[free-sklyarov] NY Times Tuesday

[mike castleman]

Ah, with the Internet, you can get articles before the physical paper is
around. <http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/24/technology/24HACK.html> The
article makes it seem like mere coincidence that Adobe issued this press
release on the same day 100 people were yelling outside their doors and
the EFF was sitting inside, but Occam's razor dictates otherwise. Anyway,

Adobe Opposes Prosecution in Hacking Case

By AMY HARMON

In an unexpected turnaround, Adobe Systems (news/quote ) called
yesterday for the release of a Russian programmer accused of violating
American copyright law after he helped create software that can crack
Adobe's security software for electronic books.

Last month, Adobe filed a complaint with the F.B.I. against Elcomsoft,
the Moscow-based company where the programmer works. It was selling a
$99 software package that disabled Adobe's anti-piracy system for
e-books. Then last week, the programmer, Dmitri Sklyarov, was arrested
by federal agents at a conference in Las Vegas, where he described how
to crack copy-protection system. He remains in jail.

But yesterday, Adobe said it would withdraw its support for the
prosecution of Mr. Sklyarov.

The detention of the 26-year-old programmer touched off a public
outcry over the first criminal prosecution under a 1998 copyright
law. The law makes it illegal to "provide to the public" a device with
a main purpose of circumventing a technological security measure for
copyrighted works.

About 100 protesters marched at Adobe's headquarters in San Jose
today, and protests were held in several other cities. Civil liberties
advocates argue that the 1998 law, known as the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act, or D.M.C.A., is an unconstitutional restriction on
speech.

Adobe announced its decision after an eight-hour meeting with the
representatives of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit
civil liberties group based in San Francisco.

"We strongly support the D.M.C.A. and the enforcement of copyright
protection of digital content," said Colleen Pouliot, Adobe's general
counsel. "However, the prosecution of this individual in this
particular case is not conducive to the best interests of any of the
parties involved or the industry."

Last month, after being contacted by Adobe, Elcomsoft stopped selling
the controversial software. Mr. Pouliot said that "from that
perspective, the D.M.C.A. worked."

Robin Gross, a lawyer for the foundation, said that the group had been
able to convince Adobe that supporting the prosecution would hurt its
business. The Justice Department could continue to pursue the case
regardless of Adobe's position. But Ms. Gross said the company's
statement should be "persuasive."

"It makes very little sense for the U.S. attorney's office to ask
taxpayers to foot the bill for a prosecution that Adobe itself doesn't
even support," Ms. Gross said.