From robertl1 at home.com Sat Sep 1 01:13:07 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] New York Times story on court appearance In-Reply-To: <16711844761.20010831233301@elcomsoft.com> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010901010647.024d2110@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 11:33 PM 8/31/01 -0700, you wrote: >"Mr. Sklyarov has been free on $50,000 bail. Since Aug. 6. he lives in Cupertino, Calif." > >- change the "dot" placement - and all seems to be OK now :-)))) > >-- >Best regards, > Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com What sophistry is this, Alex? Dmitry is confined to Northern California, unfree to go home. Certainly a larger jail, but a jail nonetheless. I speak as one who has a Filipina wife. Sovereign states are no lovers of freedom. Ask the US Immigration and Naturalization Service who kept my family apart for years. Free people neither know nor respect such boundaries nor the states that support them. Bob La Quey From keith at indierecords.com Sat Sep 1 08:17:19 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Senator plans anti-piracy bill] References: Message-ID: <3B90FBFF.265C@indierecords.com> > Message: 23 > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:09:11 -0400 (EDT) > From: Jay Sulzberger > To: Charles Eakins > Cc: Jeme A Brelin , > Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Senator plans anti-piracy bill] > > > > Today the > Velociraptor Sytem of Licensed Access is almost ready for mandated all > Earth deployment. The Microsoft component "Papers Please!" is already > installed in all Starbucks. For your convenience! I tried to search for "Papers Please!" to see what you're referring to, but nothing relevant came up -- what is it? -Keith From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 1 08:55:35 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Salon: LoC DMCA review: "impact on consumers appears to be minimal" Message-ID: <20010901085534.G22249@navel.introspect> Damien Cave at Salon: Copywrong? http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/08/31/dmca_report/print.html Damien reports on the Library of Congress's review of the DMCA Just as the office's previous report -- focusing specifically on Section 1201 -- concluded that public anti-circumvention concerns were focused too far out in the future to warrant immediate legislative action, Wednesday's tome also argued against the call for reform. Even as hackers worldwide launch protests for a Russian programmer who was indicted for unlocking e-book security, and ISPs daily struggle with how to decide when Web sites violate the law, and a magazine publisher is in the middle of appealing an injunction that prohibits distribution of DVD-cracking code, the study's writers argue that "the actual impact on consumers appears to be minimal." Congress, the report declares, already dealt with the subject at length over a period of three years while crafting the law, and "the impact of section 1201 on fair use and other copyright exceptions is outside the scope of this Report." Just what, exactly, is the LoC's 1201(a) obligation in reporting on the DMCA and its impacts? Seems to me the LoC's neglected its oblications under items (iii) below. (C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine - o (i) the availability for use of copyrighted works; o (ii) the availability for use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational purposes; o (iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research; o (iv) the effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or value of copyrighted works; and (v) such other factors as the Librarian considers appropriate. (D) The Librarian shall publish any class of copyrighted works for which the Librarian has determined, pursuant to the rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), that noninfringing uses by persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to such users with respect to such class of works for the ensuing 3-year period. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010901/cbb7e8e8/attachment.pgp From sethf at sethf.com Sat Sep 1 09:24:35 2001 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Salon: LoC DMCA review: "impact on consumers appears to be minimal" In-Reply-To: <20010901085534.G22249@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 08:55:35AM -0700 References: <20010901085534.G22249@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010901122435.A10907@sethf.com> On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 08:55:35AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > Just what, exactly, is the LoC's 1201(a) obligation in reporting on the > DMCA and its impacts? > > Seems to me the LoC's neglected its oblications under items (iii) below. Not at all. See "Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works" http://www.loc.gov/copyright/1201/anticirc.html And read "Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies" http://www.loc.gov/copyright/fedreg/65fr64555.html Of particular interest: "6. Encryption Research Purposes A number of commenters urged that a broader encryption research exemption is needed than is contained in section 1201(g). See, e.g., C185, C30, R55, R70. Dissatisfaction was expressed with the restrictiveness of the requirement to attempt to secure the copyright owner's permission before circumventing. C153. See 17 U.S.C. 1201(g)(2)(C). Most of the references to statutory deficiencies regarding encryption research, however, merely state that the provisions are too narrow. See, e.g., PH20." PH20, by the way, was me. Wow, will I be able to say more the next time around ... much more ... much much more ... :-(. The report goes on to state: "As with reverse engineering, proponents of an exemption for encryption research are asking the Librarian to give them a broader exemption than Congress was willing to enact. But they have not carried their burden of demonstrating that the limitations of section 1201(g) have prevented them or are likely in the next three years to prevent them from engaging in noninfringing uses." Oh, the irony. -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf@sethf.com http://sethf.com http://archive.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/technology/circuits/19HACK.html BESS's Secret LOOPHOLE: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/loophole.php From jays at panix.com Sat Sep 1 10:42:36 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Senator plans anti-piracy bill] In-Reply-To: <3B90FBFF.265C@indierecords.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 1 Sep 2001, Keith Handy wrote: > > Today the > > Velociraptor Sytem of Licensed Access is almost ready for mandated all > > Earth deployment. The Microsoft component "Papers Please!" is already > > installed in all Starbucks. For your convenience! > > I tried to search for "Papers Please!" to see what you're referring to, > but nothing relevant came up -- what is it? > > -Keith The name under which the compnent is presently being sold^Wimposed is "Microsoft passport". oo--JS. From Robloch at aol.com Sun Sep 2 17:54:43 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <1e.1a912eaf.28c42ed3@aol.com> The Business Software Alliance's members include bascially every major technology player. http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08-30.692.phtml From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sun Sep 2 18:15:18 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment References: <1e.1a912eaf.28c42ed3@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B92D9A6.E0E6C6DD@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> The impudence of these logic bigots. That's more well-tempered comment I have. Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology Robloch@aol.com wrote: > > The Business Software Alliance's members include bascially every major > technology player. > > http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08-30.692.phtml From rknop at pobox.com Sun Sep 2 18:28:22 2001 From: rknop at pobox.com (Robert A. Knop Jr.) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <1e.1a912eaf.28c42ed3@aol.com>; from Robloch@aol.com on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:54:43PM -0400 References: <1e.1a912eaf.28c42ed3@aol.com> Message-ID: <20010902182822.A27611@sonic.net> > The Business Software Alliance's members include bascially every major > technology player. > > http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08-30.692.phtml Here's my favorite quote: Law enforcement actions are critical to the BSA's anti-piracy efforts, which resulted in over $11 billion in loses to the industry last year alone. Well, heck, if the BSA's anit-piracy efforts are so costly, they should be stopped RIGHT NOW! :) Regards what they really meant to say, I think we all know that the $11 billion estimate is utter hooey. It is probably based on generous estimates of how far each bootleg copy goes (i.e. how many times it is passed around), and on the assumption that everybody who got a bootleg copy would have purchased a legitimate copy if they didn't have the bootleg one. Both probably false. Of course, although I know the BSA doesn't mean to say this, there are *real* costs associated with time lost to the software piracy patrol requiring everybody "demonstrate compliance." -Rob From wiljan at pobox.com Sun Sep 2 19:59:42 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <200109030218.VAA000.41@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:54:43 Robloch@aol.com said: > The Business Software Alliance's members include > bascially every major technology player. > http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08-30.692.phtml Please inform us of what you mean by "every major technology player"? What part say of the S&P index companies are you including? Is not 'technology' still 'all of the industrial arts'? From the statement: > Since the DMCA's enactment the evidence of the abundance of creative > content available online is proof that the DMCA is working. Oh thank you dear BSA for the "abundance of creative content." I don't know we will ever repay you. Have you folks out there any creative ways of repaying the BSA? -will-:@) From mlc67 at columbia.edu Sun Sep 2 19:31:01 2001 From: mlc67 at columbia.edu (mike castleman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <200109030218.VAA000.41@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net>; from wiljan@pobox.com on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:59:42PM -0600 References: <200109030218.VAA000.41@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010902223101.C880@pinetree.columbia.edu> On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:59:42PM -0600, Will Janoschka wrote: > Please inform us of what you mean by "every major technology player"? > What part say of the S&P index companies are you including? > Is not 'technology' still 'all of the industrial arts'? According to their website, "BSA worldwide members include Adobe, Apple, Autodesk, Bentley Systems, CNC Software/Mastercam, Macromedia, Microsoft, Symantec and UGS." Interpret that as you wish. And I think the most common connotation of technology, at least on this list, is "hi-tech" software and hardware industries. However, BSA only includes software companies, so Intel (for example), which I would consider a "major technology player", is not a member. mike -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010902/b9b6acc8/attachment.pgp From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Sun Sep 2 23:00:57 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ Message-ID: <168158020532.20010902230057@elcomsoft.com> Adobe FAQ: ElcomSoft legal background http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elcomsoftqa.html Although Adobe withdrew its support for the criminal complaint against Dmitry Sklyarov, we respect the grand jury's and federal government's role in prosecuting this case. ... Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government in this matter as required by law. ... Adobe continues to support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright protection of digital content. ... -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From Robloch at aol.com Sun Sep 2 23:32:20 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <16b.3b02db.28c47df4@aol.com> Intel is a member. Others include, Dell, IBM, Novell, Compaq. I will rephrase my previous comment. Members include many prominent technology companies. From wiljan at pobox.com Mon Sep 3 01:17:23 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <200109030731.CAA000.42@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:32:20 EDT Robloch@aol.com said: > Intel is a member. Others include, Dell, IBM, Novell, Compaq. I will rephrase > my previous comment. Members include many prominent technology companies. Sir; Would you please identify yourself and your affiliations to the BSA? This is a list directly opposed to all efforts of the BSA, go away! -will-:@) From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 3 00:39:15 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <200109030731.CAA000.42@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> References: <200109030731.CAA000.42@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010903003915.G6864@zork.net> Will Janoschka writes: > This is a list directly opposed to all efforts of the BSA, go away! I imagine the BSA has done something we could agree with, at some point. Anyway, people who want to disrupt the list aren't welcome, but there are already employees, and lawyers, of copyright industries and of companies which lobbied for the DMCA reading this list. They're welcome to hang around; maybe some year, when their kids or neighbors get arrested, they'll know where to come for help. -- 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 wiljan at pobox.com Mon Sep 3 01:54:26 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <200109030809.DAA000.43@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:39:15 Seth David Schoen schoen@loyalty.org said: >I imagine the BSA has done something we could agree with, at some >point. >Anyway, people who want to disrupt the list aren't welcome, but there >are already employees, and lawyers, of copyright industries and of >companies which lobbied for the DMCA reading this list. They're >welcome to hang around; maybe some year, when their kids or neighbors >get arrested, they'll know where to come for help. Sorry Seth, I got carried away! I would like Dmity to go home. Then mabe later some of us can try to fix the damage of DMCA. -will-:@) From Robloch at aol.com Mon Sep 3 01:09:10 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <65.1a1ee5d4.28c494a6@aol.com> Sir; Would you please identify yourself and your affiliations to the BSA? This is a list directly opposed to all efforts of the BSA, go away! -will-:@) I've obviously somehow confused you. I was posting the link because I thought that it was interesting, not because I supported BSA or its rheteric. To be honest, I don't know enough about their policies to judge them. I write freelance for DotcomScoop, and work in the UK. These are 2 articles that I have written on this subject so far. Part of the reason that I am on this list is to keep myself informed, in an attempt to cover this case properly. http://www.dotcomscoop.com/wtaw828.html http://www.dotcomscoop.com/wtaw830.html In a message dated 9/3/01 8:33:05 AM GMT Daylight Time, wiljan@pobox.com writes: << free-sklyarov@zork.net >> From wiljan at pobox.com Mon Sep 3 02:27:23 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment Message-ID: <200109030850.DAA000.44@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 04:09:10 EDT Robloch@aol.com said: > I've obviously somehow confused you. I was posting the link because I thought > that it was interesting, not because I supported BSA or its rheteric. To be > honest, I don't know enough about their policies to judge them. Ok; I apologize to both you and Seth. On my reply to your original post, I was being sarcastic or tongue in cheek. ---Being a writer please say this in a way that I cannot. Oh thank you dear BSA for the "abundance of creative content." I don't know how we will ever repay you. Have you folks out there any creative ways of repaying the BSA? -will-:@) From admin at seattle-chat.com Mon Sep 3 02:05:57 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <20010902223101.C880@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: Funny IBM's pushing open source software, I'm sorry to say this, but FUCK these companys, it's time to boycott, and hit these assholes in the pocket book. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of mike castleman Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 7:31 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:59:42PM -0600, Will Janoschka wrote: > Please inform us of what you mean by "every major technology player"? > What part say of the S&P index companies are you including? > Is not 'technology' still 'all of the industrial arts'? According to their website, "BSA worldwide members include Adobe, Apple, Autodesk, Bentley Systems, CNC Software/Mastercam, Macromedia, Microsoft, Symantec and UGS." Interpret that as you wish. And I think the most common connotation of technology, at least on this list, is "hi-tech" software and hardware industries. However, BSA only includes software companies, so Intel (for example), which I would consider a "major technology player", is not a member. mike -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 3 02:16:12 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment References: Message-ID: <3B934A5C.FD48D43E@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Yep, we gotta stop these logic bigots. This kind of statement from the BSA really puts the shine on the apple. Seth Johnson Charles Eakins wrote: > > Funny IBM's pushing open source software, I'm sorry to say this, but FUCK > these companys, it's time to boycott, and hit these assholes in the pocket > book. From a.chterenlikht at sheffield.ac.uk Mon Sep 3 06:21:32 2001 From: a.chterenlikht at sheffield.ac.uk (Anton Chterenlikht) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] today's article in a portuguese paper References: Message-ID: <3B9383DC.DDB00EBC@sheffield.ac.uk> http://jornal.publico.pt/2001/09/03/Computadores/TI01.html anton From tom at lemuria.org Mon Sep 3 06:55:38 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Senator plans anti-piracy bill] In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 03:47:13PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010903155538.C1731@lemuria.org> On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 03:47:13PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > They'll be able to own my computer when they can pry it out of my cold dead > fingers. they won't have to. ten years from now, none of your machines will be able to read ANY of the then-current medias or connect to any device that can. oops. From kfoss at planetpdf.com Mon Sep 3 07:15:23 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Comments on Sklyarov, ElcomSoft Cases Message-ID: from Planet eBook: Adobe Systems has published a new FAQ on the events surrounding the U.S. government's arrest of ElcomSoft employee Dmitry Sklyarov and the subsequent indictment of Sklyarov and ElcomSoft. The FAQ is Adobe's attempt to clarify areas it believes have been misrepresented, including its position on the indictments, its point of view on the DMCA and copyright infringement, and its involvement in the events leading up to Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest. http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=224 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From kyhwana at world-net.co.nz Mon Sep 3 07:10:01 2001 From: kyhwana at world-net.co.nz (Daniel Richards) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [DMCA_discuss] [C-FIT_Community] BSA Statement on DMCA and Sklyarov Indictment] In-Reply-To: References: <20010902210520.J44726@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <3B9437F9.14121.235046B@localhost> On 3 Sep 2001, at 1:55, metahcetia wrote: > > Safe for who? For large corporations and their IP, obviously ;) http://www.freesklyarov.org - Free Dmitry! PGP Pub key: http://shell.world-net.co.nz/~kyhwana/DanielRPubKey.asc Fingerprint: 416D 4027 D635 AF51 F2BF 60DF 4D94 F7A0 9893 2848 From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 3 08:29:30 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud References: Message-ID: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Yep. The copyright inheres in the originality evidenced by the selection and arrangement of its elements, not in the elements themselves. Plus, since Feist Publications, it's irrelevant whether Mr. Maden put in more work than Lewis Carroll. There is no "sweat of the brow" doctrine. Copyright is intended to benefit the public, and only proposes to benefit authors as a means to that end. What the DMCA is now expressing is the fact that the power given to Congress to grant "exclusive right" to authors is no longer viable, except at the untenable expense of policing the most intricate aspects of people's free use of information -- a result that is anathema to the very design and principles of American society. (This is not legal advice, etc. etc.) Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology "James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)" wrote: > > While I might agree that the new version is a new work and is copyrightable, > I would disagree that the words are copyrightable. > > Any restriction on reading the words seems inappropriate for me because the > words are public domain. > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 05:45:27PM -0700, Christopher R. Maden wrote: > > >I guess I would like to reiterate that this version of Alice is not > > >public domain but is a unique new work and copyrightable. My work on > > >recapturing Carroll's exact typography and design was probably more > > >exhaustive than his original work. It's copyrighted for that reason. > > >But since the original From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 3 09:52:09 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:56 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: References: <20010902223101.C880@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: <20010903095209.H6864@zork.net> Charles Eakins writes: > Funny IBM's pushing open source software, It's come up before that IBM and other companies with a large investment and involvement in the open source world are also involved in some initiatives which are seen as harmful to that world. I was very critical of IBM for shipping the InterVideo LinDVD software on Linux ThinkPads (this is the too-little-too-late DVD CCA-licensed Linux DVD software, still inferior to the free software DVD CCA suggests is illegal). Now people who buy ThinkPads with Linux are giving money and credibility to support the DVD CCA's arguments against free software DVD players. IBM could have shipped free software (LiViD OMS, Xine, VideoLAN, ...), but it would likely have faced a lawsuit. On the other hand, I argued that the decision to ship LinDVD sends a harmful message. Other people have worried about IBM and software patents (it has always held many more than any other entity), and IBM and copy protection/DRM (IBM is a proponent of several DRM initiatives and a member company of standards working groups which are developing others). The interesting thing is that IBM is a vast organization containing many different parts, many different goals, and many different cultures. At a recent summit meeting on software patents, one participant mentioned that some companies have entire departments which are very anti-patent, and at the same time have other departments whose entire purpose is to try to make money by licensing patents. (IBM's patent licensing department in particular already received over one billion dollars in annual revenue from licensing patents some time ago.) The size of IBM has made it difficult to talk to people who could do something about this. Some of my friends have certainly been trying, but they tend to get the response "that's not my department", and _that response tends to be accurate_! "And when you give alms, do not even let your left hand know what your right hand is doing." (Matthew 6:3) -- 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 DAckroyd at igl.co.uk Mon Sep 3 10:14:26 2001 From: DAckroyd at igl.co.uk (Dan Ackroyd) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:56 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re:Adobe Comments on Sklyarov, ElcomSoft Cases Message-ID: <6F3916076228D211B8F400A0C9DD6663012E6AFE@IGL-EXCH> From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 3 12:16:29 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:56 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Thanks to demonstrators Message-ID: <20010903121629.M6864@zork.net> I'm just looking at the new pictures linked from http://sf.freesklyarov.org/ and I wanted to thank everybody who turned out to protest during LinuxWorld. I'm impressed by how many people I _don't_ know from those pictures! -- 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 admin at seattle-chat.com Mon Sep 3 12:39:20 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Comments on Sklyarov, ElcomSoft Cases In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Grrr, for all of you that have told me we shouldn't worry about Adobe anymore, here is proof along with the BSA statement that we should still protest in front Adobe! That includes all you people on the Seattle List and Boycottadobe.com. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Kurt Foss Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 7:15 AM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Comments on Sklyarov, ElcomSoft Cases from Planet eBook: Adobe Systems has published a new FAQ on the events surrounding the U.S. government's arrest of ElcomSoft employee Dmitry Sklyarov and the subsequent indictment of Sklyarov and ElcomSoft. The FAQ is Adobe's attempt to clarify areas it believes have been misrepresented, including its position on the indictments, its point of view on the DMCA and copyright infringement, and its involvement in the events leading up to Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest. http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=224 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 3 12:43:44 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud In-Reply-To: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>; from seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org on Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 11:29:30AM -0400 References: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20010903124344.L17829@navel.introspect> on Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 11:29:30AM -0400, Seth Johnson (seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org) wrote: > > Yep. The copyright inheres in the originality evidenced by the > selection and arrangement of its elements, not in the elements > themselves. > > Plus, since Feist Publications, it's irrelevant whether Mr. Maden put > in more work than Lewis Carroll. There is no "sweat of the brow" > doctrine. As was pointed out on CNI-Copyright, Feist was a unanimous decision: the court utterly, completely, and without dissent, dismissed the "sweat of the brow" argument. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010903/a905589d/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 3 12:51:36 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <20010902182822.A27611@sonic.net>; from rknop@pobox.com on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 06:28:22PM -0700 References: <1e.1a912eaf.28c42ed3@aol.com> <20010902182822.A27611@sonic.net> Message-ID: <20010903125136.M17829@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 06:28:22PM -0700, Robert A. Knop Jr. (rknop@pobox.com) wrote: > > The Business Software Alliance's members include bascially every major > > technology player. > > > > http://www.bsa.org/usa/press/newsreleases//2001-08-30.692.phtml > > Here's my favorite quote: > > Law enforcement actions are critical to the BSA's anti-piracy > efforts, which resulted in over $11 billion in loses to the > industry last year alone. > > Well, heck, if the BSA's anit-piracy efforts are so costly, they should be > stopped RIGHT NOW! :) A long-lived outright lie, thoroughly repudiated for years, I might add, in an essay I wrote: http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/piracy.html On Software "Piracy", Lies, BSA, Microsoft, Rocks, and Hard Penguins <...> Impacts on ISVs Piracy does have a negative impact on legitimate software revenues. The amount cited by the SPA as "losses due to piracy" is mislabeled, it is really the wholesale value of pirated software (units of pirated software times wholesale price). The actual loss is the difference between what revenues would have been without piracy and actual revenues with piracy. Determining the price and unit sales in the absence of piracy requires a more rigorous economic analysis than is used in the SPA case. The amount is far, far less than the numbers reported by SPA. I've been looking for, but have been unable to find any rigorous economic analysis suggesting the what the actual amounts might be in different markets. It's possible to get some idea of how far off these are simply by backing out SPA's numbers, taking the piracy rate to represent a fraction of total wholesale unit sales. Taking a few of the markets described, 1998 SPA report: (billions of US dollars) Market Whsl Value Pirate Sw Piracy Rate Legitimate Sales (my estimate) US $2.8 27% $7.6 China $1.4 96% $0.06 Japan $0.8 32% $1.7 Korea $0.6 67% $0.3 Brazil $0.4 62% $0.3 UK $0.3 31% $0.7 China is of particular interest. Though piracy "losses" of $1.4 billion are claimed, ACTUAL software sales were only $60 million. I find it impossible to believe that any significant fraction of the claimed billion plus dollars in "losses" would have been realized in actual sales, in the absence of piracy. Put another way, the US per capita legitimate software purchase for 1997 was $27. For China, it was $0.05. I point this essay to reporters and authors whenever I see misstatements of piracy impacts stated. Moreover, the fact is that in order to promote marketshare, SW publishers have tacitly (and sometimes actively) supported unauthorized distribution of proprietary software. EFF/Free Sklyarov efforts are free to use, reference, and distribute this essay with attribution. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010903/137c496d/attachment.pgp From crism at maden.org Mon Sep 3 12:48:05 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud In-Reply-To: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010903124711.00a970d0@mail.maden.org> At 08:29 3-09-2001, Seth Johnson wrote: >Plus, since Feist Publications, it's irrelevant whether Mr. Maden put in >more work than Lewis Carroll. There is no "sweat of the brow" doctrine. To clarify: Mr. Maden forwarded a post from the _Alice_ publisher, Pete Zelchenko. Mr. Maden had and has nothing to do with Mr. Zelchenko nor with VolumeOne publications, except subscribing to a common mailing list. -Chris -- Christopher R. Maden, Principal Consultant, HMM Consulting Int'l, Inc. DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 3 12:57:59 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <168158020532.20010902230057@elcomsoft.com>; from akatalov@elcomsoft.com on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 11:00:57PM -0700 References: <168158020532.20010902230057@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <20010903125759.N17829@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 11:00:57PM -0700, Alex Katalov (akatalov@elcomsoft.com) wrote: > > Adobe FAQ: ElcomSoft legal background > http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elcomsoftqa.html > > Although Adobe withdrew its support for the criminal complaint against > Dmitry Sklyarov, we respect the grand jury's and federal government's > role in prosecuting this case. > ... > Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government in this matter as > required by law. > ... > Adobe continues to support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright > protection of digital content. > ... We should have a counterpoint to this FAQ posted, specifically backed with content from the FBI's affidavit showing Adobe's involvement in the initial complaint, and featuring callouts, specifically: [Adobe] respect[s] the grand jury's and federal government's role in prosecuting this case. Adobe continues to support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright protection of digital content. These two statements should be featured prominantly on future materials and press releases produced supporting Sklyarov and the anti-DMCA battle. Adobe's complicity will not go unmentioned. