From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Thu Nov 1 07:23:13 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] ÁËÃÉÑ × íÏÓË×Å: 26 ÎÏÑÂÒÑ References: <163156685.20011031104220@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <004801c162e9$230ab1d0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, All! ?????????, ??? 26 ?????? ? ?????? ?? ???????? ????? ? ?????? ??????? ????????. ??????? ?????????? ????? ?? ???? ???????????. ??? ?? ?????????? ?????? ???? ???? ???????? -- ??????????????. ??? ??? ??????? ?? ????????? ? ?????????? -- ?????????. ?? ???? ??? ? ???? ?????????? ????? ????????? ??????? ????????? ?? EFF. ;-) ?????? ???????/??????? ??? ??? ???????, ? ??? ????????? ?????????? ? ???? ??????? ????? ???????? ? ????????????. ??????????? ?????????????? ? ????????, ????? 26 ?????? ????????? ?? ? ????????, ? ??????????. ?? ? ? ???????? ???? ?????????. ;-) ????????? ???????! ????? DMCA! - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Nov 2 03:09:01 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Movie industry dealt DVD-cracking blow Message-ID: <914865118.20011102140901@elcomsoft.com> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com November 1, 2001, 5:05 p.m. PT update: A California court has dealt a potentially serious setback to the movie industry's attempt to rid the online world of software that can help break through copy protections on DVDs. The appeals court released a decision Thursday overturning an earlier order that barred hundreds of people from publishing the code for a software program called "DeCSS" online. Posting the code is just like publishing other types of controversial speech and is protected by the constitution, the appellate judges said. "Although the social value of DeCSS may be questionable, it is nonetheless pure speech," the decision reads. "Our respect for the legislature and its enactment of the (trade secrets law) cannot displace our duty to safeguard the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment." The decision, while not a final one on the legality of the software program, nevertheless marks a severe blow for the movie industry's legal battle against online threats. Hollywood studios have contended that software that can break through their anti-piracy techniques is simply a tool and does not warrant free-speech protections. A federal judge has agreed with much of that reasoning. The California appeals court's ruling Thursday goes the furthest to date in explicitly defining software code as speech. Under that legal reasoning, programmers could still be prosecuted for posting illegal software but could not be prevented from doing so in the first place. The difference is important for both sides, particularly in software cases. If publishers can release something online, even if it might be deemed illegal later, it can take on a life of its own as it is read, copied, and distributed by others. If copyright holders could get a prior restraint on publication, the spread of a piece of software or information could more effectively be stopped. The DeCSS software, in several legal manifestations, has become a cause celebre among open-source programmers and much of the computer underground. Allegedly created by a 15-year-old Norwegian programmer named Jon Johansen, the DeCSS software was designed to let DVDs play on computers running the Linux operating system. But it wound up being a tool useful to those who want to copy movies stored on DVDs and distribute them online. The movie industry has sued to stop the spread of the software in several ways. A federal case is still going on, in which the industry argues that the code is explicitly designed to break through a copyright protection system and therefore illegal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. In that case, publisher Eric Corley has been blocked from posting the code online or linking to other sites that post the code. He's appealing that ruling, saying that the decision violates his free-speech rights. Prior to the federal case, the movie industry filed its suit in California against hundreds of people who had posted the code online. In this case, the DVD Copyright Control Association, an industry group aimed at fighting DVD piracy, claimed that Johansen and anyone who posted the code was illegally spreading trade secrets. The unusual argument states that Johansen reverse engineered the anti-piracy technology to create DeCSS. Although he didn't actually have access to trade secrets to steal, the reverse engineering was barred by a license agreement distributed along with software DVD players. The judges did not evaluate that argument Thursday, as they looked only at the issue of whether blocking the code's publication was appropriate. The court said that blocking publication would amount to "prior restraint." Judges typically see this as a legal no-no and have used the term to allow publication of instructions for building a nuclear weapons and to protect The New York Times' ability to print the Pentagon Papers documents on Vietnam. The movie industry's "statutory right to protect its economically valuable trade secret is not an interest that is 'more fundamental' than the First Amendment right to freedom of speech," the judges wrote. Nor is it "on equal footing with the national security interests and other vital governmental interests that have previously been found insufficient to justify a prior restraint." The Motion Picture Association of America declined comment on the ruling Thursday, saying that members had not yet had a chance to study the ruling. But the decision has re-energized online civil liberties activists. "I really think the court of appeals reinstituted the cyberliberties of individuals worldwide," said Allonn Levy, an HS Law Group attorney working for the defense. "We are a free society, and we are entitled to free speech." The California case is currently in the middle of a pretrial phase, with both parties seeking information from the other. From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Nov 2 03:42:57 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Movie industry dealt DVD-cracking blow In-Reply-To: <914865118.20011102140901@elcomsoft.com> References: <914865118.20011102140901@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <2916901352.20011102144257@elcomsoft.com> Hello, > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html More on that: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/22613.html I especially like some quotes. like: "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting CSS-encrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were compiled to create object code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones would not convey ideas. "That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of pure speech." And this, the court reminds us, is presumed unconstitutional unless proven otherwise, and of course the CCA offered no such proof: "Prior restraints on pure speech are highly disfavored and presumptively unconstitutional. (Hurvitz v. Hoefflin (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 1232, 1241.) 'In the case of a prior restraint on pure speech, the hurdle is substantially higher [than for an ordinary preliminary injunction]: publication must threaten an interest more fundamental than the First Amendment itself. Indeed, the [US] Supreme Court has never upheld a prior restraint, even faced with the competing interest of national security or the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial.'" From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Nov 2 03:52:59 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror Message-ID: <11017502660.20011102145259@elcomsoft.com> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer announced this week that Americans would not be given details about the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a first for a software development community that prides itself on transparency. An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the software. In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" to circumvent a copy protection scheme. Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've purchased. In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on constitutional grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to guess about security issues." America Boycotted But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry a political message. "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security fixes to your own code." Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's standard security features may be used for "rights management" of copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that reaches U.S. citizens." The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on a Web site that will block access from the U.S. Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology Clinic. "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't allowed to do," says Granick. From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 04:14:38 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: <11017502660.20011102145259@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first then he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If the second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something about the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox to step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His political agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the time for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he continues to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. The security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability as developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is apparently no longer the case. