictions on the manner in which it can be used?

For my most chafing U.S. example, it is illegal to copy and distribute a movie. But, legally, do you *have* to watch the FBI warning at the beginning of the movie?
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.

~Wx

Re:Most worrying bit::

[The One KEA]

Oh my $DEITY..... they're trying to make fast-forwarding past advertisements illegal?!?

I hope someone with a brain throws this out the moment it reaches that point. This whole thing is a crock -- it's being done only to suppress fair use rights and the like. It's just like the SCO suit -- they're trying to geta nice big wave of FUD going, and I'm sure that they know it.

What's next -- a SCO-style marathon of going after blue-haired grannies who want to watch DVDs on their Linux-based PVR system set up by their loving children?

Re:Most worrying bit::

[kaworu-sama]

By simply playing a DVD in a no-region player, aren't you bypassing that? Couldn't people who use those players be sued as well as the people who made them? One could even use PowerDVD and chance the region code on their computer DVD player to "bypass", in a way, region checking. Why not sue Cyberlink?

Re:Most worrying bit::

[Zocalo]

I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately in a move that I can only class as idiocy he's just released details on breaking Apple's iTunes admittedly rather weak DRM system. It's almost a given that the defense lawyers that were doing the high-fives as they realised they could use this a proof of Johansen's blatant disregard for copyright. I mean, seriously, would it *really* have hurt to have waited another couple of weeks to see how things went in the retrial?

I wish him luck in the trial, and boy do I think he's going to need it now.

Re-trial is common when a precedent is being set

[Space cowboy]

According to the article, when a precedent is being set, it is common for an appeal to succeed, and this is what has happened. Actually (despite hoping Jon will prevail) I think this is a pretty good idea - a second look at something with big ramifications is probably a good thing under any circumstances...

Simon

It's Norweigan Law

[harriet nyborg]

The charges OKOKRIM filed against Johansen were brought under the Norwegian criminal code section 145.2, which outlaws bypassing technological restrictions to access data that one is not entitled to access. Johansen's prosecution is the first time that this law has been used to prosecute a person for accessing his own property.

this is misleading.

according to the complaint filed against him he was charged with vilolating section 145.2 of the Norweigan criminal statute "which outlaws bypassing technological restrictions to access data that one is not entitled to access."

according to the criminal complaint he was charged with accessing the master key, the master key list, as well as the contents of a protected disk.

the question is whether the master key, and the master key list, which are intentionally encrypted, can be considered as data he is not "entitled to access."

to say he is being prosecuted for "accessing his own property" is simply shrill hyperbole.

despite the confidence expressed by his lawyer, his case is not so clear cut.

Jon is now 18 years old

[teamhasnoi]

apart from the fact he's done more to shape IP laws, copy protection, open source software and linux - he's had to deal with this BS since he was *15*.

I was still sitting on legos and eating giant bowls of Sugar Crisp in front of the Smurfs when I was 15.

When will we see the takedown of fair use in this country?

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?

Accessing data to which he was not entitled

[Anonymous Coward]

"The charges OKOKRIM filed against Johansen were brought under the Norwegian criminal code section 145.2, which outlaws bypassing technological restrictions to access data that one is not entitled to access."

So it should boil down to whether people are entitled to access data on DVDs for which they paid fair and square. Why do we pay $25/DVD if it isn't for the right to access the data on them?

Re:What is this about ?

[Frymaster]

Why should it be that a prosecutor could not appeal?

• because the resources of money and time of a government are "unlimited" while those of a defendent are finite. the government can always win by attrition.
• because we believe in a system where a person can be held in jail or on bond pending a trial. defendendants could be held perpetually in remand for a petty crime of which s/he is never convicted.
• the government could use points one and two above to coerce guilty pleas from innocent parties
• once exonerated of a crime, citizens should have the ability to move on with their life without fear of a second jeaopordy.

sound like good reasons to me.

Re:Ok, that really sucks

[AKAImBatman]

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!

In theory, yes that could happen. In reality, the DA would simply try to nail you on some bullshit charge that can carry a hefty penalty. e.g. Al Capone was nailed on tax evasion after the various agencies were continually unable to prove his involvement in serious crimes.

Re:What is this about ?

[st0rmshad0w]

Don't forget that he won his country's top science award for DeCSS.

Prosecutor doesn't know algorithms

[rRogta]

Here's from a norwegian newspaper:

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article. jh tml?articleID=682755

If you scroll a little down you'll find:

According to newspaper VG's web site, the
technical nature of the case led to judge Wenche
Skjaeggestad asking the prosecutor to explain the
meaning of the central term 'algorithm' (a
computational procedure applied to solve a
problem), a request eventually satisfied by one
of the expert assessors.

Now, who could expect the prosecutor to actually understand what it is he's beeing charged of? That would just be silly..

Re:Prosecutor doesn't know algorithms

[isfuglen]

This is a "save face" case for the prosecutor more than anything else. She was badly shamed during the first trial, having lost the way she did. I sat during part of the trial last year. I think everyone finally started understanding things, especially the technical matters. Except the prosecutor.

Re:Love that US Constitution!!

[squiggleslash]

nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb

Hmmm. Interesting. A literal reading of the above would suggest that the constitution only forbids double-jeopardy for capital offenses (or offenses where amputation is a punishment, currently not used in the US, not even Texas.)

Re:What is this about ?

[Bromrrrrr]

That's the second time you said that! Now come up with some examples of the worst government abuses by far in the developed world or apologize to everyone present.

I'd say watergate , Iran / contra not to mention quantanamo are pretty bad casses of government abuse myself, but then that's probably because I'm not as free as Americans and I've probably been indoctrinated by my evil government to think that.

Keep tossing until something sticks

[nurb432]

Really sad to see that a person can be tried, then retried again and again until the charges stick.

I'm glad I live in the USA where that cant happen.. um errr unless enough evidence is found to reopen the case.. or its for 'national security reasons' or or or...

Re:Love that US Constitution!!

[egriebel]

Yes, but the US appeal system effectively lets one party haul the other into court hundreds [of times] ... The system in Norway lets you haul your opponent into court TWICE.

This is (unfortunately) true in Civil matters only between two parties (e.g. lawsuit), where the damages are only monetary, not incarceration. Multiple motions and appeals occur in criminal cases if the defendant is found guilty. Once the defendant is acquitted (innocent) of the charges, the appeals etc. cease.

Re:Ok, that really sucks

[soft_guy]

OK, then why were the cops who were found not guilty of beating Rodney King retried and sent to prison after the LA riots?

The really bad principle in this

[panurge]

is the idea that individuals can be repeatedly prosecuted in order to "clarify the law". If a law was so badly designed or so obscurely drafted, or if the education of state prosecutors and judges is so neglected, that a valid prosecution fails, it should be up to the representative government to redraft the law or address the training of law officers.

Anybody who has been engaged in a long drawn out legal case with many hearings knows that it is one of the worst things that can happen to anybody, and even if one is eventually successful it may take years to recover. What is happening in Guantanamo Bay is deplorable, but surely what is happening in this case is deplorable on a smaller scale. To me, both cases are like prosecuting a small scale cannabis seller because the guy running the big operation selling crack is too powerful and the police badly need a drugs bust for the statistics.