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010903/824bb143/attachment.pgp From proclus at iname.com Mon Sep 3 16:12:41 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:57 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <168158020532.20010902230057@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <200109032312.f83NCit08658@moerbeke> On 2 Sep, Alex Katalov wrote: > > Adobe FAQ: ElcomSoft legal background > http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elcomsoftqa.html > > Although Adobe withdrew its support for the criminal complaint against > Dmitry Sklyarov, we respect the grand jury's and federal government's > role in prosecuting this case. > ... > Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government in this matter as > required by law. > ... > Adobe continues to support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright > protection of digital content. > ... It seems to me that the practical meaning of these statements will be quite apparent soon. We should be ready to restart the boycott at any time, and we should be public about our readiness. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/news.html Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > > -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Mon Sep 3 16:45:50 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <200109032312.f83NCit08658@moerbeke> Message-ID: On Mon, 3 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: > It seems to me that the practical meaning of these statements will be > quite apparent soon. We should be ready to restart the boycott at any > time, and we should be public about our readiness. Well, I think most of us are still boycotting. And I think that they should be boycotted until the damage they inflicted is undone. IMHO it's insufficient if they simply express regret or take this or that stance on the issue. Scott [I just saw someone sporting the shirt in Palo Alto Fry's today.] From proclus at iname.com Mon Sep 3 17:15:43 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109040015.f840Fkt08733@moerbeke> On 3 Sep, Xcott Craver wrote: > On Mon, 3 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: > >> It seems to me that the practical meaning of these statements will be >> quite apparent soon. We should be ready to restart the boycott at any >> time, and we should be public about our readiness. > > Well, I think most of us are still boycotting. And I think that > they should be boycotted until the damage they inflicted is > undone. IMHO it's insufficient if they simply express regret > or take this or that stance on the issue. > > Scott Yes indeed, I agree with all of this, and I am not saying that people should go back to using Adobe products. Moreover, we can use the threat of a return to the boycott. The boycott really did end. Adobe lost a few customers permanently, and they did their about face. The boycott gave some teeth to the demonstrator's demands. Without the threat of a boycott, we are not as powerful. We could do much more to reach Adobe's customer base, if it turns out that they have been disingenous about their desire to see Dmitry go home. What would trigger a return to the boycott? That is a wide open field, IMHO. I think it will be clear whether they are truly advocating Dmitry's release or not. We should not return to the boycott, if Adobe is merely required by the prosecution to testify against Dmitry, because Adobe would be legally obligated to do so. On the other hand, if they actively work with the Feds towards a conviction, if they advocate his incarceration or testify that Dmitry should be punished, and so on, then we can restart the boycott with a vengence. I don't think that Adobe should provide anything to the Feds that is not required by the law. Adobe should be mostly out of the picture now, and I hope that it stays that way, but if not, we have a response. This whole situation is a great offense on the part of Adobe, and they were right to withdraw their support. Now, they should not do _anything_ to make things worse, where they could legally do otherwise. What if Adobe is still working with the prosecutor in order to have Dmitry punished? I'm sure that others can think of situations where we can raise the stakes with a vigorously renewed boycott, but we should reserve that course for the right time. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > [I just saw someone sporting the shirt in Palo Alto Fry's today.] > -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 3 17:11:28 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud References: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <20010903124344.L17829@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <3B941C30.696F255E@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> I hope you're intending to amplify my point -- that's what I was saying! :-) Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology "Karsten M. Self" wrote: > > As was pointed out on CNI-Copyright, Feist was a unanimous decision: > the court utterly, completely, and without dissent, dismissed the "sweat > of the brow" argument. > > on Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 11:29:30AM -0400, Seth Johnson (seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org) wrote: > > > > Yep. The copyright inheres in the originality evidenced by the > > selection and arrangement of its elements, not in the elements > > themselves. > > > > Plus, since Feist Publications, it's irrelevant whether Mr. Maden put > > in more work than Lewis Carroll. There is no "sweat of the brow" > > doctrine. From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 3 17:16:13 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010903124711.00a970d0@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <3B941D4D.E192F54F@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Okay, the way the quote header worked, plus the phrase "My work" led me astray. My apologies to Mr. Maden. I should have referenced Mr Zelchenko or whoever did the "my work" stuff. Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology "Christopher R. Maden" wrote: > > To clarify: Mr. Maden forwarded a post from the _Alice_ publisher, Pete > Zelchenko. Mr. Maden had and has nothing to do with Mr. Zelchenko nor with > VolumeOne publications, except subscribing to a common mailing list. > > At 08:29 3-09-2001, Seth Johnson wrote: > >Plus, since Feist Publications, it's irrelevant whether Mr. Maden put in > >more work than Lewis Carroll. There is no "sweat of the brow" doctrine. From wiljan at pobox.com Mon Sep 3 18:58:46 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ Message-ID: <200109040139.UAA000.40@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:45:50 Xcott Craver sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU said: > Well, I think most of us are still boycotting. And I think that > they should be boycotted until the damage they inflicted is > undone. IMHO it's insufficient if they simply express regret > or take this or that stance on the issue. > Scott This Adobe stuff gets more and more confusing. Why was Adobe not charged with trafficking and circumventing? They did it in before a US law enforcement officer. If the FBI/DoJ believes that AEBPR does meet the requirements under 17 USC 1201, don't they have an obligation to bring charges against those who violate the law? US customs has warnings about importing stuff via the internet, i.e the buyer is the importer always. US customs provides no tariff on imported software, but again they caution that if an item is illegal to import to the US the importer not the exporter is violating US law. Also a money broker is not an importer. Adobe profited from the import be getting the FBI to arrest a person that was saying to the world that Adobe software is "crap". 1. DoJ says AEBPR is a circumvention device. 2. An Adobe employee imported this circumvention device for Adobe. 3. An Adobe employee "circumvented" before a law officer. 4. Arrest the employee and indict Adobe. There is a way that the FBI could avoid that, but do they have the papers? show the "Sting order". -will- From MLarma at eFuel.com Mon Sep 3 18:41:26 2001 From: MLarma at eFuel.com (Larma, Mark) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Humorous DMCA Article (not real, of course) Message-ID: <1E50F10694062B4D922862B413D01C9E0584@efuelmail.efuel.com> From Robloch at aol.com Mon Sep 3 18:52:32 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Learn Russian Message-ID: <140.fff1da.28c58de0@aol.com> http://www.russian.about.com/ From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Mon Sep 3 19:19:44 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <200109040139.UAA000.40@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: > 2. An Adobe employee imported this circumvention device for Adobe. > 3. An Adobe employee "circumvented" before a law officer. > 4. Arrest the employee and indict Adobe. Alright, smoke some crack and follow along: If I own the media, I have Fair Use rights. DMCA doesn't change them, it just makes them impossible to exercise. Not illegal, just impossible. So I, Adobe Joe, buy media, and exercise Fair Use rights within the law. My legal act is evidence of a crime, but I'm not the criminal, the tool creator is. From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 3 20:10:29 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] _Alice_ read aloud References: <3B93A1DA.D4F7DEEF@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <20010903124344.L17829@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <3B944625.BF2D8EF2@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Plus, probably nowhere else will you find as direct an acknowledgement of the nature of digital media as their decision that the copyright in compilations is "thin" -- given that copyright only covers originality in selection and arrangement, and yet the technology is thoroughly manipulable. That's the other fabulous part of Feist. Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology "Karsten M. Self" wrote: > > As was pointed out on CNI-Copyright, Feist was a unanimous decision: > the court utterly, completely, and without dissent, dismissed the "sweat > of the brow" argument. From gneely2 at yahoo.com Mon Sep 3 23:22:13 2001 From: gneely2 at yahoo.com (Gary Neely) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) Message-ID: <20010904062213.7141.qmail@web20306.mail.yahoo.com> PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR LIST. I CANT HANDLE THE VOLUME. I WILL FOLLOW YOUR EFFORTS AND SUPPORT AS I AM ABLE. I WILL CONTINUE WRITTING MY PEOPLE IN CONGRESS. THANK YOU __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Mon Sep 3 23:39:46 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Comments on the indictment Message-ID: <20010904083946.A9251@3soft.de> Thanks to cryptome for an HTML version of the indictment. (http://cryptome.org/dmitry-indict.htm) A couple of comments on the indictment document which might be of interest to the defence team (does anyone know how to bring this to their attention?) Paragraph 1.f > Consumers who wished to purchase books formatted for the Adobe > Acrobat eBook Reader ("eBook Reader") could download a free > copy of the eBook Reader to their personal computer and then > purchase the ebook from an online retailer. Upon purchasing the ebook > from the online retailer, a series of electronic communications > between and among the computers of the online retailer -- including, > typically, an Adobe-supplied server -- and the customer's computer > authorized the ebook to be read on the computer from which the > purchase was made. The communication is specifically between the eBook Reader and the servers, not between the computer as a whole. This is an important point, because the rest of the software on the computer, and any subsequently installed software, is not explicitly authorised to access the eBook. Neither is it forbidden to access the eBook. Furthermore, the customer is not informed of these "permissions", so is unable to determine if his actions, or the actions of the software he runs, are "permitted". The secrecy of these transactions was admitted by Adobe in their original complaint. Paragraph 1.g > When an ebook purchased for viewing in the Adobe eBook Reader > format was sold by the publisher or distributor, the publisher or > distributor of the ebook could authorize or limit the purchaser's > ability to copy, distribute, print, or have the text read audibly > by the computer. Technically incorrect. The publisher could authorize or limit the Adobe eBook Reader's ability to perform these actions. There is nothing that informs other software of this "authorisation", nor is there anything that informs the purchaser. Furthermore, the list of actions the "publisher or distributor" can permit or forbid is incomplete. It should include sell, give, lend, and possibly others. Only a small subset of these are actions that the _copyright holder_ has the right to authorise or forbid (distribute, copy under certain circumstances). The rest he has no rights to authorise nor forbid. Furthermore, the distributor is unlikely to have any of these rights, since he is almost certainly not the copyright holder. And the publisher may only deny permission when he is the copyright holder. So in the majority of cases (if not in all cases) the use of the tool, and hence the distrbution of it, would be perfectly legal. If the publishers want legal protection against third-party software, the should limit their restrictions to what is permitted by law. > Adobe designed the eBook Reader to permit the > management of such digital rights so that in the ordinary course > of its operation, the eBook Reader effectively permitted the > publisher or distributor of the ebook to restrict or limit the > exercise of certain copyright rights of an owner of the copyright > for an ebook distributed in the eBook Reader format. "During the normal course of its operation" the reader software does nothing to permit or forbid access to the data files that form the eBook. The reader software therefore plays no role in the protection of the eBook, either "during the normal course of its operation" or otherwise. Once this is firmly established, the only protection that is available is contained within the data file which, "during the normal course of operation", remains passively on the computer's hard disk. The effectiveness of the protection is therefore the effectiveness of the encryption, which is clearly ineffective. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From wiljan at pobox.com Tue Sep 4 00:32:33 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:58 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] no subject Message-ID: <200109040827.DAA000.44@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Gary Neely gneely2@yahoo.com said on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:22:13 > PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR LIST. I CANT HANDLE THE > VOLUME. I WILL FOLLOW YOUR EFFORTS AND SUPPORT AS I AM > ABLE. I WILL CONTINUE WRITTING MY PEOPLE IN CONGRESS. > THANK YOU Seth, can you handle this? Another traveler on the internet that can cruise, but has no idea of the brake pedal, or how it can be used. I can inform him of how to unsubscribe- I doubt that it will work. From Robloch at aol.com Tue Sep 4 02:45:08 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Skylarov quotes Message-ID: sfgate article: There are some great quotes from Dmitry: "I don't like to be a symbol of justice or something like that," Sklyarov said. "I want to be on my own and do things that I like to do, not what many people want from me. My main intention is to go back to Russia." "I am a computer engineer. I am not a hacker," Sklyarov said. "I've never been in jail in Russia, but I know jail in Russia is much worse than in the United States," said Sklyarov, who seems unruffled about his predicament. "I was three days in the Russian military -- as part of graduating from the university I became an officer of the military reserve. Food in the military was worse than in American jail." "I've spent some time using the computer, reading newsgroups and Web sites about me." He laughed: "Well, not only about me." "I am not so familiar as Bill Gates," he said, grinning. "There is nothing personal about me and this country. If it will be necessary for me to get to this country for a job, for fun, for some other purposes, probably I will return back -- if the country will allow me to do that," he said. "But now -- I don't like living in the United States," he said. "It's another country with other rules. I prefer to live in Russia." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/31/B U219882.DTL&type=tech Cheers Robert dotcomscoop.com From petico at io.com Tue Sep 4 08:19:41 2001 From: petico at io.com (A.J. Peticolas) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Launching Wipout (fwd) -- ip essay contest/site Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:11:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul Davis To: Multiple recipients of list From: "Wipout" Reply-To: contact@wipout.net Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:16:38 +0100 Subject: Launching Wipout Dear Friends, Colleagues, and Fellow Activists: WIPOUT, an international organisation consisting of academics, artists, musicians, and other activists, is today (Sept. 4) launching the Intellectual Property Counter Essay Contest on its website, www.wipout.net The multi-lingual essay contest has been organised in response to the World Intellectual Property Organisation's (WIPO's) own competition announced earlier this year. The counter contest is intended to challenge the over-protection of intellectual property (IP) which is doing much damage to education, health care, the environment, and economic security for millions around the world. Entrants are being asked to address the same topic that WIPO has posed: WHAT DOES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MEAN TO YOU IN YOUR DAILY LIFE? We expect the counter contest essays to be rather more critical than those that WIPO is soliciting. The website also has a space for shorter 'Point of View' pieces on the same topic for those who have something to say, but do not want to write an essay. WIPOUT?s contest will continue from 4 September until 15 March 2002. The winning essays will be chosen by an international panel of judges and the results announced on 26 April 2002, the same day that WIPO announces the winners of its contest. WIPOUT?s prize fund currently totals ?1500.00 (approx. $US2100.00). Unlike submissions to most essay contests, WIPOUT?s essays will be immediately posted on the website and accessible to all readers, not just the judges. And although WIPOUT is hosting a 'contest', we see the competitive aspect of the contest secondary to the purpose of enabling a public and critical debate on the over-protection of IP. More than 40 groups and individuals from 10 countries have, to date, announced their support for WIPOUT. (A complete list can be viewed at www.wipout.net) High- profile endorsers include Noam Chomsky, The Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa, the Gene Campaign of India, British barrister Michael Mansfield, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Center for the Public Domain in the US. WIPOUT sees the contest as a way of building on recent high-profile issues such as the South African anti-HIV drugs case, the growing protests against the TRIPS agreement and the WTO, the Napster saga (and increasing resentment against the high price of CDs), the arrest and charging of Dmitry Skylarov, and public concern about GM crops and the patenting of human genes and plants. The essays can be submitted to WIPOUT in English, French, German, and Spanish. A selection of initial essays, submitted for judging purposes or for the shorter non-judged ?point of view? section of the website, has already been posted on the website. Details of the WIPO contest can be found at: http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/alert/2001/ma03rev.htm So what can you do? First, go and check our website, www.wipout.net, and look at the contributions already posted. Then if you want to become a part of the contest and join in the campaign against the over-protection of intellectual property, you can: 1) Most obviously, write an essay or a 'Point of View' and submit it to WIPOUT. It will then be posted on our website. 2) Become an official endorser of the competition. 3) Make a contribution to our prize fund. 4) If you run a website, put a link to WIPOUT on your site (a .jpg button can be provided). We are happy to put a reciprocal link on our site. 5) If your group or organisation publishes a newsletter/magazine, mention our launch. We have a launch essay we can supply for you. 6) Download the Wipout poster and put it up in your workplace, university, school, or local shop. 7) Spread the word. Tell others who may be interested by forwarding them this email. There are a lot of people in the world who are extremely unhappy with the effects of the excessive protection of IP. Give them the chance to say what they think Finally, keep checking www.wipout.net in coming weeks to read the new submissions. It shows there are others who share your views and want to do something. Our email address is:contact@wipout.net ----------------------------------------------- The Intellectual Property Counter-Essay Contest www.wipout.net Tell the world what you think ----------------------------------------------- From dmarti at zgp.org Tue Sep 4 09:57:33 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] New York Times story on court appearance In-Reply-To: <20010831072955.A22249@navel.introspect> References: <20010831072955.A22249@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010904095733.C14118@zgp.org> begin Karsten M. Self quotation of Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 07:29:55AM -0700: > I think you've seriously misread Jennifer 8 Lee's reporting. She's > noting the level of public support and outrage over the case. Complain politely about any error or bias you feel a story contains, even if the story is, as a whole, balanced. If the Media don't get complaints from both sides they feel like they're being biased. Be polite though. -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti Free Dmitry: http://eff.org/ dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs: http://burnallgifs.org/ From schoen at loyalty.org Tue Sep 4 10:20:00 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] no subject In-Reply-To: <200109040827.DAA000.44@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> References: <200109040827.DAA000.44@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010904102000.I20590@zork.net> Will Janoschka writes: > Gary Neely gneely2@yahoo.com said on Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:22:13 > > > PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR LIST. I CANT HANDLE THE > > VOLUME. I WILL FOLLOW YOUR EFFORTS AND SUPPORT AS I AM > > ABLE. I WILL CONTINUE WRITTING MY PEOPLE IN CONGRESS. > > THANK YOU > > Seth, can you handle this? Another traveler on the internet that can cruise, > but has no idea of the brake pedal, or how it can be used. > > I can inform him of how to unsubscribe- I doubt that it will work. This person is already unsubscribed, but -- once again -- sending a request to the mailing list is not an appropriate way to unsubscribe. The correct way to unsubscribe is by following the instructions at http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov/ or sending a message with the line "unsubscribe" to free-sklyarov-request@zork.net (not free-sklyarov@zork.net). -- 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 dmarti at zgp.org Tue Sep 4 10:57:46 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: References: <200109032312.f83NCit08658@moerbeke> Message-ID: <20010904105746.G14118@zgp.org> begin Xcott Craver quotation of Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 07:45:50PM -0400: > Well, I think most of us are still boycotting. And I think that > they should be boycotted until the damage they inflicted is > undone. IMHO it's insufficient if they simply express regret > or take this or that stance on the issue. Don't forget our secret weapon, the concerned Adobe employees. We should do everything we can to keep them on our side, by taking the position that we're boycotting high-quality software because of the company's political actions, not just "Adobe sux." Every chance we get to mention the divide between management and the responsible professionals who work there is good too. Adobe is planning to announce earnings on Sept. 13. Sales are down. http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200107/20010730intraq3release.html -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti Free Dmitry: http://eff.org/ dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs: http://burnallgifs.org/ From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 4 11:28:28 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <20010904105746.G14118@zgp.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Don Marti wrote: > Adobe is planning to announce earnings on Sept. 13. Sales are down. > http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200107/ > 20010730intraq3release.html Let's do what we can to make sure that Sklyarov's arrest, and the subsequent boycott, is mentioned in every news item reporting their earnings. [Chances are it already will be, thanks to a amazingly organized and effective effort.] Sure, there's not a direct connection between earnings and Sklyarov, but then again... siccing the FBI on Sklyarov was a supreme act of computer illiteracy. Somone at Adobe is empowered to make pretty dumb decisions affecting the whole company. BTW, the Microsoft virus problem is getting worse by leaps and bounds, and I find more articles on the subject as a result. Some of them are predicting a grim future with XP, which will have more high-end capabilities but mostly end-user-level security. We gotta make it part of the general public perception of this rising crisis, that not only are viruses going to get worse, but the security experts we presently have are being jailed or otherwise silenced by giant paranoid corporations. Scott From kmself at ix.netcom.com Tue Sep 4 11:59:46 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: PRI event 9/5 in DC: A "free choice approach" to privacy] Message-ID: <20010904115945.G7619@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010904/977f5876/attachment.pgp From martinb at kemokid.com Tue Sep 4 12:10:20 2001 From: martinb at kemokid.com (Martin Baker) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <20010904105746.G14118@zgp.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Don Marti wrote: > Don't forget our secret weapon, the concerned Adobe employees. > We should do everything we can to keep them on our side, I don't think Adobe employees are on our side, on the whole. Adobe seems to have given them quite a bit of propaganda. I spoke briefly to one person I know who works there, and he said of Sklyarov, "Well, it'd be one thing if he gave it away, but he was selling it for money. That's clearly piracy." Unfortunately, I didn't get the chance to follow up or correct him. A co-worker told me about his conversation with an Adobe employee - he neutrally mentioned the Free Dmitry protests, and she, assuming he was sympathetic to Adobe, was very virulently anti-Dmitry, feeling that he had was basically a criminal and deserved jail time. The implication in both cases was that Dmitry was selling Adobe software, or perhaps some part of Adobe software in his own product. So I believe that Adobe employees are the victim of some incredible misinformation from Adobe - the same confusion of reverse engineering with "piracy" that the BSA is trying to push. Martin From declan at well.com Tue Sep 4 12:16:16 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] BSA, DMCA statement on indictment In-Reply-To: <20010903003915.G6864@zork.net>; from schoen@loyalty.org on Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 12:39:15AM -0700 References: <200109030731.CAA000.42@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <20010903003915.G6864@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010904151616.B16770@cluebot.com> On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 12:39:15AM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > Will Janoschka writes: > > > This is a list directly opposed to all efforts of the BSA, go away! > > I imagine the BSA has done something we could agree with, at some > point. Arguing against crypto export rules, for one. -Declan From jays at panix.com Tue Sep 4 12:39:05 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] What the DMCA and universal "copy protection" in all home computers means. Message-ID: James M. Rosebaum explains what "copy protection" in the home computer means. It means universal automatic inescapable government enforced spying on every user of the Net. http://www.greenbag.org/rosenbaum_harddrive.pdf oo--JS. From jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 4 13:57:44 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] The Reg: MS eBook cracker keeps findings secret Message-ID: <20010904135744.C62714@networkcommand.com> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/21469.html An anonymous programmer has created a program that cracks the security of Microsoft's eBook reader software in a development that put a fresh spin on the case against Russian programmer, Dmitry Sklyarov. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/21469.html From kfoss at planetpdf.com Tue Sep 4 14:37:37 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Will Not Aid Russian Programmer In-Reply-To: <10434211613.20020903182431@centras.lt> References: <10434211613.20020903182431@centras.lt> Message-ID: Adobe Will Not Aid Russian Programmer - Sept. 4 http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,60643,00.asp rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 4 14:47:19 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Will Not Aid Russian Programmer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Kurt Foss wrote: > Adobe Will Not Aid Russian Programmer - Sept. 4 > http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,60643,00.asp I guess we already knew or suspected as much, but this article really hammers it in. POW! I quote: Because of this--and even though the company's complaint led to Sklyarov's arrest, prosecution, and possible imprisonment in a foreign country which would separate him from his wife and young daughter for as many as 25 years--Adobe has no responsibility or obligation to help him further, she says. Sam Costello, IDG News Service, does not appear to belong to the Dark Side of the Force. =Xcott From admin at seattle-chat.com Tue Sep 4 14:49:22 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: [Seattle-Sklyarov] Adobe Seminar Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: seattle-sklyarov-admin@woozle.org [mailto:seattle-sklyarov-admin@woozle.org]On Behalf Of Ben Reser Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 1:51 PM To: seattle-sklyarov@woozle.org Subject: [Seattle-Sklyarov] Adobe Seminar For those of you that care Adobe is having a "Adobe beyond the Book: Publish Redefined" Seminar here in Seattle. Beyond the Book: Publishing Redefined The W Hotel Seattle 1112 Fourth Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 For directions call: 206-264-6000 Event Date: Thursday, September 6th, 2001 The event runs from 9:00 am - 12:00 pm I know it's short notice but for those of you that want to protest Adobe it might be an interesting and topical location. -- Ben Reser http://ben.reser.org Wizard's First Rule - People are stupid, they will believe anything if they want it to be true or they fear it is true - Terry Goodkind _______________________________________________ seattle-sklyarov mailing list seattle-sklyarov@woozle.org http://woozle.