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladimir Katalov" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > first for a software development community that prides itself on > transparency. > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > software. > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > purchased. > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on constitutional grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to guess about security issues." > > America Boycotted > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > a political message. > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > fixes to your own code." > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > reaches U.S. citizens." > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > Clinic. > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Nov 2 06:46:45 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] From AAP Message-ID: <3727930334.20011102174645@elcomsoft.com> http://www.printmediamag.com/doc/273435466633516.bsp BT: What will it take for most traditional publishers to invest in e-books? When do you anticipate this happening? EM: Publishers want to know that copyright in the works they publish will be protected. Without sufficient technical and legal protections, digital copies of works are subject to unauthorized copying on a mass scale. AAP has been extremely supportive of the Justice Department's prosecution of Dmitry Sklyarov and ElcomSoft for producing and selling a program to hack through Adobe's e-book DRM protection. Without copyright protection, publishers could not pay their authors. Fewer quality works would be produced and readers would lose out. Many publishers are investing in e-books now, but I think you'll see a gradual growth in the number of available titles over the next several years. With Washington actively enforcing the DMCA, publishers have a stronger incentive to put their content into e-book formats. The Open eBook Forum (OeBF), a large standards body and trade association for the e-book industry, houses a working group dedicated to producing standards for the interoperability of DRM systems. Finally, hardware, software and presentation will constantly improve to make e-books more attractive options. From ascott at tathata.org Fri Nov 2 05:50:43 2001 From: ascott at tathata.org (ascott) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an expression of speech (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel developement. Surely, you jest. I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as well. see http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.html Here's the crux. "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" speech. " While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. Most Sincerely, -Andrew On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first then > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If the > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something about > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox to > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His political > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the time > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he continues > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. The > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability as > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is apparently > no longer the case. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > transparency. > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > software. > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > purchased. > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on constitutional > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > guess about security issues." > > > > America Boycotted > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > a political message. > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > fixes to your own code." > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > Clinic. > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Nov 2 08:18:54 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: References: <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: <20011102081854.Q2342@zork.net> ascott writes: > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > expression of speech > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > developement. Surely, you jest. > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > well. > > see > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.html > > Here's the crux. > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > speech. " > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. The trouble is that this only (partly, and possibly only temporarily) disposes of the "misappropriation of trade secrets" claim used to attack DeCSS. It doesn't do anything to the "circumvention device" claim -- it wasn't a ruling on or about the DMCA! The Second Circuit could do something about the latter claim by deciding Emmanuel Goldstein's appeal in his favor. That would make a lot of people breathe easier. They've been briefed pretty well and they've expressed curiosity about the free speech issues involved, so we can hope. The trade secret claim has been viewed as weaker than the DMCA claim by most lawyers I know. They often think that the DMCA was written to prevent what Emmanuel Goldstein was doing (although they hope it will be found unconstitutional), whereas the UTSA was not written to prohibit what Andrew Bunner was doing. This decision definitely doesn't provide a precedent for Dmitry's case because he's in Federal court and this decision was made by a California state court (and the law in question is a different law in each case). Although there are situations where state court decisions could affect how Federal courts rule, deciding on the constitutionality of a Federal law doesn't seem to be one of them. Anyway, I'm going to have a party to celebrate the Bunner ruling. It's great news! -- Seth David Schoen | Its really terrible when FBI arrested Temp. http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | hacker, who visited USA with peacefull down: http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF) | mission -- to share his knowledge with http://www.freesklyarov.org/ | american nation. (Ilya V. Vasilyev) From tom at lemuria.org Fri Nov 2 09:50:50 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR>; from krburger@burger-family.org on Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:14:38AM -0500 References: <11017502660.20011102145259@elcomsoft.com> <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: <20011102185050.B12008@lemuria.org> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:14:38AM -0500, Kenneth Burger wrote: > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. Obviously, you have been living in a box for a while, especially during the Sklyarov arrest. The danger of being thrown into a small room with a funny window and a doorlock only on the outside is very, very real. Now Alan's reaction may be, uh, somewhat weird. But from what I've read from his postings to the kernel list, he has good reasons, based on legal advise. I have learned quite a lot about the US legal system over the past two years, ever since the DVDCCA trial got started. I probably know more about the US legal system now than I do about the one in my own country. The essence of what I learned is this: It's completely fucked up, and the one thing you do not want to be is become involved in it. You will not win. Let me repeat that: No matter what you do, no matter how the case runs, you as the person involved will ALWAYS lose. At best, the California case has only costed me countless hours of time and several transatlantic phone calls. That's if the defense "wins" in court. For Dmitry Sklyarov, a "victory" in court means he can return to his home country after several MONTHS of imprisonment and forced stay in a foreign country. Alan isn't a coward. He is being realistic. It's the reality that's fucked up. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From dmarti at zgp.org Fri Nov 2 10:20:27 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> References: <11017502660.20011102145259@elcomsoft.com> <000501c16397$f1481890$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: <20011102102027.C12629@zgp.org> begin Kenneth Burger quotation of Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:14:38AM -0500: > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first then > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. Please. He's under no obligation to do security-related research, or to publish his results in any forum. If he wants to write in chalk on the muffler of a 1987 Ford Taurus and charge people 42 million tumtums to crawl under and look, that's his decision. Alan certainly knows that some Europeans will read his site and paraphrase it. There's no practical damage in the long run. Shortsighted quarter-to-quarter US computer executives are perfectly happy to drink from the free software well that Congress is crapping in. If Alan's action gets one "Linux industry" person to understand the danger of DMCA and DRM, it's more than worth it. I appreciate everything Alan has done to express solidarity with Dmitry. Any country that takes these actions against an indvidual for doing useful things deserves to be quarantined. -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs. http://burnallgifs.org/ From russotto at pond.com Fri Nov 2 10:35:27 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror Message-ID: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> I'm afraid I have to agree with Kenneth Burger over the latest Alan Cox move. He's deliberately overstating the DMCA and taking extreme actions in order to draw attention to the cause, and he's punishing Linux users and maintainers to do it. His actions cannot be justified. On the face of it, publishing details of security updates does not violate the DMCA, and indeed is quite common and so far never prosecuted. There is a tortuous (no pun intended) argument by which such publishing could violate the DMCA... however, the same argument would also apply to the changes themselves, which Mr. Cox is NOT suppressing. Therefore, it seems his action is political and not based on any genuine reasonable or unreasonable fear of prosecution. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20011102/38e7c7f5/attachment.htm From russotto at pond.com Fri Nov 2 10:46:07 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Ones and Zeros Message-ID: <003101c163ce$a2450690$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> The court concluded that source code was expressive, and object code was not. This is bad news (indirectly, as the Dmitry and Elcomsoft cases are Federal) for Elcomsoft and Dmitry, because AEBPR was distributed as object code. However, the courts conclusion cannot be justified either technically or logically. Technically, object code can be more or less mechanically translated to source code form, if merely by disassembly. How can mere translation create something which expresses an idea from something which does not? Logically, Johansen is accused (and the court assumed arguendo that the accusation had basis) of taking the trade secrets from Xing's code -- object code -- to obtain the ideas expressed in DeCSS. If those ideas were not expressed in the code they were taken from, where did they come from? Technically again, what of interpreters, which execute source code? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20011102/00c3cb72/attachment.html From russotto at pond.com Fri Nov 2 10:48:22 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] HTML spew Message-ID: <003901c163ce$f2bb79b0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> Sorry guys, I'm on my back-up emergency back-up email connection, which is Outlook Express, and the accursed thing defaults to sending HTML even though I thought I turned it off. From tompoe at renonevada.net Fri Nov 2 11:42:10 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> Message-ID: <01110211421000.03572@aether> On Friday 02 November 2001 10:35, Matthew Russotto wrote: > > I'm afraid I have to agree with Kenneth Burger over the latest Alan Cox > move. He's deliberately overstating the DMCA and taking extreme actions in > order to draw attention to the cause, and he's punishing Linux users and > maintainers to do it. Hi: Whew! Pretty strong stuff, don't you think? Or do you think? Maybe, just maybe you should think about this. The DMCA is a big hammer. If it doesn't go away, you and I will see Linux go away. The Alan Cox's of the world will not only post that they fear the DMCA, but they just plain won't post. Period. What you tasted, with Alan Cox taking the time to post that he wasn't going to post, and providing the reason for not posting, was a glimpse of the future. Keep the DMCA and lose Linux, Open Source, computers as we know them, and enjoy your expensive new "certified, registered, approved" entertainment device. GET A GRIP, Matthew. Tom From russotto at pond.com Fri Nov 2 12:06:19 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> <01110211421000.03572@aether> Message-ID: <005801c163d9$d6671f20$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> "tom poe" wrote: > On Friday 02 November 2001 10:35, Matthew Russotto wrote: > > > > I'm afraid I have to agree with Kenneth Burger over the latest Alan Cox > > move. He's deliberately overstating the DMCA and taking extreme actions in > > order to draw attention to the cause, and he's punishing Linux users and > > maintainers to do it. > > Hi: Whew! Pretty strong stuff, don't you think? Or do you think? Maybe, > just maybe you should think about this. Please try to avoid the gratuitious insults. > The DMCA is a big hammer. If it > doesn't go away, you and I will see Linux go away. The Alan Cox's of the > world will not only post that they fear the DMCA, but they just plain won't > post. Period. What you tasted, with Alan Cox taking the time to post that > he wasn't going to post, and providing the reason for not posting, was a > glimpse of the future. Keep the DMCA and lose Linux, Open Source, computers > as we know them, and enjoy your expensive new "certified, registered, > approved" entertainment device. GET A GRIP, Matthew. Tom Believe me, I'm no fan of the DMCA. I've had run-ins with it myself. An example appropriate to this list (because of the server it is on): There's an old Infocom game called "A Mind Forever Voyaging". As copy protection, it requires you to enter a password found by looking things up in a table or on a code wheel provided for it. Neither the code wheel nor the table is accessible to the blind. A blind fan of interactive fiction asked that someone provide an accessible table. I disassembled the program, figured out how it generated the codes, and wrote another program to generate a table from the data in the original program. THAT program was a circumvention device. The resulting table was also a circumvention device. My sending that table to the person who asked for it was distribution of a circumvention device. Information about Linux security fixes, given that the fixes themselves are not circumvention devices? Sorry, not a circumvention device. Censoring the ChangeLog is just a political move. The DMCA does not threaten Linux or Open Source in general (though it treads all over specific projects). It's bad enough, it doesn't need to be exaggerated. (as for the device: Sorry, feds, both table and program were lost when my ISP discarded its servers without warning. Besides, no profit was involved and I doubt you'll get a complaint out of Activision) From tom at lemuria.org Fri Nov 2 13:12:23 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com>; from russotto@pond.com on Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 01:35:27PM -0500 References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> Message-ID: <20011102221223.B12162@lemuria.org> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 01:35:27PM -0500, Matthew Russotto wrote: > There is a tortuous (no pun intended) argument by which such publishing > could violate the DMCA... however, the same argument would also apply to > the changes themselves, which Mr. Cox is NOT suppressing. Not true. Please read his arguments on the kernel list. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From jono at microshaft.org Fri Nov 2 12:45:32 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] sony dogs aibohack site Message-ID: <20011102124532.B30330@networkcommand.com> This was reported last week but this is a good story. It seems likely that Linux kernel programmers and security researchers would have more to fear from the DMCA than the owners and users of a Robot Dog, but Sony is after them now too. Seems to support Alan Cox's decision to sensor notes and things in the Linux kernel... ----- Forwarded message from nettime's_rovering_reporter ----- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:49:46 -0100 From: "nettime's_rovering_reporter" To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net Subject: sony dogs aibohack site Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "nettime's_rovering_reporter" [via . another day, another future: sony invokes the DMCA to prevent people--and given the price of an aibo, mostly adults--from sharing tips and tricks on how to hack robotic dogs. quiz: is drawing a parallel between this and doing the same to a living thing: (a) a theoretical trap, (b) an inane misunderstanding, (c) a ruthless insight into social morphology, or (d) other? answer: it's a trick question, because the referent of 'this' isn't clear. "Looking at the last two years, I probably spent more time doing unpaid technical support for Sony than I have playing with my dog. But it's been rewarding. I've met people throughout the world." --cheers, t] November 1, 2001 Sony Dogs Aibo Enthusiast's Site The company uses a controversial law to stop owners from altering the robotic pet. Some consumers balk. By DAVE WILSON and ALEX PHAM, TIMES STAFF WRITERS Sony Corp. is using a controversial U.S. law aimed at protecting intellectual property to pull the plug on a Web site that helps owners of Aibo, Sony's popular and pricey robotic pet, teach their electronic dogs new tricks. Aibo owners are outraged, and hundreds have vowed to stop buying Sony products altogether until the company backs off. Sony has sold more than 100,000 Aibos worldwide since 1999, at prices ranging from $800 to $3,000. The dogs have spawned a community of enthusiasts who fuss over the mechanical marvels as if they were real canines. Last week, Sony executives sent a letter to the operator of a Web site, http://www.aibohack.com, alleging that much of the site's contents-programs and software tools that can modify the Aibo's behavior--was created and distributed in ways that violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The 1998 law was designed to combat the duplication of digitized materials, which can be easily distributed instantaneously worldwide on the Internet. Violators can face monetary damages and even prison time, depending on the nature of the violation. In a prepared statement, Sony officials said they asked only for removal of material it considered illegal and encouraged the distribution of Aibo-related materials that they did not believe infringed the company's rights. Sony sells a number of software kits, usually for about $150, that allow Aibo users to modify the dog's behavior. The software tools removed from the Web site are easier to use and more powerful, according to users--and are available for free. "We do not support the development of software that is created by manipulating existing Sony Aibo-ware code, copying it and/or distributing it via the Internet," the company said. "This is a clear case of copyright infringement, something that most Aibo owners can appreciate and respectfully understand." Critics of the DMCA say the law upsets the delicate balance between the rights of copyright holders to protect their intellectual property and the rights of everyone else to use such items to develop their own works. That has sparked increasing concern in Congress as scientists, librarians, researchers and consumer groups have voiced opposition to the law. "On the surface, Sony appears to be using portions of the DMCA in an attempt to keep people from putting the company's product to new and interesting uses," said Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil rights group. "This is exactly the sort of thing we've been concerned about." Cohn said that if Congress does not act, the courts will eventually have to repair the situation. "Sooner or later, this is going to come to a head," she said. "This is a critical societal problem. If we can no longer stand on the shoulders of giants, take a cool thing somebody has made and make it a little bit cooler, progress is stunted, perhaps irreparably." Bob Harting, a Santa Monica potter, has programmed his three Aibos--Sparky, Agent Aibo and Aibojangles--to perform a syncopated dance routine to Madonna's "Vogue." "It's just impossible to do this sort of thing with the Sony tools," he said, as the dogs danced to the music in his living room. "I have bought every accessory made for the Aibo, and nearly every bit of equipment in my apartment--television, VCRs, computers--is from Sony," Harting said. "But I'm not comfortable giving them more money until this is resolved." The man behind Aibohack.com, who goes by the screen name Aibopet and asked to not be identified, removed the contested material from the site, leaving it largely empty except for links to other sites that have organized protests against Sony. He said he incorporates Sony's code into his programs but that no one is harmed. His programs give Aibo owners the ability to manipulate their robot dogs, but only if the user has a legitimate copy of Sony's software. He said that Sony benefits from his work because it generates consumer enthusiasm for Aibo. Although he's upset about being forced to take his tools off the Internet, he said he has no plans to litigate the matter. Before Aibohack.com went down, it saw 400 to 600 visitors a day, many of whom downloaded Aibopet's tools. One of the programs, AiboScope, wirelessly transmits images from the robot's camera to a computer. Another, Disco Aibo, programs Aibo to dance when it hears a specific song. The most recent program is Brainbo, which combines voice-recognition software with a library of answers to various questions. Users can ask the robot a question, and it will pull from the database to lip sync an answer. Aibopet said he has posted more than 1,500 comments, tips and answers to Aibosite.com in the last two years. "I guess you could call it a hobby, but it has gotten a little out of control at times. I just enjoy programming," Aibopet said. "Looking at the last two years, I probably spent more time doing unpaid technical support for Sony than I have playing with my dog. But it's been rewarding. I've met people throughout the world." Experts say Sony risks angering Aibo enthusiasts to the point that they might hurt sales of Aibo and related merchandise but could boost sales of its own software tools. It's a big risk said David A. Aaker, vice chairman of Prophet, a brand strategy consulting firm. Other companies that have faced similar situations have made the opposite choice. Lego Co., a Danish company that makes the classic plastic interlocking children's toy, introduced a computer-controlled set in 1998. MindStorms, as the kit is called, offers users the ability to add motors and an onboard computer to control the creation's behavior. Almost as soon as the toy was introduced, enthusiasts rewrote the software to allow for more complex operation. After much consideration, Lego decided to endorse such hacking, provided that nobody turns their software into a commercial product and that Lego trademarks aren't used. "The decision wasn't easy to make," said Lego spokesman Michael McNally. "We were obviously concerned that if this got out of hand, we could lose control of what we hold as our own. But we decided that if we made this easier for them, they'd be less inclined to change it and dilute it. In a way, we're protecting our own interests." McNally said the decision has helped build the Lego community, but he concedes that Lego's decision was largely made to boost sales. "We're like any other company," he said. "This was about taking the brand forward, creating a larger fan base; and what company wouldn't want to do that? It contributes to the bottom line." Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ ------------------------ http://www.anti-dmca.org ------------------------ DMCA_discuss mailing list DMCA_discuss@lists.microshaft.org http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss ----- End forwarded message ----- From dmarti at zgp.org Fri Nov 2 13:46:32 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> Message-ID: <20011102134632.C16553@zgp.org> begin Matthew Russotto quotation of Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 01:35:27PM -0500: > I'm afraid I have to agree with Kenneth Burger over the latest > Alan Cox move. He's deliberately overstating the DMCA and taking > extreme actions in order to draw attention to the cause, and he's > punishing Linux users and maintainers to do it. Better get your money back from him right away, then. All the rest of you free software programmers, back to work! Matthew Russotto needs working code by yesterday! Don't worry about politics, or getting arrested if you do something a company doesn't like -- that would never happen. -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs. http://burnallgifs.org/ From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 15:09:28 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> <20011102134632.C16553@zgp.org> Message-ID: <011801c163f3$6c245e10$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> If you're going to be the leader of something like this then you should be willing to take that risk. I would. If someone would get me those security updates I would post them on the Internet in a heartbeat despite the risk. If they put me in jail I'd be happy to martyr myself for the cause of overturning the DMCA. To me the security of important data is worth taking the chance. Please note that I did not say that he should stop being a kernel developer. I said he should turn over leadership and control of the changelog and website to someone who would be willing to take that risk. Lets also remember that he's not even American so the DMCA wouldn't affect him unless he came over here. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Marti" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > begin Matthew Russotto quotation of Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 01:35:27PM -0500: > > > I'm afraid I have to agree with Kenneth Burger over the latest > > Alan Cox move. He's deliberately overstating the DMCA and taking > > extreme actions in order to draw attention to the cause, and he's > > punishing Linux users and maintainers to do it. > > Better get your money back from him right away, then. > > All the rest of you free software programmers, back to work! > Matthew Russotto needs working code by yesterday! Don't worry > about politics, or getting arrested if you do something a company > doesn't like -- that would never happen. > > -- > Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! > http://zgp.org/~dmarti > dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs. > http://burnallgifs.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 15:18:49 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: Message-ID: <012801c163f4$baa52640$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> I didn't say he should step down from development. I said he should step down from his leadership position. Leaders should not be cowards. There's plenty of people who are qualified to lead this project who are not so cowardly as to censor their own security fixes to prevent themselves from being jailed even though such a possibility is remote at best. I'm not qualified because my dev skills suck as compared to the actual kernel development team, but there are plenty of people on the team who do. Alan's not American, but he's still letting this get to him. Turn control over to someone else in Europe who will likely never set foot in the US. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ascott" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:50 AM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > expression of speech > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > developement. Surely, you jest. > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > well. > > see > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.h tml > > Here's the crux. > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > speech. " > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. > > Most Sincerely, > > -Andrew > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first then > > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If the > > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something about > > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox to > > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His political > > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the time > > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he continues > > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. The > > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability as > > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is apparently > > no longer the case. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > > transparency. > > > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > > software. > > > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > > purchased. > > > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on constitutional > > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > > guess about security issues." > > > > > > America Boycotted > > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > > a political message. > > > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > > fixes to your own code." > > > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > > Clinic. > > > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From ilya at theIlya.com Fri Nov 2 15:20:00 2001 From: ilya at theIlya.com (Ilya Volynets) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <011801c163f3$6c245e10$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> <20011102134632.C16553@zgp.org> <011801c163f3$6c245e10$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: <20011102232006.8614.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 02 November 2001 03:09 pm, you wrote: > If you're going to be the leader of something like this then you should be > willing to take that risk. I would. If you feel you have time, ability, and desire, go ahead and start your own kernel cvs tree, whith security update for US people. I'll be first to chec out. > If someone would get me those > security updates I would post them on the Internet in a heartbeat despite > the risk. I guess that posting to couple of kernel-related mailing lists would get them to you in no time. > If they put me in jail I'd be happy to martyr myself for the > cause of overturning the DMCA. To me the security of important data is > worth taking the chance. And we all will be happy to stand behind you. > Please note that I did not say that he should > stop being a kernel developer. I said he should turn over leadership and > control of the changelog and website to someone who would be willing to > take that risk. As you have said before, Linux kernel is not tool for doing politics, so why someone has to take risk of being involved into legal things in US, for leading it's development? > Lets also remember that he's not even American so the DMCA > wouldn't affect him unless he came over here. And let's also remember that many Unix-related conferences are run in US. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjvjKiYACgkQ84S94bALfyWhbACguHlItMNE99HVnh7eepGkP7K5 k1kAn2nDwDJDhC7PxX2uzyry2wIxZAfc =eRkH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jono at microshaft.org Fri Nov 2 15:29:14 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <012801c163f4$baa52640$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR>; from krburger@burger-family.org on Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 06:18:49PM -0500 References: <012801c163f4$baa52640$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> Message-ID: <20011102152914.C30971@networkcommand.com> Don't forget Kenneth, Alan resigned from his USENIX post very soon after Sklyarov was arrested. Other people are being threatened, having websites taken down, etc. I'm sure there is no real risk to Alan or anyone else. Or am I? Is Alan punishing Linux users and maintainers or are the corporations, government and others who support the law? Alan is merely attempting to protect linux, comply with and follow a law that is being thrown about in the interest of corporate welfare and true R&D. He knows the DMCA is a pick and choose, selective enforcement type law. It's written that way. See a DMCA voilation and report it. Linux isn't going to get anyone claiming DMCA issues, but device drivers, kernel things, other applications which interface with a possibly hostile vendor may cause problems. You are aksing people to change their organisations based on the needs of these hostile vendors and a bad law. That's bogus. Linux kernel developers shouldn't have to worry about this type of crap and you shouldn't support and suggest it. They should not have to fear coming to the US and the fact that you don't see that scares me also. On 02-Nov-2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > I didn't say he should step down from development. I said he should step > down from his leadership position. Leaders should not be cowards. There's > plenty of people who are qualified to lead this project who are not so > cowardly as to censor their own security fixes to prevent themselves from > being jailed even though such a possibility is remote at best. I'm not > qualified because my dev skills suck as compared to the actual kernel > development team, but there are plenty of people on the team who do. Alan's > not American, but he's still letting this get to him. Turn control over to > someone else in Europe who will likely never set foot in the US. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ascott" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:50 AM > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > terror > > > > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > > expression of speech > > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > > developement. Surely, you jest. > > > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > > well. > > > > see > > > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.h > tml > > > > Here's the crux. > > > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > > speech. " > > > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. > > > > Most Sincerely, > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > > > > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > > > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > > > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first > then > > > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If > the > > > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something > about > > > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox > to > > > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His > political > > > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the > time > > > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he > continues > > > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > > > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > > > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. > The > > > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > > > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability > as > > > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > > > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > > > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > > > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is > apparently > > > no longer the case. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > terror > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > > > transparency. > > > > > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > > > software. > > > > > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > > > purchased. > > > > > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on > constitutional > > > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > > > guess about security issues." > > > > > > > > America Boycotted > > > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > > > a political message. > > > > > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > > > fixes to your own code." > > > > > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > > > Clinic. > > > > > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > > > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 16:22:02 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: <012801c163f4$baa52640$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> <20011102152914.C30971@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <019d01c163fd$8f9b7450$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon O ." To: "Kenneth Burger" Cc: "ascott" ; Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:29 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > Don't forget Kenneth, Alan resigned from his USENIX post very soon after > Sklyarov was arrested. Other people are being threatened, having websites > taken down, etc. I'm sure there is no real risk to Alan or anyone else. Or > am I? > > Is Alan punishing Linux users and maintainers or are the corporations, > government and others who support the law? Alan is merely attempting to > protect linux, comply with and follow a law that is being thrown about in the interest > of corporate welfare and true R&D. > > He knows the DMCA is a pick and choose, selective enforcement type law. > It's written that way. See a DMCA voilation and report it. Linux isn't > going to get anyone claiming DMCA issues, but device drivers, kernel > things, other applications which interface with a possibly hostile > vendor may cause problems. > > You are aksing people to change their organisations based on the needs > of these hostile vendors and a bad law. That's bogus. Linux kernel > developers shouldn't have to worry about this type of crap and you > shouldn't support and suggest it. They should not have to fear coming > to the US and the fact that you don't see that scares me also. > > > > > > On 02-Nov-2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > I didn't say he should step down from development. I said he should step > > down from his leadership position. Leaders should not be cowards. There's > > plenty of people who are qualified to lead this project who are not so > > cowardly as to censor their own security fixes to prevent themselves from > > being jailed even though such a possibility is remote at best. I'm not > > qualified because my dev skills suck as compared to the actual kernel > > development team, but there are plenty of people on the team who do. Alan's > > not American, but he's still letting this get to him. Turn control over to > > someone else in Europe who will likely never set foot in the US. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ascott" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:50 AM > > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > > > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > > > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > > > expression of speech > > > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > > > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > > > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > > > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > > > > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > > > developement. Surely, you jest. > > > > > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > > > well. > > > > > > see > > > > > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.h > > tml > > > > > > Here's the crux. > > > > > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > > > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > > > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > > > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > > > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > > > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > > > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > > > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > > > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > > > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > > > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > > > speech. " > > > > > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > > > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > > > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > > > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. > > > > > > Most Sincerely, > > > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > > > > > > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > > > > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > > > > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first > > then > > > > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If > > the > > > > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something > > about > > > > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox > > to > > > > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His > > political > > > > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the > > time > > > > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he > > continues > > > > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > > > > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > > > > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. > > The > > > > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > > > > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability > > as > > > > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > > > > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > > > > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > > > > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is > > apparently > > > > no longer the case. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > > > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > > > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > > > > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > > > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > > > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > > > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > > > > transparency. > > > > > > > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > > > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > > > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > > > > software. > > > > > > > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > > > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > > > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > > > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > > > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > > > > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > > > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > > > > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > > > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > > > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > > > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > > > > purchased. > > > > > > > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > > > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > > > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > > > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > > > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > > > > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on > > constitutional > > > > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > > > > guess about security issues." > > > > > > > > > > America Boycotted > > > > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > > > > a political message. > > > > > > > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > > > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > > > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > > > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > > > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > > > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > > > > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > > > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > > > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > > > > fixes to your own code." > > > > > > > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > > > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > > > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > > > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > > > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > > > > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > > > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > > > > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > > > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > > > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > > > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > > > > Clinic. > > > > > > > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > > > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > > > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > > > > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > > > > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > > > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > > > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 16:22:18 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror References: <012801c163f4$baa52640$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> <20011102152914.C30971@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <01a101c163fd$98cf1b30$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> There's a problem with the idea that we should allow large corporations to get away with this though. The only way to change the law is to challenge it. Yes, sometimes it requires people to be put in a position they rather would not be in, i.e. jail, which is why I'm not suggesting that Alan should put himself in that position, but the fact of the matter is that there are plenty of people who would be willing to do such and they should be allowed to do so. The leader of the foundation should not prevent it from being posted on the site, nor forbid it from being discussed. Like I said, if people will send me the security flaws that were fixed I will post them. If I get arrested, so be it. I'll be happy to know that at least the time I spend in jail is for a good, just, and worthy cause. I'd rather do that than rot my life away doing what I'm doing now anyways. There is such a thing as the greater good you know, and sometimes you have to sacrifice to obtain it. Freedom is the greater good and this is about freedom. The freedom to speak without fear of imprisonment. The freedom to share information is vital to the foundation of our country, and if America is to be the beacon of freedom in the world, and we lose that freedom, then I will be ashamed to call myself an American. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon O ." To: "Kenneth Burger" Cc: "ascott" ; Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:29 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > Don't forget Kenneth, Alan resigned from his USENIX post very soon after > Sklyarov was arrested. Other people are being threatened, having websites > taken down, etc. I'm sure there is no real risk to Alan or anyone else. Or > am I? > > Is Alan punishing Linux users and maintainers or are the corporations, > government and others who support the law? Alan is merely attempting to > protect linux, comply with and follow a law that is being thrown about in the interest > of corporate welfare and true R&D. > > He knows the DMCA is a pick and choose, selective enforcement type law. > It's written that way. See a DMCA voilation and report it. Linux isn't > going to get anyone claiming DMCA issues, but device drivers, kernel > things, other applications which interface with a possibly hostile > vendor may cause problems. > > You are aksing people to change their organisations based on the needs > of these hostile vendors and a bad law. That's bogus. Linux kernel > developers shouldn't have to worry about this type of crap and you > shouldn't support and suggest it. They should not have to fear coming > to the US and the fact that you don't see that scares me also. > > > > > > On 02-Nov-2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > I didn't say he should step down from development. I said he should step > > down from his leadership position. Leaders should not be cowards. There's > > plenty of people who are qualified to lead this project who are not so > > cowardly as to censor their own security fixes to prevent themselves from > > being jailed even though such a possibility is remote at best. I'm not > > qualified because my dev skills suck as compared to the actual kernel > > development team, but there are plenty of people on the team who do. Alan's > > not American, but he's still letting this get to him. Turn control over to > > someone else in Europe who will likely never set foot in the US. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ascott" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:50 AM > > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > > > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > > > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > > > expression of speech > > > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > > > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > > > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > > > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > > > > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > > > developement. Surely, you jest. > > > > > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > > > well. > > > > > > see > > > > > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.h > > tml > > > > > > Here's the crux. > > > > > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > > > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > > > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > > > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > > > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > > > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > > > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > > > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > > > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > > > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > > > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > > > speech. " > > > > > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > > > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > > > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > > > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. > > > > > > Most Sincerely, > > > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > > > > > > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > > > > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > > > > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first > > then > > > > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If > > the > > > > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something > > about > > > > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox > > to > > > > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His > > political > > > > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the > > time > > > > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he > > continues > > > > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > > > > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > > > > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. > > The > > > > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > > > > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability > > as > > > > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > > > > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > > > > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > > > > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is > > apparently > > > > no longer the case. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > > > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > > > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > > > > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > > > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > > > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > > > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > > > > transparency. > > > > > > > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > > > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > > > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > > > > software. > > > > > > > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > > > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > > > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > > > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > > > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > > > > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > > > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > > > > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > > > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > > > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > > > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > > > > purchased. > > > > > > > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > > > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > > > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > > > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > > > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > > > > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on > > constitutional > > > > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > > > > guess about security issues." > > > > > > > > > > America Boycotted > > > > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > > > > a political message. > > > > > > > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > > > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > > > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > > > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > > > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > > > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > > > > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > > > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > > > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > > > > fixes to your own code." > > > > > > > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > > > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > > > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > > > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > > > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > > > > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > > > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > > > > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > > > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > > > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > > > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > > > > Clinic. > > > > > > > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > > > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > > > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > > > > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive se nse > > > > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > > > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > > > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon O ." To: "Kenneth Burger" Cc: "ascott" ; Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:29 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror > > Don't forget Kenneth, Alan resigned from his USENIX post very soon after > Sklyarov was arrested. Other people are being threatened, having websites > taken down, etc. I'm sure there is no real risk to Alan or anyone else. Or > am I? > > Is Alan punishing Linux users and maintainers or are the corporations, > government and others who support the law? Alan is merely attempting to > protect linux, comply with and follow a law that is being thrown about in the interest > of corporate welfare and true R&D. > > He knows the DMCA is a pick and choose, selective enforcement type law. > It's written that way. See a DMCA voilation and report it. Linux isn't > going to get anyone claiming DMCA issues, but device drivers, kernel > things, other applications which interface with a possibly hostile > vendor may cause problems. > > You are aksing people to change their organisations based on the needs > of these hostile vendors and a bad law. That's bogus. Linux kernel > developers shouldn't have to worry about this type of crap and you > shouldn't support and suggest it. They should not have to fear coming > to the US and the fact that you don't see that scares me also. > > > > > > On 02-Nov-2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > I didn't say he should step down from development. I said he should step > > down from his leadership position. Leaders should not be cowards. There's > > plenty of people who are qualified to lead this project who are not so > > cowardly as to censor their own security fixes to prevent themselves from > > being jailed even though such a possibility is remote at best. I'm not > > qualified because my dev skills suck as compared to the actual kernel > > development team, but there are plenty of people on the team who do. Alan's > > not American, but he's still letting this get to him. Turn control over to > > someone else in Europe who will likely never set foot in the US. