Slashdot Mirror
Are Programmers Responsible For the Actions of Their Clients?
Bobfrankly1 writes "Robert Stuart and his company Extensions Software are being charged by New York authorities, claiming he is promoting gambling in New York because of the actions of his clients. They are charging him after he rejected a plea agreement that would have him plead guilty to lesser charges, adding backdoors to his software, and using said backdoors to gather details on his clients and their customers." Another article on the case at Salon.
There's no need to elaborate, is there? The analogies you conjur up in your mind are sufficient to tell you just how stupid an idea this is.
Are plumbers responsible for the actions of their clients?
No. This is just as bullshit.
IMHO it all depends if the programmer knows that the client will use said feature/software for illicit activity. If the programmer doesn't know them he`s not to blame. Otherwise he is a partner and should be prosecuted as so, specially if the feature in question has the only possible purpose of illegal action.
This combination doesn`t exist: ETIs that know about humanity and want to see us dead. Otherwise we wouldn't exist.
Just their motions
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
This particular excerpt just helps to show how out of control things have gotten:
The case began in February 2011, when Stuart says he and his wife got the Kim Dotcom treatment after about 30 local Arizona law enforcement agents wearing SWAT gear and camouflage dress — some of them with bushes attached to their shoulders to blend into the woods around his house — descended on his home and threatened to send him and his wife to prison for 35 years if he didn’t cooperate.
The search warrant used in the raid said Stuart and his wife were engaged in money laundering, operating an illegal enterprise and engaging in the promotion of gambling. Stuart has tried to obtain a copy of the affidavit used to get the search warrant, but it’s currently sealed.
Why yes of course, 30 Arizona SWAT agents to take down a husband and wife accused of online crimes in New York. Sounds about right. At the very least, SWAT got the right address and didn't shoot anybody's dog.
Seems that the DAs office in NYC should be busy issuing Arrest Warrants for manufacturers of Guns, Knives, Automobiles, Hammers, Crowbars and Household Cleaning Products.
Ahh fuck it -- just arrest anyone who has ever made anything.
We can't be too sure.
I'm sure Duct Tape has been used in many abductions and murders.
And arrest everyone at Google too -- how many murder suspects have been found to have used their site to help them commit their crimes?
Gun manufacturers held responsible for how their clients use their guns.
The liberals up there in New York know this is a perfect test case to get all those Religious Right Republican biddys nodding their head yes along with them up until the time it's too late to say "wait! no!"
The real issue here is: Should software makers backdoor their programs for cops?
Stuart showed Wired a plea agreement signed by former Manhattan Assistant District Attorney James Meadows, which stated that he would plead guilty to second- and fourth-degree money laundering charges and assist the DA's investigations by, among other things, "aiding in the design of software used to obtain records, usernames, passwords, and other information stored on websites using" his company's software.
Illegal. Any evidence acquired by that software would not be usable in court.
Are gun makers responsible for how their guns are used? :)
just wait until we have the first fatalities with civilian UAVs or autonomous cars without permanent supervision. The weasels in management and politicians craving recognition will point all the way down to the poor soul who failed to write perfect code in too little time. This discussion is similar to the one about who is responsible for shootings - shooter or gun manufacturer. Only that at some point there will not be an identifiable person holding the gun, and still people get killed.
You know it's time for the next revolution when your rulers' names end with roman numerals.
They are if they sell them to north korea or Iran.
Asinine shit like this is why we need to maintain our right to trial by jury. If you're ever called to serve on a jury, please remember that when you do so, you are directly exercising the people's sovereign power to determine a just verdict of the case before you. A jury has the right to return a not guilty verdict if they so choose, even though the prosecutor and the judge will lie to you and tell you otherwise. Remember, you OUTRANK the entire government when you're a jury.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Your strawman doesn't represent GP's logic because GP said that the programmer should be held responsible if he "knows that the client will use said feature/software for illicit activity." That's different than knowing that the software could be used for illegal activity, even for something so widely used that that knowledge also implies knowledge to a statistical certainty that some user, somewhere will eventually end up using for criminal activity.
And, frankly, it is pretty much the standard that, decades ago, when I worked in retail (at Radio Shack) we were trained to apply: if a customer told us something that made us believe they were going to use the product they were seeking to purchase for criminal activity, we shouldn't sell it to them, otherwise the we (the company and potentially the sales person) could be held culpable.
There's the case where a purchaser goes on to use a product illegally and the seller is innocent, and then there is a case where a criminal purpose known to both the seller and purchaser is the whole point of the sale. Obviously, the seller, when charged, has a vested interest in portraying the latter case as if it was the former; there's a reason we have trials with evidence rather than just deciding criminal cases based on public statements by either the prosecutor or the defendant.
Are car designers responsible for drunk drivers?
"Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
The actual charge (rather than Stuart's characterization of it) is that Stuart and his employees "knowingly advanced and profited from unlawful gambling activity by engaging in bookmaking to the extent that they received and accepted in any one day more than five bets totaling more than five thousand dollars."
Not that they provided software which the purchaser of the software used (with or without their knowledge) to accept bets, but that Stuart and his employees actually received and accepted bets.
If Stuart is to be convicted, they will need to prove that charge to a jury.
I think the plea bargain agreement(http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/12/Robert-Stuart_Plea-Agreement.pdf) should land Manhattan Assistant District Attorney James Meadows in Federal Jail.
He is asking the software vendor to commit theft on a large scale.
I'm not sure of the exact change, something like conspiracy to commit grand theft.
The ballot box comes first and we're still on that stage. Congress currently reflects the values of the American people. We are legitimately divided and thus so is Congress. This is exactly as things should be. Our problems will be solved by the grind of elections.
The ballot box comes first and we're still on that stage.
I'm not sure that's the wisest course. If a bully slaps you, do you slap him back? No, you hit him with a baseball bat! Didn't you guys learn anything from the Cold War?!? You don't negotiate with bullies, FFS!
Too bad your govt. has turned into a bully. Whattya gonna do about it, huh?
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I get that, but think about it for a minute. It basically means that everything the government can't tax, can be forbidden. Not because it is something evil --- just because they can't tax it. Maybe instead of worrying about the ability of the government to get a cut of every damn thing in the world, we should worry about human integrity, the notion that people should be able to live their lives in ways they see fit. And sometimes, the government won't be able to tax that, and it should be OK anyway.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good