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-sklyarov From rms at privacyfoundation.org Tue Sep 4 15:52:07 2001 From: rms at privacyfoundation.org (Richard M. Smith) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:07:59 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms> Besides information about the Sklyarov case, it would be nice to also have a write-up entitled "Why MS Reader is a better choice for eBooks" to give to attendees. Perhaps such a document already exists on the Web that can easily be printed out. Another good option is to pass out one of the press articles that talks about why eBooks are seeing poor sales so far. Richard -----Original Message----- From: seattle-sklyarov-admin@woozle.org [mailto:seattle-sklyarov-admin@woozle.org]On Behalf Of Ben Reser Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 1:51 PM To: seattle-sklyarov@woozle.org Subject: [Seattle-Sklyarov] Adobe Seminar For those of you that care Adobe is having a "Adobe beyond the Book: Publish Redefined" Seminar here in Seattle. Beyond the Book: Publishing Redefined The W Hotel Seattle 1112 Fourth Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 For directions call: 206-264-6000 Event Date: Thursday, September 6th, 2001 The event runs from 9:00 am - 12:00 pm I know it's short notice but for those of you that want to protest Adobe it might be an interesting and topical location. -- Ben Reser http://ben.reser.org Wizard's First Rule - People are stupid, they will believe anything if they want it to be true or they fear it is true - Terry Goodkind _______________________________________________ seattle-sklyarov mailing list seattle-sklyarov@woozle.org http://woozle.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-sklyarov _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 4 16:28:55 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Richard M. Smith wrote: > Besides information about the Sklyarov case, it would be nice to also > have a write-up entitled "Why MS Reader is a better choice for eBooks" > to give to attendees. Perhaps such a document already exists on the Web > that can easily be printed out. I think an important goal is to convince publishers that eBook restrictions are ultimately vapor, and expensive vapor at that. You want to let potential investors know that they're looking at an impossible technology and an impossible business model. They might as well be investing in perpetual motion machines. This is almost reminiscent of the dot com boom: people bought into a beautiful dream that violated common sense, ultimately leading to a crash. Here, the dream is to control (and meter) that which is ultimately uncontrollable, legally and technologically. If investors realize that this is another "bubble," maybe they'll back off. What kind of people will be at this seminar? Publishers? Investors? People from eBook-related technology companies? Scott From jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 4 17:28:25 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer censors website, cites DMCA Message-ID: <20010904172825.G63469@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded Message ------ To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer censors website, cites DMCA Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:09:01 -0700 Dug Song is a highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer and the author of Dsniff and numerous security papers including a common vulnerability in many firewall applications and servers. He has censored his own website, citing the DMCA: http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/ At this time it is not clear whether the site was taken down under pressure from corporations or simply attempting to express feelings about the DMCA and possibly start a trend whereby security researchers withhold their own research because they are at risk under the DMCA. Many people outside of the security industry do not fully understand that independent security research by people like Dug Song often find security holes, vulnerabilities and are the driving force toward stronger software and security practices within corporations. They are the watch dogs that ensure indepentent security testing (often, if not always) without compensation and simply for the challenge and to promote safer, stronger software. _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 sisgeek at yahoo.com Tue Sep 4 19:01:09 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] no quibble with the DMCA Message-ID: <20010905020109.45526.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> hummmmm - i get a little lost reading parts of this article. i go from not not hearing sklyarov, to burton's press releases, to no quibble with the DMCA in less than thirty one words!! i know space is at a premium but, give me a break or some background:) nice human angle, though:) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/31/BU219882.DTL&type=tech i'm just guessing here ... but i do not think we'll be reading the defense strategy in press releases. i suspect neither dima nor elcomsoft are particularly interested in becoming the poster children for declaring the DMCA (both are probably still trying to figure out how they went from fbi consultants to DMCA test cases) unconstitutional. however, this does not make the DMCA any more constitutional in its unconstitutional restrictions on speech! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From schoen at loyalty.org Tue Sep 4 19:13:03 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] London, Edinburgh protest reports Message-ID: <20010904191303.Y20590@zork.net> ----- Forwarded message from "Julian T. J. Midgley" ----- Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 02:28:29 +0100 (BST) From: "Julian T. J. Midgley" Subject: [DMITRY-PLAN] London and Edinburgh Protests - Reports Apologies for delay in forwarding these - have had to catch up with my 'real' job. Interest in the DMCA and EUCD is steadily increasing in both the UK and Europe as a whole. The Chaos Computer Club in Germany is gearing up to oppose the EUCD which will be brought before the Bundestag in a matter of weeks. UK mailing list very active again at the moment, which is heartening. Anyway, on to last week's protests: Last Thursday's London protest outside the US Embassy went very well. Estimated attendance was 25-30 people, possibly a few more (I can't say accurately myself, as I only arrived at around 2:30 having been delayed at work for longer than I was expecting). Several dedicated teams of flyer dispensing bods did a splendid job, handing out over 1000 flyers (approximately half and half the new EUCD flyers, and "What is the DMCA?" flyers, plus a couple of hundred flyers of various sorts left over from the last US Embassy protest). Those of us shouting at the Embassy (from a much enlarged repertoire of chants ;-) ) were once again delighted to see most of those who'd been given leaflets walking past actually reading them, including, notably, several employees of the Embassy itself. Someone (possibly Jason or Gerry?) had printed off several copies of the "Ballad of Dmitry Sklyarov", which it was universally agreed was a better song than the DMCA version of "YMCA"; the CFDR's choral contigent demonstrated a significant increase in volume since its last meeting, regretably without a similar improvement in tunefulness. Although, in the spirit of the recent Heineken adverts, this may be to our advantage... "Drop the Charges! Or we'll come back and sing at you again - with an amplifier!". Neil Newell, Chairman of Ashpool Telecom, gave his entire programming team the day off to attend (all but one of whom did, the other spending the time reading up on the issues to see whether or not he should have attended ;-)). Reporters from Silicon and PC Pro attended, the Register had hoped to send someone along, who unfortunately fell ill, so they got a briefing over the phone instead. Articles have appeared since in the Register and Silicon (including an editorial), and people having been signing up for both mailing lists since the press-releases went out on Tuesday night - total membership (across the two lists, discounting duplicates) has increased from 80 on Tuesday night to just over 100. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/21375.html http://www.silicon.com/a46959 Success also in Edinburgh (the following from Ronan Burnett, who organised the protest): The Edinburgh protest went well - I lost count of exactly how many people turned up. At least 15 people appeared at some point during the day, although we didn't number any more than about 10 at any one time. We distributed leaflets, and had people sign the petition to the US Attorney as we explained the issues. We marched up to the US consulate chanting, 'Free Dmitry, Free Speech' and rang their doorbell. Sadly there were only 2 people inside and neither would come out from behind the security door to talk to us. There's a bunch of photos of the event in chronological order at http://www.informinus.com/dmca/ if you're interested. -- Julian T. J. Midgley http://www.xenoclast.org/ Cambridge, England. PGP Key ID: 0xBCC7863F Beware the European Copyright Directive: http://uk.eurorights.org/ _______________________________________________ Free-sklyarov-uk mailing list Free-sklyarov-uk@xenoclast.org http://mailman.xenoclast.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov-uk ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Seth David Schoen | Lending, printing, copying, giving Temp. http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | and text-to-speech are permissions down: http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF) | enabled by the publisher. -- Adobe From schoen at loyalty.org Tue Sep 4 19:35:47 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] EFF: Russian Programmer & Co. Case Continued to Sept. 24 Message-ID: <20010904193547.A20590@zork.net> Not much news to report here. ----- Forwarded message from Will Doherty ----- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 18:19:24 -0700 From: Will Doherty Subject: EFF: Russian Programmer & Co. Case Continued to Sept. 24 Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release For Immediate Release: September 4, 2001 Contacts: Cindy Cohn, EFF Legal Director, cindy@eff.org, +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 823-2148 (cell) Will Doherty, EFF Online Activist / Media Relations, press@eff.org, +1 415 436-9333 x111 (office), +1 415 794-6064 (cell) Russian Programmer & Co. Case Continued Trial Schedule and Company Counsel Cause Delay to September 24 San Jose, California - Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov and his employer Elcomsoft appeared briefly in court today regarding charges of providing electronic book format conversion software in the United States. At the hearing -- described as "pretty routine" by defense attorney Joseph Burton -- the case was continued to 9:00 AM on September 24, 2001, in the same San Jose Federal court building. The case was continued so that Elcomsoft will have sufficient time to choose their legal representation and so that both prosecution and defense teams may present a joint schedule for motions and discovery in the case. Last Thursday, the court heard a five-count grand jury indictment against Elcomsoft and previously jailed programmer Sklyarov on charges of trafficking and conspiracy to traffic in a copyright circumvention device. Sklyarov -- who is out of custody on US $50,000 bail -- could face a prison term of up to twenty-five years and a US $2,250,000 fine. As a corporation, Elcomsoft faces a potential US $2,500,000 fine. "Dmitry has programmed a format converter which has many legitimate uses including enabling the blind to hear eBooks," explained Cindy Cohn, Electronic Frontier Foundation Legal Director. "The idea that he faces prison for this is outrageous. The EFF will support Dmitry through the end of this ordeal." "We were hoping that the government would see the wisdom and justice in not pursuing a case against Sklyarov," said his attorney, Joseph M. Burton of Duane Morris in San Francisco. "Even if one were to ignore the serious legal questions involving the DMCA, this case hardly cries out for criminal prosecution. Sklyarov's and Elcomsoft's actions are not conduct that Congress intended to criminalize. We will vigorously contest these charges." The next court appearance scheduled in the case is 9:00 AM Pacific on September 24 before Judge Ronald Whyte in the San Jose Federal Court building. Background on the Sklyarov case: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Sklyarov/ Calendar of protests related to the Sklyarov case: http://freesklyarov.org/calendar/ Sklyarov Defense Fund: http://www.elcomsoft.com/aebpr.html About EFF: The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the most linked-to websites in the world: http://www.eff.org/ - end - ----- End forwarded message ----- -- 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 proclus at iname.com Tue Sep 4 19:59:14 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer ce nsors website, cites DMCA In-Reply-To: <20010904172825.G63469@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109050259.f852xHZ10583@moerbeke> On 4 Sep, Jon O . wrote: > > ----- Forwarded Message ------ > > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org > Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer censors website, cites DMCA > Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:09:01 -0700 > > > Dug Song is a highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer and the > author of Dsniff and numerous security papers including a common > vulnerability in many firewall applications and servers. > > He has censored his own website, citing the DMCA: > > http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/ Devastating > > At this time it is not clear whether the site was taken down under > pressure from corporations or simply attempting to express feelings > about the DMCA and possibly start a trend whereby security researchers > withhold their own research because they are at risk under the DMCA. > > Many people outside of the security industry do not fully understand > that independent security research by people like Dug Song often find > security holes, vulnerabilities and are the driving force toward stronger > software and security practices within corporations. They are the watch > dogs that ensure indepentent security testing (often, if not always) without > compensation and simply for the challenge and to promote safer, stronger > software. Maybe there is a kind of argument to be made here for capitalists. What we need is free and open competition in the security realm, a marketplace of cryptological greed ;-}. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > ------------------------ > 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 ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 4 20:19:38 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:00 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer ce nsors website, cites DMCA In-Reply-To: <200109050259.f852xHZ10583@moerbeke> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: > On 4 Sep, Jon O . wrote: > > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > > > > He has censored his own website, citing the DMCA: > > http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/ > > Devastating Remember when all the pages went black, after Clinton signed the CDA? Would a similar action work here? Aaaaaand, do you notice how DMCA proponents are citing a boom in online content since 1998 [um, duh?] as evidence that the DMCA is good? As if there could be any connection there at all? It would be nice if we could point to a million blackened pages and say, "oh, yeah, sure does look like the DMCA is fostering creative expression there, ayup." Scott From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Tue Sep 4 20:33:53 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:01 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NYC Canvassing Effort Sunday Message-ID: <20010904233353.C10004@www2> New Yorkers for Fair Use is announcing our first canvassing efforts in Senator Schumers back yard, at 9AM on Sunday Sep 9th. Time: Sep 9th 9AM Mobilization: 10AM Canvassing Leaflets, block assignments, and marching orders are to be handed out as we hit door to door to cover the neighborhood. When we get finished, noone in the community should be unaware of the impact of the DMCA on Libraries, Education and Fair Use. If you want to be involved in this very importnt work, email me as soon as possible to signup for buttons, paperwork and petitions. So far we have about 15 people commited to this action, but more is better. This is not a demonstatration, and letting us know that your planning to show up to canvass, and to get instructions, is important. We will be starting off by hitting the local evening rush next week, and doing a speach at the Food Co-op, and the Atlantic Antic. Time is ticking, we have to hit on this now. Tuesday nite we will meet on IRC at 10PM on irc.linux.com #nylug, to hammer out some issues. Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Tue Sep 4 20:37:30 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:01 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NYC Canvassing Effort Sunday In-Reply-To: <20010904233353.C10004@www2>; from ruben@mrbrklyn.com on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 23:33:53 -0400 References: <20010904233353.C10004@www2> Message-ID: <20010904233730.E10004@www2> http://www.nyfairuse.org ___________________________________ On 2001.09.04 23:33:53 -0400 Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: New Yorkers for Fair Use is announcing our first canvassing efforts in Senator Schumers back yard, at 9AM on Sunday Sep 9th. Time: Sep 9th 9AM Mobilization: 10AM Canvassing Leaflets, block assignments, and marching orders are to be handed out as we hit door to door to cover the neighborhood. When we get finished, noone in the community should be unaware of the impact of the DMCA on Libraries, Education and Fair Use. If you want to be involved in this very importnt work, email me as soon as possible to signup for buttons, paperwork and petitions. So far we have about 15 people commited to this action, but more is better. This is not a demonstatration, and letting us know that your planning to show up to canvass, and to get instructions, is important. We will be starting off by hitting the local evening rush next week, and doing a speach at the Food Co-op, and the Atlantic Antic. Time is ticking, we have to hit on this now. Tuesday nite we will meet on IRC at 10PM on irc.linux.com #nylug, to hammer out some issues. Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From netcmdd at yahoo.com Tue Sep 4 20:46:33 2001 From: netcmdd at yahoo.com (Jon O.) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:01 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: [DMCA_discuss] Call To Action! Message-ID: <20010905034633.88572.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> If you find a site that is participating in this, please forward the link to me. FYI: --- tom poe wrote: > From: tom poe > Reply-to: tompoe@renonevada.net > Organization: Salta Monte Solutions, Inc. > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Call To Action! > Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:22:26 -0700 > > Hello: The obvious sits before us with Dug Song's site. The folks on this > list might offer some suggestions to the following idea: > > As the DMCA sits, it's untenable. Something needs to be done to demonstrate > the horrendous consequences it brings. I suggest a movement be formally > initiated with the end-goal to have as many millions of sites as possible, go > > "off line" with only the page of Dug Song's site as it sits right now > displayed. > > This would be a movement coordinating the publicizing of an international > Anti-DMCA Day sometime in the months or year following, and make some > remarkable demonstration of what happens on the Internet when everyone > respects the DMCA censorship tactics by censoring their sites. If it's a > week, even better. > > For starters, I sent all personal contacts a forwarded email posted by Jon, > suggesting they get the full impact of the DMCA for themselves. I would > suggest at a minimum, Jon's email be as widely distributed as possible. If > ever there was an "chain email" that deserved an extended life, this is it. > Any thoughts? Tom > _______________________________________________ > > > ------------------------ > http://www.anti-dmca.org > ------------------------ > > DMCA_discuss mailing list > DMCA_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Tue Sep 4 23:17:18 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:01 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Launching Wipout (fwd) -- ip essay contest/site In-Reply-To: ; from petico@io.com on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 10:19:41AM -0500 References: Message-ID: <20010905081718.A9695@3soft.de> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 10:19:41AM -0500, A.J. Peticolas forwarded: > > WIPOUT, an international organisation consisting of academics, artists, > musicians, and other activists, is today (Sept. 4) launching the > Intellectual Property Counter Essay Contest on its website, www.wipout.net May I also suggest that those who write essays for this contest also enter them in the WIPO contest. It would be a hoot if the majority of entries in the WIPO contest were against WIPO's position. I'll be entering both contests myself. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From mlc67 at columbia.edu Tue Sep 4 23:23:37 2001 From: mlc67 at columbia.edu (mike castleman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:01 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms>; from rms@privacyfoundation.org on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400 References: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms> Message-ID: <20010905022337.G487@pinetree.columbia.edu> Why is MS Reader "a better choice for eBooks"? I have no doubt that Microsoft would be happy to behave just as evilly (if not more) as Adobe if their product were attacked. The best choice for eBooks is unencrypted PDF, or HTML, or some other open, non-proprietary format. I don't think we as Free Dmitry activists need to be in the business of promoting Microsoft software. mike On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400, Richard M. Smith wrote: > Besides information about the Sklyarov case, it would be nice to also > have a write-up entitled "Why MS Reader is a better choice for eBooks" > to give to attendees. Perhaps such a document already exists on the Web > that can easily be printed out. > Another good option is to pass out one of the press articles that talks > about why eBooks are seeing poor sales so far. > > Richard -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010905/d79b7ada/attachment.pgp From david.haworth at altavista.net Tue Sep 4 23:24:35 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:03 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms>; from rms@privacyfoundation.org on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400 References: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms> Message-ID: <20010905082435.B9695@3soft.de> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400, Richard M. Smith wrote: > Besides information about the Sklyarov case, it would be nice to also > have a write-up entitled "Why MS Reader is a better choice for eBooks" > to give to attendees. Perhaps such a document already exists on the Web > that can easily be printed out. Why should we spread misinformation? MS's reader is just as restrictive and just as flawed as Adobe's offering. Perhaps a better line would be "Why an open format would be a better choice for eBooks", the advantages being: cheaper, greater target audience, fewer complaints from dissatisfied readers, among others. We should point out that all security claims made be the vendors of reader software are purely imaginary. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From kmself at ix.netcom.com Tue Sep 4 23:40:31 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:03 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Functionality Doctrine (fwd (CNI-Copyright) Re: DMCA) Message-ID: <20010904234030.F22100@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010904/ad9526ad/attachment.pgp From david.haworth at altavista.net Tue Sep 4 23:46:09 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:03 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Launching Wipout (fwd) -- ip essay contest/site In-Reply-To: <20010905081718.A9695@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:17:18AM +0200 References: <20010905081718.A9695@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010905084609.C9695@3soft.de> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:17:18AM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > May I also suggest that those who write essays for this contest also > enter them in the WIPO contest. It would be a hoot if the majority > of entries in the WIPO contest were against WIPO's position. I'll > be entering both contests myself. Oops - I just read the entry conditions for the WIPO contest. You have to be a university student to enter. Maybe I'll join the University of Real Life. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From kmself at ix.netcom.com Wed Sep 5 01:00:46 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:03 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NPR: Sept 5 Morning: Bands v. Labels Message-ID: <20010905010046.A24063@navel.introspect> NPR's running a promo for this morning's upcoming Morning Edition program. Segment on bands battling their lables, to include Dixie Chicks, also mentioned Courtney Love and IIRC Don Henley. Info: http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/ Audio archive will be available after 12 PM EDT: http://search.npr.org/cf/cmn/cmnpd01fm.cfm?PrgDate=9%2F5%2F2001&PrgID=3 San Francisco: 88.5 FM, KQED Audio stream: Real: http://www.kqed.org/streamingfiles/kqed_real.ram WMP: http://www.kqed.org/streamingfiles/kqed_wmp.asx Airtime: 3am - 9am PDT Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010905/744d43fa/attachment.pgp From Robloch at aol.com Wed Sep 5 03:29:55 2001 From: Robloch at aol.com (Robloch@aol.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:03 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov Message-ID: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> Now that they have explained why they are not responsible, I'm sure everyone will accept their case and won't blame them in any respect. NOT. http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=3451 By Sam Costello Adobe is not planning to aid the Russian programmer who is facing 15 years in jail for alleged copy-control infringements against the company. Despite its initial support for Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest, Adobe soon fell into line with general calls for the Russian's release. However, the US government has not dropped the charges against Sklyarov, or his Moscow-based company, Elcomsoft. Adobe general counsel Colleen Pouliot said: "All we have done is express our public sentiment that we don't support the prosecution of this individual in this particular case. Adobe will do no more than that, she said." Pouliot also denies that Adobe has any responsibility for Sklyarov's prosecution: "We provided information to the government about what ElcomSoft was doing" and the government made its own decision about whom to arrest and prosecute. "If Sklyarov does go to jail, that's an outcome our system has provided," Pouliot added From david.haworth at altavista.net Wed Sep 5 03:54:22 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com>; from Robloch@aol.com on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:29:55AM -0400 References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> Message-ID: <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:29:55AM -0400, Robloch@aol.com wrote: > Now that they have explained why they are not responsible, I'm sure everyone > will accept their case and won't blame them in any respect. NOT. > > http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=3451 I have a few questions that perhaps someone with a bit of US-centric knowledge can answer (being a European, I know very little about US legal affairs apart from what gets brought to my attention). 1. Are there any laws against making provable false statements in advertising materials (or even better, against making statements that can't be backed up by evidence, like we have in the UK)? 2. Are these laws criminal laws, or merely civil laws (ie to whom do you make the complaint)? 3. Have Adobe made any false claims about the security of their eBook reader (similar to the "100% burglarproof" claim by another vendor whose name I forget right now)? 4. If so, has anyone made an official complaint about the advertising? As a side note, has anyone made an official complaint about the "100% burglarproof" claim? 5. Does the old chestnut "I refuse to give evidence on the grounds that I might incriminate myself" actually exist as a right, or is it just something from the movies? My line of reasoning is that if Adobe were threatened with a suit for false advertising, they might be reluctant to testify in the Sklyarov case on grounds that they might incriminate themselves. Without Adobe's testimony, the DoJ's case would surely fall apart in their own hands. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 5 05:40:59 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> Message-ID: >3. Have Adobe made any false claims about the security of their >eBook reader (similar to the "100% burglarproof" claim by another >vendor whose name I forget right now)? Whether these are false claims or not we leave for others to judge; but this is the official language: http://www.adobe.com/products/contentserver/overview2.html Encryption Technology "The Adobe Content Server supports both PDF Merchant and EBX digital rights management schemes including encryption technology licensed from the industry leader, RSA Laboratories. There are two levels of encryption: 64 bit and 128 bit. With 64-bit encryption, there are 20 billion billion possible keys to decipher the coded information, and only one of them works. Someone intercepting the information would have to find the right key - a nearly impossible task. With 128-bit encryption, the number of possible keys is the square of the number of 64-bit keys. It is virtually impossible for an unauthorized party to find the right key, even if that party is equipped with the best computers." rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network -- From david.haworth at altavista.net Wed Sep 5 06:02:03 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: ; from kfoss@planetpdf.com on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:40:59AM -0500 References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010905150203.D9737@3soft.de> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:40:59AM -0500, Kurt Foss wrote (quoting Adobe's advertisements): > " [...] It is virtually impossible for an unauthorized party > to find the right key, even if that party is equipped with the best > computers." Well, that could be construed as misleading - it's literally true that to find the right key by brute force (guesswork) is "virtually impossible", but as any competent cryptanalyst knows, brute force is usually not the best way. Key management is a common weak point, and in fact is the obvious weak point for _all_ PC-based "protection" systems, since the key must be there somewhere. All you have to do is find it. But in any case, this is talking about Adobe's content server. I'm looking specifically for claims made about the eBook reader, any of which, if made, will be trivially disprovable. Dave BTW: There's a complaint form at the "National Consumer Complaint Center" (http://www.alexanderlaw.com/nccc/). Would some interested US citizen care to file a complaint about this site (http://www.ebookpro.com/). I think theirs is one of the plug-ins that Dmitry ridiculed. -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 5 06:25:53 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905150203.D9737@3soft.de> References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> <20010905150203.D9737@3soft.de> Message-ID: At 3:02 PM +0200 9/5/01, David Haworth wrote: >BTW: There's a complaint form at the "National Consumer Complaint >Center" (http://www.alexanderlaw.com/nccc/). Would some interested >US citizen care to file a complaint about this site >(http://www.ebookpro.com/). I think theirs is one of the plug-ins >that Dmitry ridiculed. FYI> We had contacted that company for a comment after we published a review of Dmitry's videotaped presentation [URL below] in which he scoffed at the absurdity of their "100% burglar-proof" claims. We never got a reply from the eBookPro folks. Now Showing: Dmitry Sklyarov's Las Vegas Gamble http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1573 rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network -- From jeme at brelin.net Wed Sep 5 09:25:08 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> Message-ID: On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, David Haworth wrote: > 1. Are there any laws against making provable false statements in > advertising materials (or even better, against making statements that > can't be backed up by evidence, like we have in the UK)? There are "truth in advertising" laws. Generally, the laws (which can vary from state to state) are against making provably false statements. I know there are laws in some states specifically regarding making statements of a health/medicinal nature that are not supported by the Food and Drug Administration (or at least a requirement to note that such claims are not supported by the FDA). > 2. Are these laws criminal laws, or merely civil laws (ie to whom do > you make the complaint)? Generally, civil. There are a few exceptions, but I couldn't tell you what they are. > 3. Have Adobe made any false claims about the security of their eBook > reader (similar to the "100% burglarproof" claim by another vendor > whose name I forget right now)? Well, certainly they haven't told the WHOLE truth, have they? I mean, publishers are actually using the thing. > 5. Does the old chestnut "I refuse to give evidence on the grounds > that I might incriminate myself" actually exist as a right, or is it > just something from the movies? This is one application (supported by the Supreme Court) of the Fifth Amendment to our Constitution. (The first ten Amendments to the Constitution of the United States were an adaptation of Thomas Jefferson's Constitution of the State of Virginia adopted as federal law in an attempt to ensure that the rights of the people are not infringed. Collectively, the first ten Amendments are known as the Bill of Rights.) Amendment V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. So, you see, a person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself in a criminal case. That's why it's not legal for a prosecutor to call a defendant to witness at trial. If the defendant does take the witness stand, it must be in his own defense, though the prosecutor may, at that point, cross-examine. Cross-examination is limited only to questions pertaining to information revealed in direct examination and the defendant may choose not to provide any information to the prosecution in court. Such exemption does NOT exist in a civil case, however. > My line of reasoning is that if Adobe were threatened with a suit for > false advertising, they might be reluctant to testify in the Sklyarov > case on grounds that they might incriminate themselves. Without > Adobe's testimony, the DoJ's case would surely fall apart in their own > hands. There's one of the thousand reasons why a corporation shouldn't be considered a "person" in the eyes of the law (which they ARE in the US... which is the root of MANY of our problems). I don't think there's a criminal act to which Adobe might be exposing themselves for criminal prosecution (except, perhaps, misleading the FBI... but I don't have any evidence that happened). I'm not sure how the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment applies to corporations. Certainly any employee or owner of the corporation can be compelled to testify against the corporation. I'm not sure what it would mean to have a corporation testify against itself. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From smitty825 at yahoo.com Wed Sep 5 09:19:22 2001 From: smitty825 at yahoo.com (Dan Smith) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Yahoo! begins selling ebooks! Message-ID: <20010905161922.35457.qmail@web13307.mail.yahoo.com> Hey Everyone, I saw on News.com (http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7064636.html?tag=mn_hd) that Yahoo has begun selling ebooks (in both Adobe's and Microsoft's formats) on their ebook webpage (http://shopping.yahoo.com/books/ebooks/) They have a feedback form (http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/shop/cgi_feedback), which I think that we should use to tell them that we don't approve of ebooks that aren't in a standard format. It also wouldn't hurt to send email to several merchants that use the Yahoo! shopping services and mention to them that you will be no longer purchasing stuff online from them while they continue to support Yahoo or until Yahoo stops selling proprietary ebooks. I know that one of my favorite computer parts vendors (thechipmerchant.com) uses Yahoo, so they will be getting an email from me! Dan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From crism at maden.org Wed Sep 5 10:19:27 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010905101826.00a74c60@mail.maden.org> At 03:29 5-09-2001, Robloch@aol.com wrote: >Adobe general counsel Colleen Pouliot said: > >"All we have done is express our public sentiment that we don't support the >prosecution of this individual in this particular case. Adobe will do no more >than that, she said." > >Pouliot also denies that Adobe has any responsibility for Sklyarov's >prosecution: "We provided information to the government about what ElcomSoft >was doing" and the government made its own decision about whom to arrest and >prosecute. > >"If Sklyarov does go to jail, that's an outcome our system has provided," >Pouliot added "Honestly, [laugh] we didn't think the likelihood was terribly high of getting any money out of a Russian company" - Colleen Pouliot on NPR -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From csm at MoonGroup.com Wed Sep 5 07:04:04 2001 From: csm at MoonGroup.com (csm@MoonGroup.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: [DMCA_discuss] Call To Action! In-Reply-To: <20010905034633.88572.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Jon O. posted the following: JO>If you find a site that is participating in this, please forward the link to JO>me. http://www.moongroup.com/ (a bunch of domains answer at this URL) http://www.soholinux.com/ JO>--- tom poe wrote: JO>> From: tom poe JO>> Reply-to: tompoe@renonevada.net JO>> Organization: Salta Monte Solutions, Inc. JO>> To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org JO>> Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Call To Action! JO>> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:22:26 -0700 JO>> JO>> Hello: The obvious sits before us with Dug Song's site. The folks on this JO>> list might offer some suggestions to the following idea: JO>> JO>> As the DMCA sits, it's untenable. Something needs to be done to demonstrate JO>> the horrendous consequences it brings. I suggest a movement be formally JO>> initiated with the end-goal to have as many millions of sites as possible, go JO>> JO>> "off line" with only the page of Dug Song's site as it sits right now JO>> displayed. JO>> JO>> This would be a movement coordinating the publicizing of an international JO>> Anti-DMCA Day sometime in the months or year following, and make some JO>> remarkable demonstration of what happens on the Internet when everyone JO>> respects the DMCA censorship tactics by censoring their sites. If it's a JO>> week, even better. JO>> JO>> For starters, I sent all personal contacts a forwarded email posted by Jon, JO>> suggesting they get the full impact of the DMCA for themselves. I would JO>> suggest at a minimum, Jon's email be as widely distributed as possible. If JO>> ever there was an "chain email" that deserved an extended life, this is it. JO>> Any thoughts? Tom JO>> _______________________________________________ JO>> JO>> JO>> ------------------------ JO>> http://www.anti-dmca.org JO>> ------------------------ JO>> JO>> DMCA_discuss mailing list JO>> DMCA_discuss@lists.microshaft.org JO>> http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss JO> JO> JO>__________________________________________________ JO>Do You Yahoo!? JO>Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger JO>http://im.yahoo.com JO> JO>_______________________________________________ JO>free-sklyarov mailing list JO>free-sklyarov@zork.net JO>http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov JO> - -- csm "...software engineers, as Percy Bysshe Shelley said of poets, are the unacknowledged legislators of our time. acknowledge this reality and try to shape it..." - stille/lessig -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjuWMNYACgkQv6Gjsf2pQ0qeYQCcD0McggQsekkxaehmfAXfmd6M tw4An2ASoqS6dA8iHSutjqCiduPMB/t5 =3kiH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Wed Sep 5 10:46:12 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: <20010905082435.B9695@3soft.de> Message-ID: On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, David Haworth wrote: > Perhaps a better line would be "Why an open format would be a better > choice for eBooks", the advantages being: cheaper, greater target > audience, fewer complaints from dissatisfied readers, among others. I think an argument directed towards investors or companies looking at eBooks should directly state, and explain, that digital usage controls are yet another "bubble." First, point out that the technology is not there, and people have been trying for decades. Then, underscore the legal aspects: to make it work you need extra laws which are not likely to remain constitutional if passed. You just can't make money by selling people their own rights. It's an infeasible business model both legally *and* technically. One might as well try to sell perpetual motion machines made entirely out of hashish. > Dave S From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Wed Sep 5 10:57:55 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: [DMCA_discuss] Call To Action! In-Reply-To: <20010905034633.88572.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Jon O. wrote: > FYI: > --- tom poe wrote: > > > > This would be a movement coordinating the publicizing of an international > > Anti-DMCA Day sometime in the months or year following, and make some > > remarkable demonstration of what happens on the Internet when everyone > > respects the DMCA censorship tactics by censoring their sites. If it's a > > week, even better. "Of course, if the DMCA really was used on this site, it would be shut down for a minumum of *ten days*, regardless of who complained about it or why." I do like the single line statement with the link. It's very powerful. Yet, I have the desire to put smaller print below it saying such like, "Please go to a website owned by Disney, Fox, or AOL/Time-Warner. The rest of the Internet is scheduled to be demolished." Or such. S ["And clear your cache after visiting those sites, or else you are a criminal."] From kmself at ix.netcom.com Wed Sep 5 11:09:32 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:04 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 12:54:22PM +0200 References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010905110931.N4020@navel.introspect> on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 12:54:22PM +0200, David Haworth (david.haworth@altavista.net) wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:29:55AM -0400, Robloch@aol.com wrote: > > Now that they have explained why they are not responsible, I'm sure everyone > > will accept their case and won't blame them in any respect. NOT. > > > > http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=3451 > > I have a few questions that perhaps someone with a bit of US-centric > knowledge can answer (being a European, I know very little about > US legal affairs apart from what gets brought to my attention). > 5. Does the old chestnut "I refuse to give evidence on the grounds > that I might incriminate myself" actually exist as a right, or is > it just something from the movies? Not in civil cases, such as, perhaps, a wrongful imprisonment, misleading advertising, or class action harm suit (on the part of content providers mislead by advertising claims) against eBook publishers, and/or the shill organizations supporting them and/or taking heat for them: SPA, SIAA, RIAA. In this case, the company can be compelled to testify, and large amounts of internal documentation and communications become discoverable. The Fifth Amendment protections against self-incriminating testimony only apply to criminal law. This is a triple-edged sword: useful for the plaintif, painful for the defendant, and often impacting both rights and balance of power between individuals and corporations. > My line of reasoning is that if Adobe were threatened with a suit for > false advertising, they might be reluctant to testify in the Sklyarov > case on grounds that they might incriminate themselves. Without > Adobe's testimony, the DoJ's case would surely fall apart in their own > hands. Cf: discovery and testimony gathered in DoJ v. Microsoft. IANAL, this is not legal advice. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010905/21698287/attachment.pgp From ed at hintz.org Wed Sep 5 11:15:25 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Dmitry's family reportedly visiting SJ Message-ID: <200109051815.f85IFPc15974@phil.hintz.org> On the drive to work this morning, KCBS (Bay Area newsradio station) reported that Oxana and the kids boarded a flight to San Jose this morning for a "visit". According to the AP story linked below, they plan to stay through the end of September, and are hoping Dima will return home with them. At least the kids get to see Dad again, although I'd much prefer the reunion to be occurring in Moscow, with Dima a free man... AP story here: http://www.kcbs.com/pages/kcbs/news/news_story.nsp?story_id=23342268&ID=kcb s&scategory=Computers Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From mlc67 at columbia.edu Wed Sep 5 11:21:37 2001 From: mlc67 at columbia.edu (mike castleman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905110931.N4020@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:09:32AM -0700 References: <130.12a6c60.28c758a3@aol.com> <20010905125422.A9737@3soft.de> <20010905110931.N4020@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010905142137.C9380@pinetree.columbia.edu> If memory serves, a corporation does not have the 5th-Amendment right to avoid testifying even in a criminal case. If I'm right, then this is in fact the only right that corporations do not have and real people do. But, like many others here, I am not a lawyer nor qualified to give legal advice. mike On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:09:32AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > 5. Does the old chestnut "I refuse to give evidence on the grounds > > that I might incriminate myself" actually exist as a right, or is > > it just something from the movies? > > Not in civil cases, such as, perhaps, a wrongful imprisonment, > misleading advertising, or class action harm suit (on the part of > content providers mislead by advertising claims) against eBook > publishers, and/or the shill organizations supporting them and/or taking > heat for them: SPA, SIAA, RIAA. > > In this case, the company can be compelled to testify, and large amounts > of internal documentation and communications become discoverable. > > The Fifth Amendment protections against self-incriminating testimony > only apply to criminal law. This is a triple-edged sword: useful for > the plaintif, painful for the defendant, and often impacting both rights > and balance of power between individuals and corporations. -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010905/2e29e98d/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Wed Sep 5 11:37:12 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905142137.C9380@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, mike castleman wrote: > If memory serves, a corporation does not have the 5th-Amendment right > to avoid testifying even in a criminal case. If I'm right, then this > is in fact the only right that corporations do not have and real > people do. But, like many others here, I am not a lawyer nor qualified > to give legal advice. Well, as I said, how would this right be exercised? I swear, we need to get the Court to set the record straight with regard to the legal standing of corporations (i.e. make it clear that they are fictional entities with limited purpose and no inherent "rights"). I WOULD say "the Court should reconsider..." if not for the fact that it was never CONSIDERED in the first place. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 5 11:30:13 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov In-Reply-To: <20010905142137.C9380@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: You are right, only individual people have this right, not corporations. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of mike castleman Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 11:22 AM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Adobe wipes their hands clean of Skylarov If memory serves, a corporation does not have the 5th-Amendment right to avoid testifying even in a criminal case. If I'm right, then this is in fact the only right that corporations do not have and real people do. But, like many others here, I am not a lawyer nor qualified to give legal advice. mike On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:09:32AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > 5. Does the old chestnut "I refuse to give evidence on the grounds > > that I might incriminate myself" actually exist as a right, or is > > it just something from the movies? > > Not in civil cases, such as, perhaps, a wrongful imprisonment, > misleading advertising, or class action harm suit (on the part of > content providers mislead by advertising claims) against eBook > publishers, and/or the shill organizations supporting them and/or taking > heat for them: SPA, SIAA, RIAA. > > In this case, the company can be compelled to testify, and large amounts > of internal documentation and communications become discoverable. > > The Fifth Amendment protections against self-incriminating testimony > only apply to criminal law. This is a triple-edged sword: useful for > the plaintif, painful for the defendant, and often impacting both rights > and balance of power between individuals and corporations. -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 5 14:33:03 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Sklyarov clan to California Message-ID: Since Dmitry Sklyarov has not been able to leave the United States and return to Russia since his July 16 arrest in Las Vegas, his wife and two young children are scheduled to travel to California today to visit him and to lend him moral support. The family hopes Dmitry will be allowed to go home to Russia later this month, and then return to the U.S. as needed by his legal team for future court appearances. http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=225 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Wed Sep 5 15:53:35 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report Message-ID: Here is an open door . . . James S. Huggins http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/010910/opinion/10atlarge.htm Reply to: letters@usnews.com World At Large 9/10/01 Brave new battleground Fred von Lohmann loves his music. In the car, at home, and at work, the San Francisco lawyer cycles through a collection of some 800 CDs. Since he can't carry his 200-pound music library around town, he makes copies: one for his car, one for his computer, one for his MP3 player, an archival backup-you get the idea. All of this is perfectly legal under current copyright law. So it's no surprise that von Lohmann fiercely opposes a new experiment by the recording industry, an experiment he thinks will restrict the rights of millions of consumers. Armed with the power of new digital technology, the recording industry is now planning to encrypt its music CDs to prevent duplication. The industry isn't worried about the Fred von Lohmanns of the world. (Well, that's not entirely true-von Lohmann has locked horns with the recording industry as an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit group that promotes civil liberties on the Internet. But more on that later.) Record companies say their real concern is piracy-the widespread swapping of copyrighted works over the Internet without any royalties going to the artists who created them. Of course, the recording industry isn't alone in this concern. Free digital copies of American Pie 2, Planet of the Apes, and just about any other box office hit, along with bestselling novels, are ripe for picking off the Web. To fight back, copyright owners have begun using technological tools to lock up CDs, DVDs, E-books, cable and satellite broadcasts-nearly every digital medium-encrypting them in ways that could soon determine when and how we watch and listen. All this has led to a collision between industries that fear losing billions and consumers who fear losing "fair use" of the copyrighted works they buy. Who's right? How do we strike a workable balance? Tipping the scales. Balance is key. Fundamentally, copyright law represents a weighing of the free flow of ideas to benefit the public against the rights of artists, musicians, and writers to profit from their work. Too little protection, and entrepreneurs lose the incentive to create. Too much, and public speech is stifled. What brought this issue to the fore now are the dizzying changes in technology we've seen in the past few years, starting with the Internet, which opened the door to people who wanted to record and trade vast amounts of material. But the same technologies might soon restrict entertainment in ways never imagined. In an effort to block mass swapping of copyrighted works, industries are spending millions on "digital rights management." But so far, this anti-pirating technology can't tell whether I'm copying a DVD to sell it illegally or whether I'm a film-studies professor preparing clips for class. No matter. Already, movie studios are backing a new equipment standard that will make digital recording nearly impossible. Industries are also redefining what it means to "own" a copy of a work. For instance, just compare paper books with electronic books. Once you've purchased a paper book, you can read it anywhere you want, keep it as long as you want, lend it to a friend, or sell it for cash. None of this need be true with an E- book. Publishers decide whether you can read it only on your computer at home, or whether you can transfer it to a portable E-book reader. They decide whether you can print any pages. They decide whether you can make a backup copy. Right now, the E-book market is small, so the sting of such changes is minor. But Hollywood is planning on delivering movies via the Internet in a similar way. All these copyright technologies are protected by the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The law prohibits cracking these technologies or helping others crack them by providing decoding software. Industry says the law gives artists necessary protection from piracy. Critics say the law leaves consumers in a bind: Although they continue to have the rights to make limited copies of music and movies, they can be prosecuted for using any of the tools necessary to do so. Von Lohmann and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are currently challenging the legality of the statute in federal court. Clearly, the technological landscape is changing quickly, and these are just the opening stages of a crucial debate over policies that will determine how we experience media in the 21st century. Is industry trying to choke progress or simply preserve intellectual property? Are Internet activists paving the path to the future or just trying to get something for nothing? We invite you to share your thoughts on the subject as part of our ongoing World At Large series. We can be found at letters@usnews.com. We look forward to hearing from you. -The Editors ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. ----------------------- From proclus at iname.com Wed Sep 5 16:31:35 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Brave new battleground over digital copyright Message-ID: <200109052331.f85NVZY12012@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Re: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/010910/opinion/10atlarge.htm Thank you for your thoughtful and "balanced" article. I am opposed to the DMCA provisions which undermine our fair use rights. These provisions have vast and unforeseen consequences, which are only just appearing. There is a collection of related stories at The GNU-Darwin Distribution's News page. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/news.html The DMCA has the following ill-effects. 1. It stifles scientific research and free speech. 2. It undermines our fair use rights. 3 Foreign scientists are afraid to travel to the US. 4. American scientists may consider leaving the country. 5. It is unjust legislation, which is only enforced selectively. 6. It damages our vital national security interests by undermining our predominant position in cryptological and security related research. 7. It undermines the credibility of legitimate copyright claims. 8. It is creating a generation of radical pirates among our young people. 9. It has now been shown to undermine learning and reading itself. 10. It makes the US appear as Soviet Russia. If it is not overturned, the combined effect of this ill-conceived legislation will be an intellectual recession in the US. Brain capital will increasingly move to other countries, which are more inclined to build the world's future infrastructure and support the rights of their citizens. The GNU-Darwin Distribution supported the Adobe Boycott with free software replacements for Adobe products. The boycott is over, but we will continue to use our influence to turn our country away from this terrible path. Regards, Michael L. Love MacCHESS Cornell University http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Wed Sep 5 17:44:46 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Copyright in a Frictionless World Message-ID: "Copyright in a Frictionless World" http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_9/scott/ Abstract In this paper, the author reviews the history and application of copyright and concludes that, although promoted as being in the interests of authors, it is designed in such a way as to be primarily a right which benefits distributors and publishers. The author identifies a number of difficulties faced by distributors and publishers in enforcing their rights in an age where the various sources of "friction" which once limited infringement are being constantly reduced. In particular, in the emerging frictionless world the typical targets of the holder of a copyright monopoly (distributors pirating for profit) are being overtaken by a new breed of target (individuals with a cost reduction motive) and it is uneconomical for a holder of a copyright monopoly to pursue this new breed. The author argues that recent extensions to copyright monopolies add little to the illegality of the infringing acts nor any stigma to the performance of those acts. Instead, they exacerbate one of the main causes of infringement - consumer cynicism as to the benefits to society of the copyright monopoly. The author argues further that, rather than driving further cynicism through more expansive rhetoric relating to rights, holders of a copyright monopoly should instead seek to mollify consumer sentiment and encourage compliance by emphasizing a rhetoric of responsibility in the exercise of those rights. The author proposes three possible principles of responsibility that copyright monopoly holders might evaluate and endorse. Contents History of Copyright Issues for Copyright Going Forward The Court of Public Opinion and the Rhetoric of Responsibility Principles of Responsibility Conclusion History of Copyright The Current State of Play Copyright is a (legislative monopoly) right to copy. It is not a right to create per se, but does include elements of a right to derive from an already existing creation. In its current form copyright vests in the creator of a work on the creation of that work. For copyright to subsist in a work that work must fulfil a number of qualifying criteria. These criteria include such things as the work having been reduced to a material form, and that it is sufficiently original and creative. Of these last two the bar is set very low to satisfy. In theory the copyright monopoly does not extend to ideas. Rather, copyright only protects the expression of an idea in the material form to which it has been reduced. This is known as the idea-expression dichotomy [1]. The rights comprised in copyright also encompass a number of secondary rights such as the right to authorise the making of a reproduction, the right to perform a work in public and the right to create an adaptation of the work (Australian parlance - a derivative work in United States terminology). The copyright monopoly is one of the most malleable and durable monopolies known to humankind - almost infinitely so. It can be sold in whole or in part, it can be sold in relation to a specific time period or a specific geography, it can be partly licensed and partly sold and can be dealt with in any conceivable combination of any of these modes of dealing. Even after you have sold something imbued with your copyright rights, you may still be able to exercise control over it [2]. Further, each copyright monopoly has a remarkable permanence. For the vast majority of works in which a copyright monopoly subsists (everyday writings of people all around the world) that monopoly over the work lingers on long after all copies of that work have been lost to the annals of time. Indeed, copyright ordinarily lingers on for years, if not decades after the death of the person who created the work in which copyright has vested. However, despite all of these things, copyright is nothing more than a legislative monopoly. Copyright is not, and never has been a property right per se - copyright can be infringed, but it is impossible for it to be stolen. There is no such thing as "copyright theft" [3]. History of Copyright The first task of this paper is to identify the origins of this magical creature copyright, what it has historically protected and how we have arrived at the current state of play. Fortunately, for people in a Common Law System [4], England has the oldest history in relation to copyright. So, apart from a brief diversion into Greek, Roman and Medieval times we will be concentrating on the law of the United Kingdom as it developed from the fifteenth through to the nineteenth century. In relation to the twentieth century we will make some general comments on the development of copyright in other countries. The brief diversion into earlier times consists only of this observation: that during Greek and Roman times there was a general feeling that plagiarism was bad, but there was no provision within their law which could be identified as relating to copyright as we understand it in the modern sense [5]. Perhaps the most technologically and socially advanced nations of the time, China, also lacked (until recently) any rights in favour of printers or authors over the distribution of works [6]... From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Wed Sep 5 19:04:00 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NY Fairusue Meeting Message-ID: <20010905220400.A17860@www2> Thursday Nite was are having our regular NY FAIRUSE meeting at the usual place, When: Killarny Rose 82 Beaver Street NY NY Wall Street, Beaver and Pearl Street 2nd Floor Time: 6:30PM informal discussion 7:30 Formal Meeting Adgenda: Plans for the repeal the DMCA campain: Canvassing Action planned next Sunday Morning" Literature: Sample Letters to Senator Schulmer and Representitives Area Covered Buttons. Leafleting action Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From jono at microshaft.org Wed Sep 5 19:10:33 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer censors website, cites DMCA In-Reply-To: <20010904172825.G63469@networkcommand.com>; from jono@microshaft.org on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 05:28:25PM -0700 References: <20010904172825.G63469@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010905191033.E71542@networkcommand.com> There is a reporter doing a story on this "Internet Blackout" trend so if you find another site that has put up Dug Song's Censored page, please let me know. We have a somewhat of a list, but you never know... On 04-Sep-2001, Jon O . wrote: > > ----- Forwarded Message ------ > > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org > Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer censors website, cites DMCA > Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:09:01 -0700 > > > Dug Song is a highly respected OpenBSD, OpenSSH programmer and the > author of Dsniff and numerous security papers including a common > vulnerability in many firewall applications and servers. > > He has censored his own website, citing the DMCA: > > http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/ > > At this time it is not clear whether the site was taken down under > pressure from corporations or simply attempting to express feelings > about the DMCA and possibly start a trend whereby security researchers > withhold their own research because they are at risk under the DMCA. > > Many people outside of the security industry do not fully understand > that independent security research by people like Dug Song often find > security holes, vulnerabilities and are the driving force toward stronger > software and security practices within corporations. They are the watch > dogs that ensure indepentent security testing (often, if not always) without > compensation and simply for the challenge and to promote safer, stronger > software. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > ------------------------ > 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 ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Wed Sep 5 21:43:30 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report References: Message-ID: <002601c1368e$7ab19980$657ba8c0@Home> It isn't the artist anyone is really concerned about. The recording artist might make barely enough to survive, especially at first, with a very large portion going into the pockets of promoters and other companies. It is more a matter of control over the funds that are normally funneled into those pockets that is of a real concern. What is happening now is that the technology exists to remove some control from the recording industry and put it in a place where it should have been in the first place. Regards, Mary E. Dixon _______________________________________ Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ----- Original Message ----- From: "James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)" To: "Free Sklyarov List" Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 6:53 PM Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report > > Here is an open door . . . > > James S. Huggins > > > http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/010910/opinion/10atlarge.htm > > Reply to: letters@usnews.com > > World At Large 9/10/01 > > Brave new battleground > > Fred von Lohmann loves his music. In the car, at home, and at work, > the San Francisco lawyer cycles through a collection of some 800 CDs. > Since he can't carry his 200-pound music library around town, he > makes copies: one for his car, one for his computer, one for his MP3 > player, an archival backup-you get the idea. All of this is perfectly > legal under current copyright law. So it's no surprise that von Lohmann > fiercely opposes a new experiment by the recording industry, an > experiment he thinks will restrict the rights of millions of consumers. > > Armed with the power of new digital technology, the recording > industry is now planning to encrypt its music CDs to prevent > duplication. The industry isn't worried about the Fred von Lohmanns > of the world. (Well, that's not entirely true-von Lohmann has locked > horns with the recording industry as an attorney for the Electronic > Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit group that promotes civil liberties > on the Internet. But more on that later.) Record companies say their > real concern is piracy-the widespread swapping of copyrighted works > over the Internet without any royalties going to the artists who created > them. Of course, the recording industry isn't alone in this concern. > Free digital copies of American Pie 2, Planet of the Apes, and just about > any other box office hit, along with bestselling novels, are ripe for > picking off the Web. > > To fight back, copyright owners have begun using technological tools > to lock up CDs, DVDs, E-books, cable and satellite broadcasts-nearly > every digital medium-encrypting them in ways that could soon determine > when and how we watch and listen. > > All this has led to a collision between industries that fear losing billions > and consumers who fear losing "fair use" of the copyrighted works they > buy. Who's right? How do we strike a workable balance? > > Tipping the scales. Balance is key. Fundamentally, copyright law > represents a weighing of the free flow of ideas to benefit the public > against the rights of artists, musicians, and writers to profit from their > work. Too little protection, and entrepreneurs lose the incentive to > create. Too much, and public speech is stifled. > > What brought this issue to the fore now are the dizzying changes in > technology we've seen in the past few years, starting with the Internet, > which opened the door to people who wanted to record and trade vast > amounts of material. But the same technologies might soon restrict > entertainment in ways never imagined. In an effort to block mass > swapping of copyrighted works, industries are spending millions on > "digital rights management." But so far, this anti-pirating technology > can't tell whether I'm copying a DVD to sell it illegally or whether I'm a > film-studies professor preparing clips for class. > > No matter. Already, movie studios are backing a new equipment standard that > will make digital recording nearly impossible. Industries are also > redefining what it means to "own" a copy of a work. For instance, just > compare paper books with electronic books. Once you've purchased a paper > book, you can read it anywhere you want, keep it as long as you want, lend > it to a friend, or sell it for cash. None of this need be true with an E- > book. Publishers decide whether you can read it only on your computer at > home, or whether you can transfer it to a portable E-book reader. They > decide whether you can print any pages. They decide whether you can make a > backup copy. Right now, the E-book market is small, so the sting of such > changes is minor. But Hollywood is planning on delivering movies via the > Internet in a similar way. > > All these copyright technologies are protected by the 1998 Digital > Millennium Copyright Act. The law prohibits cracking these technologies > or helping others crack them by providing decoding software. Industry > says the law gives artists necessary protection from piracy. Critics say > the law leaves consumers in a bind: Although they continue to have the > rights to make limited copies of music and movies, they can be > prosecuted for using any of the tools necessary to do so. Von Lohmann > and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are currently challenging the > legality of the statute in federal court. > > Clearly, the technological landscape is changing quickly, and these are > just the opening stages of a crucial debate over policies that will > determine how we experience media in the 21st century. Is industry > trying to choke progress or simply preserve intellectual property? Are > Internet activists paving the path to the future or just trying to get > something for nothing? We invite you to share your thoughts on the > subject as part of our ongoing World At Large series. We can be found > at letters@usnews.com. We look forward to hearing from you. > > -The Editors > > ----------------------- > NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is > distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior > interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and > educational purposes only. > ----------------------- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 6 00:59:53 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report In-Reply-To: <292503989.20010906094755@centras.lt> References: <292503989.20010906094755@centras.lt> Message-ID: <1173221555.20010906095953@centras.lt> >>now planning to encrypt its music CDs to prevent duplication. D> This is so stupid, it is a bubble industry will drive in and crash. D> I can always reproduce what i hear. There is no way to prevent me to do it D> if you let me hear it at least once. D> I can always reproduce what i see. That makes ebooks protection a bubble D> Or are you going to prevent to do ScreenPrint, then how are you going D> to let me read your eBook. It is complete nonsence This is in the essence of things. The next step industry will try to do is to provide its products strait to our brains. To implement this it will require us to have an implant chip (universal port for your needs satisfaction). I do not see any other workaround for industries. This is the only solution of their problems. This will lead to control of our bodies. If we accept this then we are lost in hell forever -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt From chandler at yomogi.or.jp Thu Sep 6 00:39:43 2001 From: chandler at yomogi.or.jp (chandler) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FT article Message-ID: <3B97283F8C.4059CHANDLER@mail.yomogi.or.jp> The following article in the Financial Times (London) by Patti Waldmeir* seems quite balanced. http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT3QUH9D9RC&live=true Though I'm a bit puzzled by the claim that the software could be used to make pirate copies. Yes, it could, but so could my Canon camera and macro lens - why aren't they illegal. It seems to me there's something profoundly incoherent (mathematically) in the concept of "circumvention". * Hey! Better arrest me. Patti Waldmeir's name is in a .gif file, which can't be pasted into this message, and I just used a piece of technology (my keyboard, mf'd by NMB Technologies of California, if you need to arrest them too) to circumvent this ... Brian Chandler ---------------- Free Dimitry Sklyarov - http://freesklyarov.org/ Reject American claims to global juridiction Campaign against corporate intellectual terrorism ---------------- geo://Sano.Japan.Planet_3 http://imaginatorium.org/ From crumley at mail.com Thu Sep 6 07:32:55 2001 From: crumley at mail.com (Jim Crumley) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Dmitry/DMCA article in the Minnesota Daily Message-ID: <20010906143255.6870.qmail@mail.com> There's a nice article on Dmitry and the DMCA [1] in today's Minnesota Daily. Nothing new to the people on this list, but good press is alway nice. 1. http://www.mndaily.com/story.php?date=20010906&storyID=3400 -- _______________________________________________ FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From tom at lemuria.org Wed Sep 5 01:14:59 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe Seminar In-Reply-To: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms>; from rms@privacyfoundation.org on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400 References: <01b701c13594$39cf3f80$6501a8c0@rms> Message-ID: <20010905101459.A1357@lemuria.org> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:52:07PM -0400, Richard M. Smith wrote: > Besides information about the Sklyarov case, it would be nice to also > have a write-up entitled "Why MS Reader is a better choice for eBooks" I don't think so. M$ reader tries the same (lock away content) and fails the same (it's been broken). if at all, it's a worse choice because it also ties you into the rest of the M$ monopoly. From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 6 01:16:51 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe forums Message-ID: <5572265215.20010906121651@elcomsoft.com> Hello, I'm not sure are you aware of that, but there are "User to User" forums at Adobe site for all Adobe products: http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/main.html There are a few interesting threads in "Acrobat eBook Reader" forum, for example: FREE DMITRY SKYAROV News Stories related to Dmitry and adobe Why Free E-books are restricted for free distribution? Plato's thoughts on the DMCA If I reinstall eBook Reader ... My Letter to Friends and Family Internet says: FREE DMITRY! C'mon, Let's Abolish the 1st Amendment Transfer an ebook to another computer Exposure of security flaw=Arrest? e-book support - No knowledge at all A lot of problems: what a waste of money Ebook Reader Support for Disabled PARANOIA, OF THE INFAMOUS ADOBE (COLLECTOR OF COMPANIES AND OUR $$) Where is "Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader Customer Support"? Sincerely yours, Vladimir ElcomSoft Co.Ltd. http://www.elcomsoft.com mailto:vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 6 00:47:55 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <292503989.20010906094755@centras.lt> >now planning to encrypt its music CDs to prevent duplication. This is so stupid, it is a bubble industry will drive in and crash. I can always reproduce what i hear. There is no way to prevent me to do it if you let me hear it at least once. I can always reproduce what i see. That makes ebooks protection a bubble Or are you going to prevent to do ScreenPrint, then how are you going to let me read your eBook. It is complete nonsence -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Wed Sep 5 22:45:44 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Microsoft EBook Code Message-ID: In MIT's Technology Review http://www.technologyreview.com/web/roush/roush083001.asp James S. Huggins From nick at zork.net Thu Sep 6 10:27:03 2001 From: nick at zork.net (Nick Moffitt) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] sfbang.com Message-ID: <20010906102703.U7940@zork.net> An old San Francisco zine, "Bang!" just started publishing again. The pseudo-premier issue has an interview with Joe Strummer of The Clash, a report on The Power Exchange (a local House Of Ill Repute), and a story on Sklyarov! It's a full-page article on p20 by one Alex Griffiths . It ends with a paragraph telling people to write to Ashcroft and visit freesklyarov.org. The masthead says: BANG! Magazine is a monthly publication of Dysfunction Publishing Inc., 3128 16th Street, #116, San Francisco, CA, 94103. For advertising information, or to phone with comments on past issues or ideas for future issues, call 1-877-682-1037. The rag is one of those free zines that makes its money on adverts. I picked one up in a crepery in the Castro the other day, and was pleasantly startled to read the sklyarov story. Klepht was dead-on when he said that the Free Tibet people would KILL for the sort of coverage we're getting. This thing is all-pervasive! -- "The only thing is certain: Russian petty computer hooligans are very slovenly, while FBI agents are very persistent in hunting them." --Pravda 01234567 <- The amazing* indent-o-meter! ^ (*: Indent-o-meter may not actually amaze.) From schoen at loyalty.org Thu Sep 6 10:45:17 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [news@techlawjournal.com: TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 262] Message-ID: <20010906104517.Q7391@zork.net> Hey, Shapiro! Drop the charges! ----- Forwarded message from Tech Law Journal ----- From: "Tech Law Journal" To: Subject: TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 262 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:19:41 -0700 Tech Law Journal Daily E-Mail Alert September 6, 2001, 9:00 AM ET, Alert No. 262. [...] Shapiro Named Interim US Atty for ND California 9/5. The Department of Justice announced the appointment of David Shapiro as the interim United States Attorney for the Northern District of California. See, USAO release. [...] ----- End forwarded message ----- -- 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 jnichols at pbp.net Thu Sep 6 10:50:43 2001 From: jnichols at pbp.net (Jonathan Nichols) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [news@techlawjournal.com: TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 262] In-Reply-To: <20010906104517.Q7391@zork.net> Message-ID: I'm still thinking that a nice, organized, and LARGE protest at the California State Capitol building would get a bit of attention. I live 2 blocks from the Capitol.. there's news crews out there all the time. I can pretty much guarantee that the local media (KXTV10, KCRA13, etc) would air something about it. There is also a rather large Russian community in Sacramento. > Shapiro Named Interim US Atty for ND California > 9/5. The Department of Justice announced the appointment > of David Shapiro as the interim United States Attorney for the Northern > District of California. See, USAO release. > > [...] > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > From jono at microshaft.org Thu Sep 6 12:43:57 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles Message-ID: <20010906124357.E76115@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message ----- To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Subject: [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:30:08 -0700 http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7079519.html?tag=tp_pr Two well-known computer security experts pulled down their works from the Internet this week for fear of being prosecuted under 1998's Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Along with the threatened lawsuit of Princeton computer-science professor Edward Felten, and the arrest of Russian encryption expert Dmitry Sklyarov, the incidents are the latest to point at what is quickly becoming a touchy environment for security experts. ... Dug Song, a security expert at network-protection company Arbor Networks, pulled his own site down in protest as well. Now the only text on the site, "Censored by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act," links to a DMCA protest site, Anti-DMCA.org. ... But it was the arrest and criminal indictment of Russian encryption expert Dmitry Sklyarov at the Def Con hacking conference that really drove the point home. The incident also unnerved Russian programmers thinking of visiting the United States. http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7079519.html?tag=tp_pr _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 robertl1 at home.com Thu Sep 6 13:17:15 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010906124131.02636380@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Today I had a seemingly simple problem. I got a form for a filing with the State of California. They told me that "the information must be typed with letters in dark contrast to the paper". Well I have not "typed" on paper in years. So they pointed me to a pdf file, which I can download. Now though, how do I "type" my data into the form. I am not about to buy an Adobe product. A search on freshmeat and sourceforge reveals a number of efforts, mostly in a superficial review, efforts to build libraries but not too much in simple end use tools. I am a programmer but I don't really want to start from libraries to perform this simple task. Now this leads me to the real subject. I believe that the best way to punish Adobe for their actions in getting Dmitry jailed is to mount a high profile community effort to replace Adobe's flagship products with ones that are completely (as in GPL) free. This would also send a very strong message to the rest of the DMCA corporate backers. I note that this is a constructive (literally) form of protest. Moreover is is one that an international team of programmers could work upon. Many of the traditional forms of protest, depending as they do on physical presence, do not have this quality. Perhaps we could use the boycottadobe website as a home base. So some questions. Does anyone out there have a good handle on the existing status of free pdf software? Second, would any of you be interested in helping to organize such a protest/project or joining some existing project with this intent? Finally a personal request. Can someone point me to a simple tool for filling out my pdf form. Preferrably an Open Source/Free tool? I would like to start with the existing pdf file, not from scratch, and just add my text. Command line is fine. I don't have to have a gui just the functionality. Linux is good. Please reply offline to this personal appeal. Bob La Quey Free Dmitry http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From jeme at brelin.net Thu Sep 6 14:46:11 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report In-Reply-To: <1173221555.20010906095953@centras.lt> Message-ID: On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, DeBug wrote: > The next step industry will try to do is to provide its products > strait to our brains. To implement this it will require us to have an > implant chip (universal port for your needs satisfaction). No freaking way will it be a universal port. It'll be proprietary. And I'll say, "Oh, hey... did you read the new book by Tom Clancy's Brain In A Box?" And you'll say, "No, that's a NewsCorp book... I have a Viacom port. My brain's not compatible with that information." J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From jaed at jaedworks.com Thu Sep 6 15:22:31 2001 From: jaed at jaedworks.com (Jeanne A. E. DeVoto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] "Brave New Battleground" Over Digital Copyright: US News & World Report In-Reply-To: References: <1173221555.20010906095953@centras.lt> Message-ID: At 2:46 PM -0700 9/6/2001, Jeme A Brelin wrote: >On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, DeBug wrote: >> The next step industry will try to do is to provide its products >> strait to our brains. To implement this it will require us to have an >> implant chip (universal port for your needs satisfaction). > >No freaking way will it be a universal port. It'll be proprietary. > >And I'll say, "Oh, hey... did you read the new book by Tom Clancy's Brain >In A Box?" > >And you'll say, "No, that's a NewsCorp book... I have a Viacom port. >My brain's not compatible with that information." If they go that far, it'll be a crime to talk to someone whose port comes from a different company in the first place. Nonauthorized sharing of information, against contract and public policy. (About a quarter smiley.) -- jeanne a. e. devoto ~ jaed@jaedworks.com http://www.jaedworks.com From jono at microshaft.org Thu Sep 6 20:41:12 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:05 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Washington Post: Security Expert's DMCA Protest Rallies Supporters Message-ID: <20010906204112.L79027@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message ----- To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Washington Post: Security Expert's DMCA Protest Rallies Supporters Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:39:38 -0700 http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/169829.html On Sunday, Song, a security architect with Arbor Networks, replaced the front door of his personal site with a message that reads, "Censored By The Digital Millenium Copyright Act." Clicking on the large, all-capital red letters on a black background takes the visitor to Anti-DMCA.org, a Web site critical of the controversial 1998 US law which attempted to update copyright protections to include digital media. http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/169829.html _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 lblunk at yahoo.com Thu Sep 6 21:24:40 2001 From: lblunk at yahoo.com (Larry Blunk) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <20010906124357.E76115@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010907042440.21189.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> I'd argue that the real threat to security tool writers and researchers is not the DMCA, but rather the Council of Europe Draft Convention on Cybercrime at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/projets/FinalCybercrime.htm. Note Article 6, which criminalizes "the production, sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or otherwise making available of: 1. a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offences established in accordance with Article 2 - 5;" provided such an act is "committed intentionally and without right". But how does determine who has the "right" to produce and distribute such a device? The Council of Europe attempts to clarify this in their "Explanatory Memorandum" at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/projets/FinalCyberRapex.htm. Where in article 77 we are told that "devices designed by industry" are considered to be "with right". However, many security tools, such as Dug Song's dsniff, are not designed by industry, but rather by individuals, academics, and researchers. Apparently, none of these people have the right to design and distribute such tools according to the Council of Europe. Section 2 goes on to exempt the above acts if they are for the purpose of "authorised testing or protection of a computer system". This leads to the question of how one decides whether a device is being produced or distributed for authorized testing, or instead for purposes of illegal access. If Dug has a disclaimer on his site that the dsniff tool is intended only for testing purposes, is that sufficient? What if 2600.com has a web link to Dug's tool, but refuses to include such a disclaimer. Does that magically make Dug's tool illegal? Or rather is it 2600.com's web link that is illegal? Note that the US Department of Justice had a significant hand in developing this draft. You can see just how proud they are of their work at http://www.cybercrime.gov/intl.html#Va --- "Jon O ." wrote: > ----- Forwarded message ----- > > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > Subject: [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles > Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:30:08 -0700 > > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7079519.html?tag=tp_pr > > Two well-known computer security experts pulled down their works from the > Internet > this week for fear of being prosecuted under 1998's Digital Millennium > Copyright Act. > > Along with the threatened lawsuit of Princeton computer-science professor > Edward Felten, and > the arrest of Russian encryption expert Dmitry Sklyarov, the incidents are > the latest to point at > what is quickly becoming a touchy environment for security experts. > > ... > > Dug Song, a security expert at network-protection company Arbor Networks, > pulled his own > site down in protest as well. Now the only text on the site, "Censored by the > Digital Millennium > Copyright Act," links to a DMCA protest site, Anti-DMCA.org. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Thu Sep 6 22:24:19 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [Fwd: The Rising Tide Studios Digital Rights Management Summit.] Message-ID: <3B985A03.782A3055@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> (Forwarded from New York Fair Use list. This is the same commentator that posted the "Growing Up = Being an Information Consumer" line that was posted on July 2.) -------- Original Message -------- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:27:05 -0400 From: "Lucas Gonze" -----Original Message----- Dear Silicon Alley Daily, Digital Coast Daily and VentureReporter.net subscribers, I'm thrilled to annouce that our Digital Rights Management Summit next week is drawing the biggest names in the digital content, distribution and technology space in the world (see names below). The event is focused on the executives and companies that are fighting, and in many cases winning, the battle to get users on the Internet to become paying customers, and to protect rights holders and their work. At the event the top 50 executives from content companies like the ones listed below will take a look at case studies from people like the New York Times, Playboy.com, Salon.com, Edgar Online and even F---edCompany.com. All of which are getting consumers to take out their wallets and pay for content. My personal thanks goes out to Recriprocal which has support our efforts to pull together this very special and important event. If you are a technology or services firm interested in becoming a presenting sponsor please contact Jay.Chicoy@siliconalleyreporter.com. If you are interested in attending please visit our webiste for details: http://www.drmsummit.com/tickets.html The event is taking place next week, on September 12th, at the Hudson Hotel. Best Regards, Jason McCabe Calacanis editor & CEO, Silicon Alley Reporter & VentureReporter.net jason.calacanis@venturereporter.net Executives from the following companies will be attending the Digital Rights Management Summit taking place on September 12th at the Hudson Hotel in New York City: - About.com - American Chemical Society - ASCAP - Atomfilms.com - Barnes and Noble - Billboard - BMG Entertainment - BMG Music - BMI - Bolt, Inc. - Bravo Networks Digital Media - Cherry Lane Music - Conde Nast Magazine Network - CondeNet - Corbis - Coup D'Etat Entertainment - Edgar Online - EMI - Harper Collins - HBO - Hearst New Media - Heavy.com - Hollywood Reporter - Hypnotic - iVillage - j records - John Wiley & Sons, Inc. - LicenseMusic.com - Master Card - Maxim - McGraw Hill Pro Book Group - MTVi - New York Times - News Corporation - News Corporation Digital Ventures - NFL - Noggin - NTT DoCoMo - Octone Records - Penton - Quebecor World Book Services Group - Random House - RD.com (Reader's Digest) - Real Networks - Salon.com - Softbank - Sony - Sony US Venture Fund - Sputnik 7 - Style.com - The New Review - TheStreet.com - Tribeca Film Center - TV Guide - TVT Records - Universal Music Group - V2 Music - Virgin Records - Zomba Publishing/Jive Records ____________________________ New Yorkers for Fair Use - because it's either fair use or useless.... From bahrainperson1 at cyber-rights.net Thu Sep 6 23:04:05 2001 From: bahrainperson1 at cyber-rights.net (bahrainperson1@cyber-rights.net) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles Message-ID: <200109070536.WAA27537@pl1.hushmail.com> > I'd argue that the real threat to security tool writers and researchers >is not the DMCA, but rather the Council of Europe Draft Convention on >Cybercrime at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/projets/FinalCybercrime.htm. The problem with both of these laws is the same. They wish to define software as a device, either partially or totally.What it seems to me that we want is to define software as 100% expression and thus protected speech . On the one hand we have a powerful group of media companies, on the other the US department of Justice. Both seem to want to define software in whatever way is most advantageous for them to accomplish their goals. What is their goal? There's is goal of all large, conservative, hierarchical organizations. control. Absolute control. The european parliment, which from what I understand, is a completely appointed body and in them the DOJ has found a willing ear to their view of the world. For their purposes the DOJ wants software defined to be a device..." a device, including a computer program, "... There in fact is the rub. If software is a device, not expression, the DOJ can control it just like lockpicks, guns and drugs. No problem, the DOJ makes a business of controlling devices. What the DMCA proponents do not mention, and what the DOJ is terrified of in the US is the interpretation of software as 100% expression. If it were then maybe just maybe someone might make the connection between software and speech, and then they would be caught, undone by that increasingly, it seems, anachronistic idea of Freedom of Speech. I give them full credit. These people are cunning, manipulative and methodical. They whisper in the ears of those in power whatever mantra they think will curry them the most favour, or if that fails simply drive a truckload of money up to the front door and ring the bell. They know that if they cannot get a law passed in one country that they can find another country to pass the law in. A country that perhaps is not so strict about such arcane concepts as protect speech and other fundamental rights. Think about it. The US Department of Justice, who cannot get a law passed in the US for fear of constitutional barriers simply finds a foreign body who is amenable to passing their legislation for them in the full knowledge that the law will in fact be directly applicable to the american population. A population who cannot even depend on their own freedoms to protect them due to international treaty. I am curious how long has the US Department of Justice had the power to not only enforce laws, but make them? I thought that was the job of congress and elected officials? I think they have a name for a country where the police make laws, I believe it is called a police state. Have a nice day. :) From rosecolin at iprimus.com.au Thu Sep 6 22:53:15 2001 From: rosecolin at iprimus.com.au (Colin Rose) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Regarding Unsubscription Message-ID: I wish to unsubscribe to this list and as one poor unfortunate was flamed for sending an unsubscribe message to the list I will try and ask nicely. I want to unsubscribe please Please do not send me to http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov as there appears to be no information on the unsubscription process there at all. Except for a pointer saying that you can unsubscribe using the interface below (thats the interface that has one button marked subscribe - which doesnt have a toggle unsubscribe effect as I tried it). So without drawing to much anger and unwarranted abuse could someone please direct me as to how to do this. I hope the list administrator is reading this post to as is a waste of THEIR resources if the majority of people who wish to unsubscribe, cannot do so due to lack of instructions, dont want to ask on the list after seeing people abused for asking the question and so direct the posts from this list into /dev/null. Thank You Colin Rose PS: To the people that flamed the guy who sent the unsubscribe request to this list a few days ago and made jokes about the guys lack of ability using the net and then sent him to a page that doesn't help I suggest you email him an apology for your arrogance, presumption and lack of any idea of the content of the page you sent him too. Also if that guy is still on this list I would like to draw your attention to the fact that most people on this list don't suck but you get that type everywhere. From ca2027001 at sneakemail.com Thu Sep 6 19:03:40 2001 From: ca2027001 at sneakemail.com (ca2027001@sneakemail.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest Message-ID: <135402077.999842643432.JavaMail.root@boots> I have been thinking the exact same thoughts. There would be a certain amount of satisfaction to "killing" a particular format. You would have to write a cross platform/windows program. I'm not much of a programmer, but I could help with the beta testing. The only question - is the pdf encoder covered by patents?? anyone know?? I have been giving much thought to this. There needs to be an organization that goes beyond the list serv that consists of people who are willing to spend their time, money, and resources to fight bad law and bad corporations. Bob wrote; . I note that this is a constructive > (literally) form of protest. Moreover is is one that > an international team of programmers could work upon. > Many of the traditional forms of protest, depending as > they do on physical presence, do not have this quality. > Perhaps we could use the boycottadobe website as a > home base. > > So some questions. > > Does anyone out there have a good handle on the existing > status of free pdf software? > > Second, would any of you be interested in helping to > organize such a protest/project or joining some existing > project with this intent? From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Thu Sep 6 23:05:43 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <200109070536.WAA27537@pl1.hushmail.com>; from bahrainperson1@cyber-rights.net on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 02:04:05 -0400 References: <200109070536.WAA27537@pl1.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <20010907020543.M27372@www2> <> No - what we want to assure the right to ownership of copyrighted inforamtion. We shouldn't be allowed to "RENT" information. We must have the freedom to OWN the copy we have, minus some limitations as a concession to copyright. Fair Use, as an expression of property rights and freedom of speach must be rightfully take precedence over copyright and certainly due process, and illegal search and seizure MUST take precedence over Copyright. Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From schoen at loyalty.org Thu Sep 6 23:18:34 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Regarding Unsubscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010906231834.G7391@zork.net> Colin Rose writes: > I wish to unsubscribe to this list and as one poor unfortunate was flamed for > sending an unsubscribe message to the list I will try and ask nicely. > > I want to unsubscribe please I note that you also sent your request to the list. I don't want to flame anyone; I just want to ask people not to send unsubscribe requests to the list. Any administrative requests you can't handle by yourself are best sent to free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net; currently, this goes to me, and I can answer your questions about the list's operation. > Please do not send me to http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov as > there appears to be no information on the unsubscription process there at > all. It's the section on that page which says To change your subscription (set options like digest and delivery modes, get a reminder of your password, or unsubscribe from free-sklyarov), enter your subscription email address: If this is confusing to people, I can change the HTML to make this appear in bold, or perhaps to make it higher up on the page. -- Seth David Schoen | Lending, printing, copying, giving Temp. http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | and text-to-speech are permissions down: http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF) | enabled by the publisher. -- Adobe From schoen at loyalty.org Thu Sep 6 23:25:29 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest In-Reply-To: <135402077.999842643432.JavaMail.root@boots> References: <135402077.999842643432.JavaMail.root@boots> Message-ID: <20010906232529.H7391@zork.net> ca2027001@sneakemail.com writes: > The only question - is the pdf encoder covered by > patents?? anyone know?? Yes; for example, http://partners.adobe.com/asn/developer/legalnotices.html Patents on DRM stuff itself are a big risk. If we got rid of the DMCA tomorrow, we would still have trouble circumventing Macrovision's copy protection schemes, _because Macrovision takes out patents on the technologies it invents to circumvent its own copy protection_! If you search for patents held by Macrovision, something like 1/3 or more are actually patents on circumvention technologies, clearly taken out in order to stop other people from implementing these. Whether this means that the USPTO, or patentees, are violating the DMCA by teaching people how to circumvent TPMs is another matter. -- 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 ca2027001 at sneakemail.com Thu Sep 6 19:44:04 2001 From: ca2027001 at sneakemail.com (ca2027001@sneakemail.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:06 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Regarding Unsubscription Message-ID: <134767085.999845055458.JavaMail.root@boots> > If this is confusing to people, I can change the HTML to make this > appear in bold, or perhaps to make it higher up on the page. I have to admit it is in completely non-obvious place. I scanned the page and thought it wasn't there until you pointed it out... I vote for higher up on the page. Phillip K. From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Fri Sep 7 00:57:41 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010906124131.02636380@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: This man Touretzky has collected some alternative devices: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/index.html I am in total agreement about a professional boycott of Adobe tools, specifically by identifying alternatives. Perhaps more effective then my approach. http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 7962&mid=17586 http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 7962&mid=17585 -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Bob La Quey Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:17 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest Today I had a seemingly simple problem. I got a form for a filing with the State of California. They told me that "the information must be typed with letters in dark contrast to the paper". Well I have not "typed" on paper in years. So they pointed me to a pdf file, which I can download. Now though, how do I "type" my data into the form. I am not about to buy an Adobe product. A search on freshmeat and sourceforge reveals a number of efforts, mostly in a superficial review, efforts to build libraries but not too much in simple end use tools. I am a programmer but I don't really want to start from libraries to perform this simple task. Now this leads me to the real subject. I believe that the best way to punish Adobe for their actions in getting Dmitry jailed is to mount a high profile community effort to replace Adobe's flagship products with ones that are completely (as in GPL) free. This would also send a very strong message to the rest of the DMCA corporate backers. I note that this is a constructive (literally) form of protest. Moreover is is one that an international team of programmers could work upon. Many of the traditional forms of protest, depending as they do on physical presence, do not have this quality. Perhaps we could use the boycottadobe website as a home base. So some questions. Does anyone out there have a good handle on the existing status of free pdf software? Second, would any of you be interested in helping to organize such a protest/project or joining some existing project with this intent? Finally a personal request. Can someone point me to a simple tool for filling out my pdf form. Preferrably an Open Source/Free tool? I would like to start with the existing pdf file, not from scratch, and just add my text. Command line is fine. I don't have to have a gui just the functionality. Linux is good. Please reply offline to this personal appeal. Bob La Quey Free Dmitry http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From debug at centras.lt Fri Sep 7 01:50:02 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Big challenge for information technology specialists In-Reply-To: <20010906114127.A76115@networkcommand.com> References: <20010906114127.A76115@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <385712908.20010907105002@centras.lt> I think a big challenge for all IT specialists is defining information exchange standards, implementing these standards in interfaces and creating converters. This is what Dmitry Sklyarov did and i am fascinated by his work -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt From david.haworth at altavista.net Fri Sep 7 04:00:38 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest In-Reply-To: <20010906232529.H7391@zork.net>; from schoen@loyalty.org on Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 11:25:29PM -0700 References: <135402077.999842643432.JavaMail.root@boots> <20010906232529.H7391@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010907130038.A10969@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 11:25:29PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > > Patents on DRM stuff itself are a big risk. If we got rid of the DMCA > tomorrow, we would still have trouble circumventing Macrovision's copy > protection schemes, _because Macrovision takes out patents on the > technologies it invents to circumvent its own copy protection_! Leaving aside any questions about the validity of these patents ... That's not strictly true - unless they patent all possible circumvention methods. > Whether this means that the USPTO, or patentees, are violating the DMCA > by teaching people how to circumvent TPMs is another matter. :-) Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From mscottaline at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 03:59:21 2001 From: mscottaline at yahoo.com (Michael Scottaline) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] From our "unlimited effrontery" department Message-ID: <20010907065921.235d8e09.mscottaline@yahoo.com> Adobe weazels...... http://www.thestandard.com/article/0%2c1902%2c28875%2c00.html -- "You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline - it helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer." - Frank Zappa _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Fri Sep 7 05:35:16 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FT article In-Reply-To: <3B97283F8C.4059CHANDLER@mail.yomogi.or.jp>; from chandler@yomogi.or.jp on Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 04:39:43PM +0900 References: <3B97283F8C.4059CHANDLER@mail.yomogi.or.jp> Message-ID: <20010907143516.B10969@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 04:39:43PM +0900, chandler wrote: > It seems to me there's something > profoundly incoherent (mathematically) in the concept of > "circumvention". It's not just the concept of circumvention that's incoherent. The whole DMCA is pretty incoherent. Example: it's illegal to circumvent a technological measure that effectively protects a copyrighted work. (Or something like that - my point is that the word "effectively" is used). Now you or I might think that for something to be "effective" it must actually work - so if a protection device can be circumvented (especially as easily in this case), it can hardly be described as "effective". But the act goes on to define an effective protection measure as just about any attempt to conceal the content. Hell, by that standard just about any proprietary unpublished file format could be described as a "protection mechanism" What's really incoherent, though, are the industry mouthpieces who continue to promote this crap, and the politicians who accept their nonsense as fact. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From debug at centras.lt Fri Sep 7 07:23:33 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FT article In-Reply-To: <20010907143516.B10969@3soft.de> References: <3B97283F8C.4059CHANDLER@mail.yomogi.or.jp> <20010907143516.B10969@3soft.de> Message-ID: <1625475027.20010907162333@centras.lt> >> It seems to me there's something >> profoundly incoherent (mathematically) in the concept of >> "circumvention". DH> It's not just the concept of circumvention that's incoherent. DH> The whole DMCA is pretty incoherent. We are in a mess, really deep there ... I try to avoid courts by all means possible - too many laws are using incoherent notions, definitions and can be interpreted in many unexpected and not obvious ways *Do not judge* is one of very few laws that is coherent When i think about the Judgement Day i feel it will not be about judging people but about forgiving people and those not forgiven will have noone to blame but themselves This is where coherence of *Do not judge* comes from If you are non-believer you still feel the coherence... I somehow feel no coherence in the notion of *fare use* feel no coherence in the notion of *copyright* very much less coherence in DMCA ... There are coherent laws and i try to keep my live ruled by these laws. i fail often but never give up. Copyrights and DMCA case for me is resolved very easily: I do not promise what i cannot fullfil and i say this in advance. So i say let's do not use copyrighted products and explain this to copyright holders - there can always be situations when i will be oblieged (by coherent law) to break copyright law I would like to buy from authors the following statement - "my work is free to copy and use as you like" this is something like Bob Smart adds to his posts: "What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution." And so do I -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 7 10:47:49 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] California woman sues CD company over user tracking technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: http://www.politechbot.com/p-02476.html Her complaint, in a nutshell, is that all this DRM crap was thrown in without any warning sticker on the box. It's pretty scary stuff, too: the CD can't be played on a computer; instead it appears that one can download versions of the songs in a proprietary format that can not be loaded onto a portable MP3 player. Aaand, the user must supply personal information in order to get them. So, this takes us back to the issue of putting warning labels on CDs that are impaired by DRM etc etc. Would this suit bring that closer to reality? Xcott From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Fri Sep 7 11:22:27 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NINCH New York Town Meeting Message-ID: (Forwarded from AMIA-L list) -----Original Message----- From: Linda Tadic Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:25:46 EDT Posted on behalf of NINCH: NEW YORK CITY COPYRIGHT TOWN MEETING * * * Free of Charge * * * REGISTRATION DEADLINE: MONDAY SEPT 10 REGISTER ONLINE AT: http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" Monday September 24: New York Public Library Celeste Bartos Forum Fifth Avenue at 42nd St 8:30am-5:00pm http://www.nypl.org/research/copyright/index.html * * * Monday September 10 is the registration deadline for the New York City NINCH Copyright Town Meeting to be held at the New York Public Library on Monday September 24. This meeting is free of charge. If you intend to Participate please register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/ copyright/registration.cfm THEME: "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: Professor Peter Jaszi (Washington College of Law, American University) and Linda Tadic (Manager of the Digital Library, Home Box Office). PANEL ONE "Intellectual Property Owners in the Digital Environment" * Ryan Craig, Fathom co-founder, Warburg Pincus * Adam Eisgrau, The Wexler Group; Counsel for the American Library Association (1995-1999) * Donald J. Waters, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. PANEL TWO "Intellectual Property Users in the Digital Environment" * Hank Barry, CEO, Napster (May 2000-July 2001); Hummer Winblad Venture Partners * Howard Besser, UCLA School of Education and Information Studies * Robert Kolker, film scholar; Chair of the School of Literature, Communication, and Culture, Georgia Institute for Technology * * * The NINCH Copyright Town Meetings balance expert opinion and audience participation on the basics of copyright law, the implications of copyright online, recent changes in copyright law and practice, and practical issues related to the networking of cultural heritage materials. The program will include time for audience questions, comments and discussion. Register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm For information on all the NINCH 2001 Copyright Town meetings, see http:/ /www.ninch.org/copyright/townmeetings01/2001.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Local committees organize the NINCH Copyright Town Meetings, coordinated and reviewed by the NINCH Town Meetings Working Group. The Copyright Town Meetings series is a component of the NINCH Copyright Education Program, organized by the NINCH Advocacy Working Group. NYC LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Patricia Barnett, The Frick Collection Jacqueline F. Bausch, The New York Public Library Daniel Dex, The New York Public Library Heike Kordish, The New York Public Library Madeleine Nichols, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts Robert J. Vanni, The New York Public Library Jennifer Vinopal, New York University Libraries Matthew Zimmerman, New York University Information Technology Services NINCH TOWN MEETINGS WORKING GROUP: Kathe Albrecht, American University/Visual Resources Association Mary Case, Association of Research Libraries Robert Baron, Independent Scholar Kenneth Crews, Indiana University Georgia Harper, University of Texas Christine Sundt, University of Oregon/Visual Resources Association/NINCH BOARD Marta Teegen, College Art Association Sanford Thatcher, Pennsylvania State University Press/Association of American University Presses Peter Walsh, College Art Association Committee on Intellectual Property Patricia Williams, Americans for the Arts Martha Winnacker, University of California * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 7 11:25:01 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sample letters? Message-ID: <20010907112501.B10111@zork.net> I've been a bit slow on getting sample letters out to help people who are gathering tomorrow to write their own letters. I do plan to work on some samples today, but it would be good to collect some from other people. Once again, I understand that the letter-writing is to be directed at: (1) Members of Congress, asking them to condemn Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest and to help reform the DMCA. (One suggestion for WIPO treaty implementation, advocated by ACM, EFF, and the DFC: make it illegal to circumvent TPMs _in order to infringe a copyright_, much in the way that it may be illegal to use a weapon _in order to commit a crime_. This is distinct from making it illegal to circumvent TPMs _for any purpose_. In addition, "circumvention tools" should not be illegal in themselves; knowingly providing circumvention tools to help someone infringe a copyright is already "aiding and abetting".) (2) Interim U.S. Attorney David Shapiro. (One suggestion is to mention that foreign scientists are now afraid to visit the U.S., and respected researchers have been censoring themselves.) (3) Publishers which are members of the Association of American Publishers. (I'll try to find their addresses today. One suggestion is to write to your own favorite publisher, and explain how the DMCA is undermining the freedom of the press, which, as publishers know very well, is extremely important to them in the long term. Perhaps some publishers have not yet realized that the DMCA creates serious problems for the freedom of speech and of the press, that -- according to some observers of Judge Kaplan's opinion -- it's been used to create a _whole new carve-out_ from first amendment protections. When publishers recognize the long term risk to the first amendment at stake, they may realize that the AAP's position is short-sighted.) I would tell publishers that we appreciate their valiant efforts in the past to defend the first amendment, and that the AAP's statement -- praising the arrest of a programmer, arrested for what he wrote, while in the country to speak at a conference! -- seems like a disturbing aberration in that tradition. That's certainly the way it feels to me; remember that the AAP (and other trade groups representing copyright industries) were co-plaintiffs in the case which overturned the Communications Decency Act. Sexually explicit speech, violent speech, descriptions of how to build bombs: publishers know to stand up for the right to publish these. We've got to explain that the right to write programs is at least as important as any of these. For those of you who are enthusiasts of pre-DMCA copyright law, it might be good to mention that in your letters to publishers. I don't know how involved it's necessary to get; for example, I'd be tempted to launch into a "software DRM is snake oil -- if you believed in 'copy-proof on-line publishing', you've been sold a bridge, and one that's hurting the first amendment" discussion. But I think that would be more involved than necessary. -- 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 robertl1 at home.com Fri Sep 7 12:42:23 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010906124131.02636380@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010907123228.024f7a60@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 03:57 AM 9/7/01 -0400, John Dempsey wrote: >This man Touretzky has collected some alternative devices: >http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/index.html Thanks John, I will check it out. >I am in total agreement about a professional boycott of Adobe tools, >specifically by identifying alternatives. Perhaps more effective then my >approach. >http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 >7962&mid=17586 >http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 >7962&mid=17585 I share the outrage that are expressed quite well in the messages cited above. Adobe get's Dmitry put in jail and then washes their hands of the entire affair. We cannot just let this slide by. We will not. Since several people have indicated interest in going straight at Adobe with alternate products it appears our first project is simply to do an exhaustive survey of what (and who) is out there producing potential competitors to Adobe's products. We can then share that knowledge with all who wish to truly boycott Adobe and thus help free Dmitry. Armed with the knowledge of the existing competing products we can then turn toward the question of where Open Source/Free programming energy can be best deployed. I suggest we hang around this mailing list for a little while longer then if it seems this is going soemwhere we can setup our own. And Seth, please jump in if you feel we have wandered too far off topic. Bob La Quey From sisgeek at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 13:36:03 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <200109070536.WAA27537@pl1.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <20010907203603.11017.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> yes - but when we succeed in classifying code as 100% speech how do we reason with those (such as the 2600 trial judge and others) who believe you can constrain speech based on the likely outcome(s) that speech may produce? (ie the famous but asinine statement that you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater.) it seems to me you must go further than classifying code as 100% speech and assert that speech can never be constrained because speech in and of itself does not produce outcomes! however, our society currently seems willing to constrain one persons speech rather than assign another person the responsibility to evaluate that speech and act or not act as the evaluator person sees fit. stated differently society is currently willing to say to dima: "you dima, by speaking, have caused another person to infringe a copyright. (they throw in for profit so it has a capitalist flavor, i guess?) therefore, we are going to punish you because your speech is the cause of that person's infringement"!! to make it even more absurd, the same society asserting speech causes outcomes seeks to simultaneously assert individuals are responsible for their own behavior! (im sure they meant to add, except when another person's speech is responsible for that behavior?) ... and we laugh when someone asserts "the devil made me do it"! just a thought:) > The problem with both of these laws is the same. > They wish to define software > as a device, either partially or totally.What it > seems to me that we want > is to define software as 100% expression and thus > protected speech . > > On the one hand we have a powerful group of media > companies, on the other > the US department of Justice. Both seem to want to > define software in whatever > way is most advantageous for them to accomplish > their goals. What is their > goal? There's is goal of all large, conservative, > hierarchical organizations. > control. Absolute control. > > The european parliment, which from what I > understand, is a completely appointed > body and in them the DOJ has found a willing ear to > their view of the world. > For their purposes the DOJ wants software defined > to be a device..." a > device, including a computer program, "... There in > fact is the rub. If > software is a device, not expression, the DOJ can > control it just like lockpicks, > guns and drugs. No problem, the DOJ makes a > business of controlling devices. > > What the DMCA proponents do not mention, and what > the DOJ is terrified of > in the US is the interpretation of software as 100% > expression. If it were > then maybe just maybe someone might make the > connection between software > and speech, and then they would be caught, undone by > that increasingly, > it seems, anachronistic idea of Freedom of Speech. > > I give them full credit. These people are cunning, > manipulative and methodical. > They whisper in the ears of those in power whatever > mantra they think will > curry them the most favour, or if that fails simply > drive a truckload of > money up to the front door and ring the bell. They > know that if they cannot > get a law passed in one country that they can find > another country to pass > the law in. A country that perhaps is not so strict > about such arcane concepts > as protect speech and other fundamental rights. > > Think about it. The US Department of Justice, who > cannot get a law passed > in the US for fear of constitutional barriers simply > finds a foreign body > who is amenable to passing their legislation for > them in the full knowledge > that the law will in fact be directly applicable to > the american population. > A population who cannot even depend on their own > freedoms to protect them > due to international treaty. I am curious how long > has the US Department > of Justice had the power to not only enforce laws, > but make them? I thought > that was the job of congress and elected officials? > I think they have a > name for a country where the police make laws, I > believe it is called a > police state. > > Have a nice day. :) > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From proclus at iname.com Fri Sep 7 13:42:30 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A constructive form of protest In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010907123228.024f7a60@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: <200109072042.f87KgUv01114@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 7 Sep, Bob La Quey wrote: > At 03:57 AM 9/7/01 -0400, John Dempsey wrote: >>This man Touretzky has collected some alternative devices: >>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/index.html > > Thanks John, > > I will check it out. > >>I am in total agreement about a professional boycott of Adobe tools, >>specifically by identifying alternatives. Perhaps more effective then my >>approach. >>http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 >>7962&mid=17586 >>http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687962&tid=adbe&sid=468 >>7962&mid=17585 These messages are VERY distressing, and I'm speechless. > Armed with the knowledge of the existing competing products we can > then turn toward the question of where Open Source/Free programming > energy can be best deployed. Although we have left off of the boycott, GNU-Darwin does indeed aim to displace Adobe products and replace them with free software. With nothing as aggressive as a boycott, we have been explaining how to use free software instead of proprietary. Most of that material is on our download news page with headings like "Word Processing", "Make PDF files", etc. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/download.html The binaries are specific for Darwin, but the instructions are generally applicable. All of the software is freely available on the net. Anyone on this list should feel free to contact me directly, if you need help getting up and running with free software. I'm not just good with Darwin, but also with Mac OS, GNU/Linux, Commercial Unix, OpenBSD, and probably all of the other BSDs as well. In addition, there were many messages posted to this forum at the height of the boycott which suggested Adobe alternatives. If you go back to the messages that were posted in the first week, you will find many such suggestions. This is a "big picture" maneuver. Use free software which has been created for the benefit of the community, and you will weaken the grasp of the globalist cartels, who give us many different problems just like the DMCA. We will renew the boycott, if Abobe renews their antagonism towards Dmitry. Their apathy and inaction, though deplorable, is not grounds for a general boycott IMHO. They gave us what we asked for, and we ended the boycott. All we are asking is that they honor that agreement in good faith. http://zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/2001-September/004089.html Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From jeme at brelin.net Fri Sep 7 15:53:11 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <20010907203603.11017.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, alfee cube wrote: > yes - but when we succeed in classifying code as 100% > speech how do we reason with those (such as the 2600 > trial judge and others) who believe you can constrain > speech based on the likely outcome(s) that speech may > produce? (ie the famous but asinine statement that you > cannot yell fire in a crowded theater.) Well, context is important here. We're talking about a time and place when theaters had one, small exit and theater fires killed hundreds of people every year. > it seems to me you must go further than classifying > code as 100% speech and assert that speech can never > be constrained because speech in and of itself does > not produce outcomes! Not true. Speech can and should be restricted in very specific ways. For example: It should be illegal to walk up behind a person on a subway platform and shout: "LOOOKOUT!" right behind their head as the train is coming. If they are startled and fall down onto the rails, you are quite responsible. I'm perfectly happy fining and punishing people who make such speech. I'm also perfectly happy with the legality of civil suits for slander and libel. I believe that commercial speech must be held to the highest standard of provable and proven truth (else, for the purpose of increasing profits, whole industries will produce false documents and buy expert testimonials to promote baseless assertions). There are legitimate reasons to limit speech. > stated differently society is currently willing to say > to dima: > > "you dima, by speaking, have caused another person to > infringe a copyright. (they throw in for profit so it > has a capitalist flavor, i guess?) therefore, we are > going to punish you because your speech is the cause > of that person's infringement"!! > > to make it even more absurd, the same society > asserting speech causes outcomes seeks to > simultaneously assert individuals are responsible for > their own behavior! (im sure they meant to add, except > when another person's speech is responsible for that > behavior?) I think we have shown, through years of psychological study, that people are influenced by their surroundings. To say that a person is not influenced by what he hears and sees is pure ignorance. I believe in personal responsibility, but that responsibility extends to influencing others. You are responsible for the effects of your actions... and some of those effects are on the actions of others. The Germans have a law (or perhaps just legal doctrine) that allows as a valid defense for any criminal charge the argument that breaking the law was the rational choice in your situation. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From wiljan at pobox.com Fri Sep 7 16:44:21 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [re:] Sample letters? Message-ID: <200109072318.SAA000.57@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:25:01 Seth David Schoen schoen@loyalty.org said: > Once again, I understand that the letter-writing is to be directed at: >(1) Members of Congress, asking them to condemn Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest > and to help reform the DMCA. (One suggestion for WIPO treaty > implementation, advocated by ACM, EFF, and the DFC: make it illegal > to circumvent TPMs _in order to infringe a copyright_, much in the > way that it may be illegal to use a weapon _in order to commit a > crime_. This is distinct from making it illegal to circumvent TPMs > _for any purpose_. In addition, "circumvention tools" should not > be illegal in themselves; knowingly providing circumvention tools > to help someone infringe a copyright is already "aiding and > abetting".) Seth, I do not think this will help Dmitry at all. 1) This gives gives credibility to the muli-nationals that came up with the TRIPS agreement. If TRIPS means violating the constitution, then TRIPS is illegal until an amendment is in place. 2) TPMs? I guess you mean "Effective technological measures that protect a right on a copyright owner". The use of an acronym gives the idea that someone understands the long buzzwords that currently have no literal or legal meaning whatsoever. 3) Congress could free Dmitry in less than a week and change no laws at all. 4) After Dmitry is free, then congress needs to again be reminded that all rights, including copyright come from the people, not law. Property rights come from the fact that most people believe in them, and law only takes care of the few non-believers. If the people believed copyright was anything except a ripoff for some large corporations, all of title 17 could be condensed to a few pages. -will- From wiljan at pobox.com Fri Sep 7 16:44:21 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [re:] Sample letters? Message-ID: <200109072319.SAA000.59@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:25:01 Seth David Schoen schoen@loyalty.org said: > Once again, I understand that the letter-writing is to be directed at: >(1) Members of Congress, asking them to condemn Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest > and to help reform the DMCA. (One suggestion for WIPO treaty > implementation, advocated by ACM, EFF, and the DFC: make it illegal > to circumvent TPMs _in order to infringe a copyright_, much in the > way that it may be illegal to use a weapon _in order to commit a > crime_. This is distinct from making it illegal to circumvent TPMs > _for any purpose_. In addition, "circumvention tools" should not > be illegal in themselves; knowingly providing circumvention tools > to help someone infringe a copyright is already "aiding and > abetting".) Seth, I do not think this will help Dmitry at all. 1) This gives gives credibility to the muli-nationals that came up with the TRIPS agreement. If TRIPS means violating the constitution, then TRIPS is illegal until an amendment is in place. 2) TPMs? I guess you mean "Effective technological measures that protect a right on a copyright owner". The use of an acronym gives the idea that someone understands the long buzzwords that currently have no literal or legal meaning whatsoever. 3) Congress could free Dmitry in less than a week and change no laws at all. 4) After Dmitry is free, then congress needs to again be reminded that all rights, including copyright come from the people, not law. Property rights come from the fact that most people believe in them, and law only takes care of the few non-believers. If the people believed copyright was anything except a ripoff for some large corporations, all of title 17 could be condensed to a few pages. -will- From sisgeek at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 16:30:42 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010907233042.36281.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> jeme i hardly know where to begin but let me try:) --- Jeme A Brelin wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, alfee cube wrote: > > yes - but when we succeed in classifying code as > 100% > > speech how do we reason with those (such as the > 2600 > > trial judge and others) who believe you can > constrain > > speech based on the likely outcome(s) that speech > may > > produce? (ie the famous but asinine statement that > you > > cannot yell fire in a crowded theater.) > > Well, context is important here. We're talking > about a time and place > when theaters had one, small exit and theater fires > killed hundreds of > people every year. > > > it seems to me you must go further than > classifying > > code as 100% speech and assert that speech can > never > > be constrained because speech in and of itself > does > > not produce outcomes! > > Not true. > > Speech can and should be restricted in very specific > ways. > > For example: It should be illegal to walk up behind > a person on a subway > platform and shout: "LOOOKOUT!" right behind their > head as the train is > coming. If they are startled and fall down onto the > rails, you are quite > responsible. ============================= you cannot get very far with this logic (every person is "perfectly happy" to fine and punish people who speak what they to not like. in your case people who yell lookout behind another individual. ============================== > > I'm perfectly happy fining and punishing people who > make such speech. > > I'm also perfectly happy with the legality of civil > suits for slander and > libel. I believe that commercial speech must be > held to the highest > standard of provable and proven truth (else, for the > purpose of increasing > profits, whole industries will produce false > documents and buy expert > testimonials to promote baseless assertions). > > There are legitimate reasons to limit speech. > ====================================== i'm certain every proponent of constraining speech shares your assertion. if the individual could reason their way to the conclusion they were limiting speech for illegitimate reasons they would not feel compelled to limit speech in the first place. why do you think libel is a legitimate reason to restrict speech? it seems pretty silly to me - if someone libels me i can speak out in my defense - why do i have to limit your speech? leaving aside whether commercial speech is in fact speech at all - why do i have to restrict a corporations speech? why can't i just test their speech and if untrue speak that? what you assert as legitimate reasons i assert are illegitimate. ============================================ > > stated differently society is currently willing to > say > > to dima: > > > > "you dima, by speaking, have caused another person > to > > infringe a copyright. (they throw in for profit > so it > > has a capitalist flavor, i guess?) therefore, we > are > > going to punish you because your speech is the > cause > > of that person's infringement"!! > > > > to make it even more absurd, the same society > > asserting speech causes outcomes seeks to > > simultaneously assert individuals are responsible > for > > their own behavior! (im sure they meant to add, > except > > when another person's speech is responsible for > that > > behavior?) > > I think we have shown, through years of > psychological study, that people > are influenced by their surroundings. To say that a > person is not > influenced by what he hears and sees is pure > ignorance. ========== you have switch the discussion - of course persons are "influenced" their surroundings, including speech. that is exactly why we do not want to constrain speech!!! ================ > > I believe in personal responsibility, but that > responsibility extends to > influencing others. You are responsible for the > effects of your > actions... and some of those effects are on the > actions of others. =================== you have switch the discussion again - actions != (not equal to) speech - that is the basis for my asserting speech should not be constrained!!! ==================== > > J. > -- > ----------------- > Jeme A Brelin > jeme@brelin.net > ----------------- > [cc] counter-copyright > http://www.openlaw.org > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 7 16:58:00 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Jeme A Brelin wrote: > Speech can and should be restricted in very specific ways. > > For example: It should be illegal to walk up behind a person on a subway > platform and shout: "LOOOKOUT!" right behind their head as the train is > coming. If they are startled and fall down onto the rails, you are quite > responsible. > > I'm perfectly happy fining and punishing people who make such speech. Ah, but such a person would be charged with murder. There is no need to punish or outlaw the speech itself, any more than it is to outlaw the murderous thoughts, or quiet sneakers, that also contributed to the killing. You don't need to outlaw speech to deal with yelling "fire" in a crowded theater (and *that's* why it's such a bad example.) You can simply charge people with murder or manslaughter, or whatever damage for which they were directly responsible. =X From jeme at brelin.net Fri Sep 7 17:11:48 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:07 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <20010907233042.36281.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, alfee cube wrote: > you cannot get very far with this logic (every person is "perfectly > happy" to fine and punish people who speak what they to not like. in > your case people who yell lookout behind another individual. It isn't the slippery slope you paint. There are complex legal "tests", wherein certain criteria must be met for speech to be restricted. Our law says that such restrictions must be "narrowly tailored". Broad restrictions are bad, narrow restrictions can be good. Where do you draw the line between expression and action? I've already mentioned frightening people off of subway platforms. What about threatening a person's safety or property? Dance is protected "speech-like" expression. What about covering my body with mirrors and dancing beside a freeway, thus blinding motorists? How about if I sell a hair dryer and claim "New! Safe in the tub!"? Is it really the responsibility of every individual to assess these things for themselves? If we are restricted to our personal knowledge and experience and cannot trust the world around us (and believe me, when the profit-mongers are unrestricted, they will flood us with so much disinformation, you won't know whom or what to trust), then we cannot grow beyond an individual's experience. There is nothing to pass on to the next generation because nearly all of what we share is bullshit. There are narrowly tailored restrictions that prevent total disruption of civilization by a few. > why do you think libel is a legitimate reason to restrict speech? it > seems pretty silly to me - if someone libels me i can speak out in my > defense - why do i have to limit your speech? Because I am a powerful publisher or a cartel of powerful publishers and if I can say whatever I like in my papers, I can spread lie and rumor and innuendo without threat of recourse. And you, with your meager resources and pitifully small voice have no effective recourse. There is also our responsibility to the future. Our documents of today must reflect the best truth we know so as not to mislead and misdirect those who come later and who need to learn from our words and deeds. > leaving aside whether commercial speech is in fact speech at all - why > do i have to restrict a corporations speech? why can't i just test > their speech and if untrue speak that? Because you do not have the voice that they have. You cannot be heard. > what you assert as legitimate reasons i assert are illegitimate. Your cure is worse than your disease. Now, I believe that the DMCA won't stand up to the legal tests of narrow tailoring that any speech restriction must endure. I believe that if the judicial system fails us in this, then we are obligated as individuals to rise up and replace our government with one that better serves the interests of the public. I think there are only a handful of "root causes" that can be eliminated to achieve a more just and human-oriented society. I think we must reverse our holding that corporations receive the rights and protections of indivduals under the law. I think we must severely scale back (if not completely eliminate) our copyright and patent laws. And I think we must provide for the public funding of election campaigns (with comensurate criminal penalties and civil responsibility for those who would ignore election rules). I think that the legislation and treaties of the past ten years have done more to harm freedom of indivduals and the sovereignty of nations than all the legislation of the previous 200. > you have switch the discussion - of course persons are "influenced" > their surroundings, including speech. that is exactly why we do not > want to constrain speech!!! No switch, here. I'm describing my justification for the conclusion that some limits on speech are responsible and ethical. My argument is that a person is responsible for the influence they wield. Part of that influence is their speech and part of that responsibility includes civil or ciminal liability when it is ignored. > > I believe in personal responsibility, but that responsibility extends > > to influencing others. You are responsible for the effects of your > > actions... and some of those effects are on the actions of others. > > =================== > you have switch the discussion again - actions != (not > equal to) speech - that is the basis for my asserting > speech should not be constrained!!! I didn't switch the discussion here, either. This is where I undermine your assumption that speech is not an action. Speaking IS an action. Talking is doing. Writing is doing. Speaking is exerting influence and you are responsible for your negative influence. In some limited cases, that responsibility might extend to a criminal liability or a civil legal action. It is up to our judicial system to provide for justice and make those calls case by case. And it is up to us, as citizens, to keep our judicial system's concept of justice in line with our society's values. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Fri Sep 7 17:01:10 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! References: <9f.1abdc7d0.28ca4a60@aol.com> Message-ID: <00b801c137f9$5f8942e0$657ba8c0@Home> Leslie, In light of the recent developments in the case of the US against Sklyarov and ElcomSoft, I'm reluctant to continue any association with Adobe Systems. While I do own PhotoShop as well as other Adobe software, I will not upgrade nor will I buy another Adobe product until the situation is resolved in favor of Sklyarov. He is being held in this country unjustly because Adobe was publishing faulty software and didn't want to admit it. Not only that, my personal freedoms to use and distribute material that is already copyright free is infringed upon when published in an ebook format and marketed for a price and with restrictions. I am going to have to decline taking part in this survey even with the lure of a free tee shirt. I wouldn't want to wear anything that associated me with Adobe in any way at all. Sorry. Regards, Mary E. Dixon ________________________________________________________________________ Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant | Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.marykay.com/mdixon9 | http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ==================original deleted======================= -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010907/46e83317/attachment.htm From jeme at brelin.net Fri Sep 7 17:32:29 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Xcott Craver wrote: > Ah, but such a person would be charged with murder. There is no need > to punish or outlaw the speech itself, any more than it is to outlaw > the murderous thoughts, or quiet sneakers, that also contributed to > the killing. > > You don't need to outlaw speech to deal with yelling "fire" in > a crowded theater (and *that's* why it's such a bad example.) > You can simply charge people with murder or manslaughter, or > whatever damage for which they were directly responsible. This was not my interpretation of the original poster's argument nor of the Supreme Court's famous description of "shouting 'Fire!'". The Court did not say that it is ILLEGAL to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. The Court stated that your freedom of speech does not absolve you of responsibility for those actions. How do you say that a person has both the RIGHT to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater and the RESPONSIBILITY not to? As much as murder or maiming, inciting panic or riot or disturbing the peace are both crimes. The public welfare is as much served by government's protection of the general peace as the protection of individual life and limb. The Court resolved this by saying that there are cases where the responsibility of your speech overrides the government's inability to restrict your freedom. That is to say, they can't make it ILLEGAL to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater, but you can be held responsible for commiting a crime by shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. It's a very touchy situation. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From ed at hintz.org Fri Sep 7 17:27:03 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! Message-ID: <200109080027.f880R3c22734@phil.hintz.org> On 9/7/01 5:01 PM, spiderwoman@spiderwomanwebdesign.com thus spake: >free tee shirt. I wouldn't want to wear anything that associated me with >Adobe in any way at all. Sorry. I dunno. I still wear my Boycott Adobe tshirt with pride... >:-P http://nc.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/~ehintz/dmitry_pix/tshirts.jpg Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From wiljan at pobox.com Fri Sep 7 18:16:13 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles Message-ID: <200109080032.TAA000.61@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:58:00 Xcott Craver sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU said: > You don't need to outlaw speech to deal with yelling "fire" in > a crowded theater (and *that's* why it's such a bad example.) > You can simply charge people with murder or manslaughter, or > whatever damage for which they were directly responsible. Right on Scott. BTW Would you not like to purchase some of my Premium Content Online, good price, because you are my special friend. Such a market. -will- From sisgeek at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 17:51:29 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: <200109080032.TAA000.61@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010908005129.96541.qmail@web13903.mail.yahoo.com> if you punish an individual for speech you are outlawing that speech! it's like telling a person you can say what you want after which you'll be killed (or charged with manslaughter, murder or whatever) - that sounds like outlawing speech to me!! it sounds barbaric as well!! --- Will Janoschka wrote: > on Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:58:00 Xcott Craver > sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU said: > > > You don't need to outlaw speech to deal with > yelling "fire" in > > a crowded theater (and *that's* why it's such a > bad example.) > > You can simply charge people with murder or > manslaughter, or > > whatever damage for which they were directly > responsible. > > Right on Scott. > > BTW Would you not like to purchase some of my > Premium Content > Online, good price, because you are my special > friend. > Such a market. -will- > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From robertl1 at home.com Fri Sep 7 18:27:41 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! In-Reply-To: <00b801c137f9$5f8942e0$657ba8c0@Home> References: <9f.1abdc7d0.28ca4a60@aol.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010907181343.021b2080@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Bravo Spiderwoman! May I reccommend the Gnu Image Manipulation Program, the GIMP, better in many ways then Photoshop. See http://www.gimp.org/ You will need a Linux box, or dual boot if you must keep Windows around. Your local Linux group can often help you. http://www.linux.org/groups/ Look for an Installfest near your space and time :) Your 707-995 => Lower Lake CA implies that you could get dwon to the bay area easily where there would be lots of friendly help available. Bob La Quey From jono at microshaft.org Fri Sep 7 19:10:32 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA Message-ID: <20010907191032.B86586@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 To: politech@politechbot.com From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA Precedence: bulk Reply-To: declan@well.com X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ Text of SSSCA draft bill: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html Politech archive on DMCA: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca --- http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html New Copyright Bill Heading to DC By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically rewriting copyright laws. With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government. It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered. Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates. [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message ----- From sisgeek at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 19:13:41 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010908021341.44397.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeme A Brelin wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, alfee cube wrote: > > you cannot get very far with this logic (every > person is "perfectly > > happy" to fine and punish people who speak what > they to not like. in > > your case people who yell lookout behind another > individual. > > It isn't the slippery slope you paint. yes it is a very slippery slope that started long before i was born. i have been trying to understand first amendment law for years. not only has it been a slippery slope but the tangled mess of decisions at the bottom of the slope is not understandable anymore, if it ever was!! > > There are complex legal "tests", wherein certain > criteria must be met for > speech to be restricted. Our law says that such > restrictions must be > "narrowly tailored". > i am very familiar with the oscillating standards applied over the years, including the "narrow tailoring " aimed at a legitimate government purpose you refer to. however, this just begs the question whether it is ever legitimate for a government to restrict speech. > Broad restrictions are bad, narrow restrictions can > be good. > > Where do you draw the line between expression and > action? I've already yes - this division is tough, but not intractable: we can begin by placing verbal and written speech in one set and call that the unrestricted speech set. place whatever you want in the other set and call it whatever you want and restrict it in any manner you choose. > mentioned frightening people off of subway > platforms. What about > threatening a person's safety or property? Dance is > protected > "speech-like" expression. What about covering my > body with mirrors and > dancing beside a freeway, thus blinding motorists? i do not understand what the speech is, here? dancing with mirrors is communicating what? for example when cohen walked into a california court with a jacket that said fuck the draft i can understand the content or when a defendant in a criminal trial gives the judge the middle finger or when a defendant refuses to take of a hat or kneel or bow etc. what is the speech with the mirrors - im not getting it? (by the way i have driven behind those folks with the reflective stuff on their flat windows and been blinded... are they making speech - i have at times thought they were saying fuck you alfee:) > > How about if I sell a hair dryer and claim "New! > Safe in the tub!"