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ascott" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:50 AM > > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > Maybe we should tell Alan that he should not worry and, citing the recent > > > appeals court decision to "overturn the order that barred hundreds of > > > people from publishing" DeCSS code, since it has been found to be an > > > expression of speech > > > (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7751876.html), that his security > > > fixes, updates, conversations and documentation will be covered under our > > > country's First Ammendment to our Constitution which allows him to share > > > this info freely and protects this freedom specifically. > > > > > > The last thing that I want to see is Alan Cox step down from kernel > > > developement. Surely, you jest. > > > > > > I hope that this recent turn of events for DeCSS help in Dmitry's case, as > > > well. > > > > > > see > > > > > http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/20011101_bunner_appellate_decision.h > > tml > > > > > > Here's the crux. > > > > > > "Like the CSS decryption software, DeCSS is a writing composed of computer > > > source code which describes an alternative method of decrypting > > > CSSencrypted DVDs. Regardless of who authored the program, DeCSS is a > > > written expression of the author's ideas and information about decryption > > > of DVDs without CSS. If the source code were "compiled" to create object > > > code, we would agree that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones > > > would not convey ideas. (See generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at > > > pp.482483.) That the source code is capable of such compilation, however, > > > does not destroy the expressive nature of the source code itself. Thus, we > > > conclude that the trial court's preliminary injunction barring Bunner from > > > disclosing DeCSS can fairly be characterized as a prohibition of "pure" > > > speech. " > > > > > > While I know this is not a complete win (or is it? I'm not sure.), I feel > > > that it is a major turning point toward possibly getting it right, none > > > the less. In fact, it may have been the first bit of good news I've read > > > all month and I would certainly like to read more of it. > > > > > > Most Sincerely, > > > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > > > > > > I read about this on Slashdot awhile ago. My response to it will likely > > > > piss several people off, but I feel it's necessary. Alan Cox is either > > > > using us as martyrs for his cause or he's a coward. If it's the first > > then > > > > he's violated our trust and also everything open source stands for. If > > the > > > > second, then he needs to get a law degree or at least learn something > > about > > > > the law as well as get a backbone. I am publicly calling upon Alan Cox > > to > > > > step down as second in command for Linux kernel development. His > > political > > > > agenda has clouded his views as a developer and I believe now is the > > time > > > > for him to pass the torch onto somebody who isn't a coward. If he > > continues > > > > to withhold security updates from us I will boycott the Linux operating > > > > system in response and I call upon other Americans to do the same. Even > > > > Microsoft and Novell release the details about their security updates. > > The > > > > security of my data is very important to me as an administrator and a > > > > programmer. Not releasing security update info takes away our ability > > as > > > > developers to look for related faults elsewhere in the source code which > > > > others may have missed. I wish it didn't have to come down to this, but > > > > when I joined the open-source movement it was in the hope that I could > > > > escape M$'s and other large companies political agendas. This is > > apparently > > > > no longer the case. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Vladimir Katalov" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:52 AM > > > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA > > terror > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22536.html > > > > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/274 > > > > > > > > > > Citing a controversial U.S. copyright law, a top Linux developer > > > > > announced this week that Americans would not be given details about > > > > > the security fixes in an update to the open source operating system, a > > > > > first for a software development community that prides itself on > > > > > transparency. > > > > > > > > > > An update to version 2.2 of the Linux kernel, an older version of > > > > > Linux that's still in wide use, was released Monday, conspicuously > > > > > shorn of information about a number of security holes patched in the > > > > > software. > > > > > > > > > > In an email to a Linux developer's mailing list, U.K.-based Linux guru > > > > > Alan Cox wrote that the self-censorship was necessary to avoid running > > > > > afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a law that > > > > > makes it a crime to create or distribute software "primarily designed" > > > > > to circumvent a copy protection scheme. > > > > > > > > > > Cox controls the 2.2 release, and is generally considered Linux's > > > > > second-in-command after creator Linus Torvalds. > > > > > > > > > > The DMCA has been under fire from computer programmers and electronic > > > > > civil libertarians who argue that it is an unconstitutional > > > > > impingement on speech, and interferes with consumers' traditional > > > > > right to make personal copies of books, movies and music that they've > > > > > purchased. > > > > > > > > > > In July, the first criminal prosecution under the Act kicked-off with > > > > > FBI agents arresting Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer > > > > > who was visiting the U.S. to give a talk at a security conference. > > > > > Sklyarov is the author of a computer program that cracks the copy > > > > > protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. > > > > > > > > > > "With luck, the Sklyarov case will see that overturned on > > constitutional > > > > grounds," Cox wrote on the list. "Until then U.S. citizens will have to > > > > guess about security issues." > > > > > > > > > > America Boycotted > > > > > But U.S. Linux developers and users suspect Cox of using them to carry > > > > > a political message. > > > > > > > > > > "My personal belief is that certain people are using this as an excuse > > > > > to draw attention to the dangers inherent in the DMCA," says > > > > > Birmingham system administrator Wayne Brown. "I'm sympathetic to their > > > > > efforts, but not at all happy that people who need access to this > > > > > information will be denied just to make a point... It seems to me to > > > > > be contrary to the whole spirit of free software development." > > > > > > > > > > "I still think this is an extremist view of the DMCA," wrote U.S. > > > > > Linux developer Tom Sightler, in a post to the developer's list. "I > > > > > don't see where it keeps you from posting information about security > > > > > fixes to your own code." > > > > > > > > > > Cox didn't respond to a reporter's inquiry, but on the mailing list, > > > > > he wrote that the new closed policy was necessary because Linux's > > > > > standard security features may be used for "rights management" of > > > > > copyrighted work. He declined to elaborate further "on a list that > > > > > reaches U.S. citizens." > > > > > > > > > > The programmer plans to post Linux security information exclusively on > > > > > a Web site that will block access from the U.S. > > > > > > > > > > Despite Cox's fears, describing security holes or patches in Linux > > > > > doesn't violate the DMCA, because the information isn't primarily > > > > > designed for the purpose of circumvention, says attorney Jennifer > > > > > Granick, director of the Stanford Law School's Law and Technology > > > > > Clinic. > > > > > > > > > > "He seems to be assuming that the DMCA prohibits discussion about any > > > > > kind of security, and that's not what it does," says Granick. "The > > > > > DMCA is bad, but it's not that bad." > > > > > > > > > > "Part of the problem with the DMCA is it doesn't make intuitive sense > > > > > to people who are practicing in this field, so even after reading the > > > > > statute, people don't understand exactly what they are or aren't > > > > > allowed to do," says Granick. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From tompoe at renonevada.net Fri Nov 2 16:28:28 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Linux update withholds security info on DMCA terror In-Reply-To: <20011102134632.C16553@zgp.org> References: <002601c163cd$24a679e0$4b0710ac@glogtech.com> <20011102134632.C16553@zgp.org> Message-ID: <01110216282800.04523@aether> On Friday 02 November 2001 13:46, Don Marti wrote: > Better get your money back from him right away, then. > > All the rest of you free software programmers, back to work! > Matthew Russotto needs working code by yesterday! Don't worry > about politics, or getting arrested if you do something a company > doesn't like -- that would never happen. Hi: And, you know, Don. For this feeble brain, it just doesn't make sense that folks want to premise their comments with the assumption that DMCA, SSSCA, and Sklyarov are mutually exclusive topics. The man's life is a shambles, because companies think individuals are nonpersons. Who, in their right mind, can justify a company's profits rising above Free Speech, Employee rights, or universal Human Rights? More ridiculous, are the recent proclamations by industry, that they're entitled to put people in jail for legal acts! When the "arm of the law" reaches out across the globe, to bring to justice a programmer/employee, rather than bring to justice the CEO, or individual responsible, it just boggles the mind! Sure, I'd be just as upset if it were the CEO listed in the indictment, but that begs the question. What the hell's wrong with these legal minds out there? What's wrong with the Adobe executives? What's wrong with our legislators? Nope. In the final analysis on this thread, Alan Cox is showing us the future. We should look, see, and expand this dramatically. I posted a suggestion before, and I do it again, here. A national, maybe global demonstration by all the Alan Cox's of Open Source projects should be undertaken. A day, a week, a month of DMCA/SSSCA/Sklyarov "results" so that folks will get the message, loud and clear. Those on this list that suggest FULL ENFORCEMENT as a call to action are right. It needs to be done. Tom From krburger at burger-family.org Fri Nov 2 16:24:28 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AGH!!! Message-ID: <01aa01c163fd$e6824fa0$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> I apologize for the last two messed up posts. I'm in kind of a hurry and wasn't paying close attention when I sent the first. It was supposed to go to Jon and the group, it just went to jon, then it went to the group but I forgot to paste my text in, then it went to the group, but I pasted in the whole bloody message. Sorry bout that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20011102/5af86289/attachment.htm From martinb at kemokid.com Fri Nov 2 23:23:16 2001 From: martinb at kemokid.com (Martin Baker) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] jail and privilege Message-ID: This is in regard to complaints that Alan Cox should perhaps stand down and let someone in his place who might be willing to take certain consequences, such as jail time in a foreign country (the US). I'm not going to question Mr. Cox's view of the law or his recent actions, although I don't necessarily agree with either. I just want to point out a couple things. What one person might be willing to do, another might not, and often because of their own personal circumstances. I suspect that some of those who want their "leaders" to be willing to risk imprisonment or a self-imposed ban on travel to the US are young and single. Nothing wrong with that, but do try to empathize in light of the fact that Alan Cox is married and may not relish the idea of spending a potentially very long time away from his wife. Others (such as Linus Torvalds and our very own Dmitry Sklyarov) are not only married but have small children; for them the consequences would be even greater. There are many ways to resist, and none should be valued as inherently "better" than others. For example, if we escalate our protests to civil disobedience, some people may be willing to risk arrest. Other people may not, and their contributions of legal protest, support, outreach, solidarity, etc. are just as important. A given person's choices may change over time depending on job and family obligations, illness, or other factors. It is, in a sense, a privilege to be able to risk arrest and other legal consequences. Your average white person is probably going to fare better at the hands of the police than a minority of any kind. Youth and health will help someone withstand adverse conditions. Making bail and hiring a good lawyer require money. And so on.... Those of you who have this kind of privilege and are willing to use it for a good cause, I applaud you. But please realize that not everyone is your shoes. Peace, Martin From krburger at burger-family.org Sat Nov 3 06:15:17 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] jail and privilege References: Message-ID: <001c01c16471$f714c4a0$9865fea9@BALTHAZAR> First of all, I got a hold of the uncensored changelogs from a source I would rather not disclose so as to keep the person out of trouble and I have posted them at http://www.burger-famly.org/chglog-2_2_20.txt and http://www.burger-family.org/chglog-2_2_20pre11.txt Since this is my home server run on something less than a T1 though I would appreciate if you used the mirrors at http://www.geocities.com/vsavatar/chglog-2_2_20.txt and http://www.geocities.com/vsavatar/chglog-2_2_20pre11.txt If anyone wants to volunteer space on their servers I'd be more than glad to accept. Unfortunately, since my artistic ability is absolutely zero, I haven't been able to design a web page to link to this stuff yet. I'm a pretty good coder, but my ability to do any type of graphic art or layout design is totally nonexistent. If anyone wants to make a page up that I can maintain (i.e. mostly in HTML) and email the the zip file to me I'll be glad to put it up. Now, onto the rest of the reply to this message. I'm sure if I was arrested or if Alan was arrested for this we would both get legal assitance from the EFF in fighting this till the bitter end. I'm not rich. Slightly priviliged yes, but not rich. If Alan doesn't want to do it I understand. He should at least, however be willing to give access to people who will. For your info, yes I am young, but in a long term relationship. I've discussed the possibility of what could happen with my gf and we are both in agreement that I am doing the right thing by posting these. Civil disobedience has paid off in the past, and I hope and pray that it will pay off now. Yes, that's right... pray. I am a Christian and believe that the Lord will keep me free, and if he will not, then praise Him anyways. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Baker" To: Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 2:23 AM Subject: [free-sklyarov] jail and privilege > This is in regard to complaints that Alan Cox should perhaps stand down > and let someone in his place who might be willing to take certain > consequences, such as jail time in a foreign country (the US). I'm not > going to question Mr. Cox's view of the law or his recent actions, > although I don't necessarily agree with either. I just want to point out a > couple things. > > What one person might be willing to do, another might not, and often > because of their own personal circumstances. I suspect that some of those > who want their "leaders" to be willing to risk imprisonment or a > self-imposed ban on travel to the US are young and single. Nothing wrong > with that, but do try to empathize in light of the fact that Alan Cox is > married and may not relish the idea of spending a potentially very long > time away from his wife. Others (such as Linus Torvalds and our very own > Dmitry Sklyarov) are not only married but have small children; for them > the consequences would be even greater. > > There are many ways to resist, and none should be valued as inherently > "better" than others. For example, if we escalate our protests to civil > disobedience, some people may be willing to risk arrest. Other people may > not, and their contributions of legal protest, support, outreach, > solidarity, etc. are just as important. A given person's choices may > change over time depending on job and family obligations, illness, or > other factors. > > It is, in a sense, a privilege to be able to risk arrest and other legal > consequences. Your average white person is probably going to fare better > at the hands of the police than a minority of any kind. Youth and health > will help someone withstand adverse conditions. Making bail and hiring a > good lawyer require money. And so on.... > > Those of you who have this kind of privilege and are willing to use it for > a good cause, I applaud you. But please realize that not everyone is your > shoes. > > Peace, > Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From eaerme at newnorth.net Sat Nov 3 00:59:11 2001 From: eaerme at newnorth.net (ERNEST A. ERICKSON) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:09:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] It's all a matter of PERCEPTION/S.. Message-ID: <3BE3B1DF.776F42CF@newnorth.net> Hello: Being a new subscriber, I feel that the U.S. is doing all it can to begin its downward spiral and take all of our rights along with them. Mr. Lemuria is right when he states that the PERSON can NOT win in federal court, it takes everybody involved to make the difference felt by the court and the legal "rape" system we have here too. Have you ever wondered WHY the "in-justice" system works night and day to protect corporate america, when the remainder of the population have a complaint/s; they ignore us with the same fervent zeal? I complained and filed statements of abuse of authority for one of our Oneida County "law" enforcement droids. The senator seems to be dragging his heels doing anything to look into the charges, so weeks afterwards, i await a call from him. No matter what drives us, the problem lies with a very corrupt legal/judicial system that favors big corporations and their deep pockets of "campaign donations" makes our ever growing government a protector of the evil and jailer of the innocent! Just recall the Diallo fiasco...4 cops shot an innocent man at his home; but they HAD to fire 41 rounds so he would surely NEVER be able to file charges against them, in a word..M U R D E R! Thanks to the "jury", they all walked away free to murder again! The judge presiding on the case should have been disbarred for damn near ordering the jury to vote not guilty for those "poor" cops were once again, "just doing their jobs" excuse. Free speech is what the COURTS say it is, think nothing about what it really is or states in the Constitution, "we" simple-minded folk have no idea how to read yet, let alone understand what the full meaning and intent of those documents mean to the liberty, rights and freedoms they GUARANTEE, because we all know that government shall always decide against the people when money is involved. Dmitry Sklyarov has been forced to be the pawn in a corporate protectionist play by the government over MONEY, nothing more. Regardless of what is "said" in the court documents, this is a trial about who has the biggest bankroll gets the justice that bankroll deserves(see FCC auctions for more deep pocket law at work). Enough ranting here for one sitting...this is a job for us ALL to be witnesses for, and support any injustice by any means possible as well. Sign my name to any letters, documents, complaints and briefs that you see fit to file, and i will be behind you 100% of the way! It is said that "The law is tempered with justice", let's find out how much of that is true. If this is about "pure" justice, then Mr. Sklyarov would be walking about a free man, not imprisoned by a corporation, and that is exactly what got him there to begin with. Corporations have more rights to liberties and freedom/s than those with very shallow pockets have...no money, no rights! Remember, driving is a "privilege", not a right, but YOU MUST pay for it out of your pockets. Who decided that forced payments are constitutional? If you PAID for it, it becomes a right by default, as does property you paid for, it's YOURS, not under the control of another, or am I missing something here now? Some deep pocketed corporate "monster" wanted to change the constitution to allow ONLY those with huge bankrolls the right to vote in all elections. This was introduced to our ungracious senator/s from California or New York i think..set me straight here if you know what i am trying to convey here please. Big money gets big gove