? Is > it really the responsibility of every individual to > assess these things > for themselves? it seems to me we have to distinguish between government restricting speech and any particular set of individuals agreeing to limit their speech for whatever reason. i am not asserting that individuals cannot restrict their own speech (and i think most of us do for one reason or another) only that government's cannot restrict our speech. nothing im asserting prevents an individual from requiring a written warranty that a hair dryer (or any other product) can be used in a tub! i don't see how unrestricted speech would impede these individuals from get or giving such a warranty? > > If we are restricted to our personal knowledge and > experience and cannot > trust the world around us (and believe me, when the > profit-mongers are > unrestricted, they will flood us with so much > disinformation, you won't > know whom or what to trust), then we cannot grow > beyond an individual's > experience. There is nothing to pass on to the next > generation because > nearly all of what we share is bullshit. > > There are narrowly tailored restrictions that > prevent total disruption of > civilization by a few. > > > why do you think libel is a legitimate reason to > restrict speech? it > > seems pretty silly to me - if someone libels me i > can speak out in my > > defense - why do i have to limit your speech? > > Because I am a powerful publisher or a cartel of > powerful publishers and > if I can say whatever I like in my papers, I can > spread lie and rumor and > innuendo without threat of recourse. And you, with > your meager resources > and pitifully small voice have no effective > recourse. is this really true? if adobe does something i do not like i craft a clever logo, put up a web site, start speaking out and im a publisher -- for $60/mo or free if i use one of the free sites. corporation early on tried to respond by suing to suppress speech using libel laws (and they will continue). these attempts to restrict speech occur precisely because the individual now has the power to be heard!!!! > > There is also our responsibility to the future. Our > documents of today > must reflect the best truth we know so as not to > mislead and misdirect > those who come later and who need to learn from our > words and deeds. > > > leaving aside whether commercial speech is in fact > speech at all - why > > do i have to restrict a corporations speech? why > can't i just test > > their speech and if untrue speak that? > > Because you do not have the voice that they have. > You cannot be heard. is this true anymore - see above? > > > what you assert as legitimate reasons i assert are > illegitimate. > > Your cure is worse than your disease. for me there is no greater disease than one human being punishing another for verbal or written speech!! > > Now, I believe that the DMCA won't stand up to the > legal tests of narrow > tailoring that any speech restriction must endure. > I believe that if the > judicial system fails us in this, then we are > obligated as individuals to > rise up and replace our government with one that > better serves the > interests of the public. they have already responded - they have told us that code is speech but because of the potential harm this speech can causes we are going to restrict this speech. you have already given them the rationale (see your "lookout" example.) > > I think there are only a handful of "root causes" > that can be eliminated > to achieve a more just and human-oriented society. > I think we must > reverse our holding that corporations receive the > rights and protections > of indivduals under the law. I think we must > severely scale back (if not > completely eliminate) our copyright and patent laws. > And I think we must > provide for the public funding of election campaigns > (with comensurate > criminal penalties and civil responsibility for > those who would ignore > election rules). > > I think that the legislation and treaties of the > past ten years have done > more to harm freedom of indivduals and the > sovereignty of nations than all > the legislation of the previous 200. yes :( > J. > -- > ----------------- > Jeme A Brelin > jeme@brelin.net > ----------------- > [cc] counter-copyright > http://www.openlaw.org > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From declan at well.com Fri Sep 7 18:49:19 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA Message-ID: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA To: politech@politechbot.com Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ Text of SSSCA draft bill: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html Politech archive on DMCA: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca --- http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html New Copyright Bill Heading to DC By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically rewriting copyright laws. With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government. It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered. Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates. [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message ----- From bobthemonkey13 at home.com Fri Sep 7 19:18:35 2001 From: bobthemonkey13 at home.com (Bob The Monkey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! References: <9f.1abdc7d0.28ca4a60@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010907181343.021b2080@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: <007f01c1380c$909f3340$251f1318@west1.ia.home.com> Gimp already exists for Win32... it works very well. http://gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/ From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Fri Sep 7 19:14:12 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! References: <9f.1abdc7d0.28ca4a60@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010907181343.021b2080@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> <007f01c1380c$909f3340$251f1318@west1.ia.home.com> Message-ID: <003f01c1380b$f3ed5ea0$657ba8c0@Home> Yes.....I finally downloaded a new copy and I have been having quite a bit of fun with it. I have to wonder if I will hear from Adobe any time soon tho since I've made myself so clear. Cheers, Mary ________________________________________________________________________ Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant | Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.marykay.com/mdixon9 | http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob The Monkey" To: "Spiderwoman" ; "Bob La Quey" Cc: Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:18 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! > Gimp already exists for Win32... it works very well. > > http://gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/ > From declan at well.com Fri Sep 7 18:49:39 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Text of draft Security Systems Standards and Certification Act Message-ID: <20010907214939.C32575@cluebot.com> ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Text of draft Security Systems Standards and Certification Act To: politech@politechbot.com Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:24:51 -0400 X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ Wired News article on SSSCA: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html --- http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html Text of Security Systems Standards and Certification Act Sponsors: Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Draft dated August 6, 2001. This bill has not been introduced as of September 7, 2001. Keystroked by Declan McCullagh, all typos his. Comments in [brackets] are his. The bill is 19 pages long; much of the text is summarized and placed in brackets. _________________________________________________________________ Title I -- Security System Standards Sec. 101: Prohibition of Certain Devices (a) In General -- It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted under section 104. (b) Exception -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any previously-owned interactive digital device, if such device was legally manufactured or imported, and sold, prior to the effective date of regulations adopted under section 104 and not subsequently modified in violation of subsection (a) or 103(a). Sec. 102: Preservation of the Integrity of Security An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with integrity any security measure associated with certified security techologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other protected content such service transmits or stores. Sec. 103: Prohibited Acts (a) Removal or Alteration of Security -- No person may -- (1) remove or alter any certified security technology in an interactive digital device; or (2) transmit or make available to the public any copyrighted material or other protected content where the security measure associated with a certified security technology has been removed or altered. [Summary: Personal TV/cable/satellite time-shifting copies normally must be allowed by certified security technologies] Sec. 104: Adoption of Security System Standards [Summary: The private sector has 12 months to agree on a standard, or the Secretary of Commerce will step in. Industry groups that can participate: "representatives of interactive digital device manufacturers and representatives of copyright owners." If industry can agree, the secretary will turn their standard into a regulation; if not, normal government processes apply and NTIA takes the lead. The standard can be later modified. The secretary must certify technologies that adhere to those standards. Also: "The secretary shall certify only those conforming technologies that are available for licensing on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms." FACA, a federal sunshine law, does not apply, and an antitrust exemption is included.] Sec. 108: Enforcement The provisions of section 1203 and 1204 of title 17, United States Code, shall apply to any violation of this title as if -- (1) a violation of section 101 or 103(a)(1) of this Act were a violation of section 1201 of title 17, United States Code; and (2) a violation of section 102 or section 103(a)(2) of this Act were a violation of section 1202 of that title. Sec. 109. Definitions In this title: (1) Certified security technology -- The term "certified security technology" means a security technology certified by the Secretary of Commerce under section 105. (2) Interactive computer service -- The term "interactive computer service" has the meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1984 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)). [Note: According to 47 U.S.C. 230(f), an "interactive computer service" means "any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions."] (3) Interactive digital device -- The term "interactive digital device" means "any machine, device, product, software, or technology, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine, device, product, software, or technology, that is designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form." (4) Secretary -- The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Commerce [Takes effect at the date of enactment, except for sections that wait for federal standard.] Title II -- Internet Security Initiatives [Summary: Creates 25-member federal "Computer Security Partnership Council." Funds NIST computer security program at $50 million starting in FY2001, increasing by $10 million a year through FY2006. Funds computer security training program starting at $15 million in FY2001. Creates federal "computer security awards." Requires NIST to encourage P3P and similar privacy standards] _________________________________________________________________ Penalties summarized (by Declan): Criminal penalties apply to violations of sec. 102 or 103(a)(2). That includes the "interactive computer service shall store and transmit" without removal section, and the distribute "any copyrighted material or other protected content where the security measure associated with a certified security technology has been removed or altered." The criminal penalties are: "(1) shall be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for the first offense; and (2) shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, for any subsequent offense." Only someone who violates the law "willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain" can be convicted. Civil penalties apply to violations of sec. 101 or 103(a)(1). That includes the section talking about how it's unlawful to make systems without security measures, and how nobody may "remove or alter any certified security technology in an interactive digital device." The civil penalties include injunctions in federal court, actual damages, and statutory damages. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message ----- From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Fri Sep 7 19:18:17 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA References: <20010907191032.B86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <004d01c1380c$85b6d780$657ba8c0@Home> This is the kind of thing that could evolve into a shooting war. Half the country would end up in jail if there was a law like this!! Mary Dixon ________________________________________________________________________ Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant | Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.marykay.com/mdixon9 | http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon O ." To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:10 PM Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > To: politech@politechbot.com > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: declan@well.com > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > Politech archive on DMCA: > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > --- > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically > rewriting copyright laws. > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of > digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. > > The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), > scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with > teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of > computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified > security technologies" approved by the federal government. > > It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in > prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted > material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached > computer that disables copy protection is covered. > > Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents > the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and > their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source > advocates. > > [...] > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 7 19:39:22 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:08 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400 References: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400, Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > To: politech@politechbot.com > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > Politech archive on DMCA: > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > --- > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically > rewriting copyright laws. > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of > digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. Anyone got a campaign finance roster on Fritz? -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010907/96f2d7e6/attachment.pgp From sisgeek at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 19:39:45 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:09 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907191032.B86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010908023945.81679.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> well at least were awake this time! --- "Jon O ." wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh > ----- > > X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > To: politech@politechbot.com > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA > sequel: The SSSCA > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: declan@well.com > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at > http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > Politech archive on DMCA: > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > --- > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry > lobbyists are quietly readying > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in > hopes of dramatically > rewriting copyright laws. > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the > powerful chairman of the > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed > copy-protection controls > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and > PCs. All types of > digital content, including music, video and > e-books, are covered. > > The Security Systems Standards and Certification > Act (SSSCA), > scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up > this requirement with > teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or > sell any kind of > computer equipment that "does not include and > utilize certified > security technologies" approved by the federal > government. > > It also creates new federal felonies, punishable > by five years in > prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who > distributes copyrighted > material with "security measures" disabled or > has a network-attached > computer that disables copy protection is > covered. > > Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained > on Friday, represents > the next round of the ongoing legal tussle > between content holders and > their opponents, including librarians, > programmers and open-source > advocates. > > [...] > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and > technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you > include this notice. > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at > http://www.mccullagh.org/ > To subscribe to Politech: > http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at > http://www.politechbot.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From jono at microshaft.org Fri Sep 7 19:57:36 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:09 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 07:39:22PM -0700 References: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> It's all right here: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib/N00002423.htm http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus/N00002423.htm ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) Top Industries The top industries supporting Ernest F. Hollings are: 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,215,300 2 TV/Movies/Music $287,534 ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) Top Contributors 1 AT&T $35,610 2 FedEx Corp $33,500 2 Time Warner $33,500 4 Ness, Motley et al $32,550 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 6 News Corp $28,224 7 Philip Morris $27,050 8 Medical University of South Carolina $23,200 9 Loral Spacecom $23,000 10 Sprint Corp $22,950 11 National Assn of Broadcasters $22,000 12 Scana Corp $21,750 13 Baron & Budd $20,000 13 Lipper & Co $20,000 15 Robins, Kaplan et al $18,695 16 Burlington Industries $18,500 16 Walt Disney Co $18,500 18 McNair Law Firm $17,250 19 Beasley, Wilson et al $17,000 20 CBS Corp $16,632 On 07-Sep-2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400, Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > > > From: Declan McCullagh > > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > > To: politech@politechbot.com > > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > > > Politech archive on DMCA: > > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > > > --- > > > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying > > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically > > rewriting copyright laws. > > > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the > > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls > > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of > > digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. > > Anyone got a campaign finance roster on Fritz? > > -- > Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ > What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal > http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org > Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org > Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html From micheas at earthlink.net Fri Sep 7 20:11:38 2001 From: micheas at earthlink.net (Micheas Herman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:09 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Adobe would love to hear from you! In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010907181343.021b2080@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> References: <9f.1abdc7d0.28ca4a60@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010907181343.021b2080@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: <999918700.653.87.camel@progeny> On Fri, 2001-09-07 at 18:27, Bob La Quey wrote: > Bravo Spiderwoman! > > May I reccommend the Gnu Image Manipulation Program, the GIMP, > better in many ways then Photoshop. See http://www.gimp.org/ > The only problem is if you need panatone color matching. panatone is patented and not included in us versions of the GIMP The other publishing software that is lacking is quarkXpress or an equivilent (LyX is not wysiwyg and LaTeX has all the power that quark does it does not alow you to see what your doing as your doing it. something very necesary for visual artists) Linux (and all flavors of UNIX) have better postscript tools > You will need a Linux box, or dual boot if you must keep > Windows around. Your local Linux group can often help you. > http://www.linux.org/groups/ > not needed. GIMP installs just fine on win2K as a win32 app(though you will hate the number of windows that it generates in the start bar. you can also install an X server on your win2k box and run gnome (which includes the GIMP) in the X session using ALT-F4 to flip between your win32 desktop and your X sesion. It took me about a day and a half to hunt down every thing with google and install everything. this is a project for some one computer literate > Look for an Installfest near your space and time :) > Your 707-995 => Lower Lake CA implies that you could > get dwon to the bay area easily where there would be > lots of friendly help available. > > great recomendation I prefer linux for most things and if I must use Windows I will always install cygwin and if it will be a long project I would definetly install gnome and look to see if KDE has been ported yet. linux is much better at networking (faster and can talk to a much greater variety of computers) it is faster., especialy if youcompile your own kernel (most people don't bother and most of the benchmarks that show linux performing faster than kin2k as a smb file server us the very slow redhat kernels) If you go to an installfest you can talk some one into installing debian on your system for you. Debian boxes are the only boxesthat I have been able to keep upto date with all the security patches easily. the problem with debian is that it is a pain to install but if you get someone else to do it :-) If you are a serios Graphic designer you are probably using mac os if you install linux on your mac you can run a program that lets you run all your old mac programs in linux. It takes a bit to set up but Ihave heard that yellodog linux makes it almost seemless and very easy to install ( I have no idea whose definition of easy was used.) also if you use windows on a computer and decide to donate the computer because you got a better computer. if you have an OEM licence (the copy that normally comes pre installed on new computers)you do not have the right to give that copy to the non profit and ar screwing them because they will get a call from microsoft offering to sell them the software you thought you donated to them for 80% of full retail.. so when I give away my amdk6 that is perfectly usable my only concern is going to be finding someone who wants a fully setup linux computer (something that will not be hard) where as some one who donates a computer with windows on it should probably donate the computer to an organization that they hate because the computer will probably cost them more than it's worth. (yes I know there are organizations like compumentor that sell reduced price copies of software to nonprofits but nonprofits still have to purchase them and maintain records of what theyhave licences for instead of whatever they were suposed to be doing with their donations.) > Bob La Quey > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Fri Sep 7 20:48:17 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:09 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA References: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect> <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <003001c13819$186e3c60$657ba8c0@Home> This is the kind of hogwash that could prompt a very nice lady to do some impolite things. How ignorant and stupid do they think we are? Do you think this might evolve into a shooting war? These are our very basic freedoms they are tampering with. This is not a very nice game at all. Also.....I keep making boo-boo's with an email client I was trying to use and I don't think I got the message across about what I did to my website. Please go there (URL below) and download the graphics I've created. Use them as you see fit and if you'd like others, just let me know what you want. ________________________________________________________________________ Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant | Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.marykay.com/mdixon9 | http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon O ." To: Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > > It's all right here: > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib/N00002423.htm > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus/N00002423.htm > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Industries > > The top industries supporting Ernest F. Hollings are: > > 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,215,300 > 2 TV/Movies/Music $287,534 > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Contributors > > 1 AT&T $35,610 > 2 FedEx Corp $33,500 > 2 Time Warner $33,500 > 4 Ness, Motley et al $32,550 > 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 > 6 News Corp $28,224 > 7 Philip Morris $27,050 > 8 Medical University of South Carolina $23,200 > 9 Loral Spacecom $23,000 > 10 Sprint Corp $22,950 > 11 National Assn of Broadcasters $22,000 > 12 Scana Corp $21,750 > 13 Baron & Budd $20,000 > 13 Lipper & Co $20,000 > 15 Robins, Kaplan et al $18,695 > 16 Burlington Industries $18,500 > 16 Walt Disney Co $18,500 > 18 McNair Law Firm $17,250 > 19 Beasley, Wilson et al $17,000 > 20 CBS Corp $16,632 > > > > > > On 07-Sep-2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400, Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > > > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > > > > > From: Declan McCullagh > > > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > > > To: politech@politechbot.com > > > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > > > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > > > > > Politech archive on DMCA: > > > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > > > > > --- > > > > > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > > > > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > > > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > > > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > > > > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying > > > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically > > > rewriting copyright laws. > > > > > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the > > > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls > > > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of > > > digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. > > > > Anyone got a campaign finance roster on Fritz? > > > > -- > > Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ > > What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal > > http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org > > Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org > > Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From lists at tneu.visi.com Thu Sep 6 16:25:12 2001 From: lists at tneu.visi.com (Tim Neu) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:09 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Response to Adobe's FAQ In-Reply-To: <003f01c1380b$f3ed5ea0$657ba8c0@Home> Message-ID: There is a draft of a response to Adobe's ElcomSoft FAQ at http://www.visi.com/~tneu/adobefaq.html =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- All of the problems associated with Intellectual property can easily be resolved by keeping those who believe in it on a strict diet of Intellectual bread and water. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ______ _ __ "If you don't have the freedom to use what you / ' ) ) own - then you do not own anything." / o ______ / / _ . . No apologies to Jack Valenti or the MPAA / <_/ / / < / (_ Dear , > 2. US Domain name - Until recently, the only way to GET a .com > domain name was to get it through the internic organization in the > US. No - our elcomsoft.com domain is registered and maintained via GANDI (www.gandi.net). Look here: http://www.gandi.net/whowe.html.en GANDI is an ICANN accredited registrar for .COM, .NET and .ORG domain names operational since March 2000 Address: 38 rue Notre-Dame de Nazareth F-75003 PARIS FRANCE FRANCE - not USA !!!!!!!!! -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From jays at panix.com Fri Sep 7 23:27:15 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Text of draft Security Systems Standards and Certification Act In-Reply-To: <20010907214939.C32575@cluebot.com> Message-ID: There is another locus of struggle here besides the complex knot of copyright. Section 101 simply outlaws private ownership of personal computers. The required hardware, firmware, and software must be capable of tracking each and every operation you perform on the personal computer. There is of course a safe, effective, and well-tested way to actually "protect copyrighted works": do not distribute them in a form that can be downloaded to any home computer. The book publishers, the popular music companies, and the movie companies can simply continue their present, means of suppressing massive infringement: 1. Only publish books of paper and ink. 2. Only sell recorded music that cannot be played by any mass market thing that connects by a cable to a personal computer. 3. Only show movies in movie houses. The AAP, RIAA, and MPAA did not build the computer, nor the Net. Why should we hand over to them all personal computers, and the Net too? oo--JS. On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: FC: Text of draft Security Systems Standards and Certification Act > To: politech@politechbot.com > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:24:51 -0400 > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > Wired News article on SSSCA: > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > --- > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > Text of Security Systems Standards and Certification Act > > Sponsors: Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), chairman of the Senate > Commerce committee, and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Draft dated > August 6, 2001. This bill has not been introduced as of September > 7, 2001. > > Keystroked by Declan McCullagh, all typos his. Comments in > [brackets] are his. The bill is 19 pages long; much of the text is > summarized and placed in brackets. > _________________________________________________________________ > > Title I -- Security System Standards > > Sec. 101: Prohibition of Certain Devices > > (a) In General -- It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to > the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital > device that does not include and utilize certified security > technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted > under section 104. > > (b) Exception -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for > sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any previously-owned > interactive digital device, if such device was legally manufactured > or imported, and sold, prior to the effective date of regulations > adopted under section 104 and not subsequently modified in > violation of subsection (a) or 103(a). > > Sec. 102: Preservation of the Integrity of Security > > An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with > integrity any security measure associated with certified security > techologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or > other protected content such service transmits or stores. > > Sec. 103: Prohibited Acts > > (a) Removal or Alteration of Security -- No person may -- > > (1) remove or alter any certified security technology in an > interactive digital device; or > > (2) transmit or make available to the public any copyrighted > material or other protected content where the security measure > associated with a certified security technology has been removed or > altered. > > [Summary: Personal TV/cable/satellite time-shifting copies normally > must be allowed by certified security technologies] > > Sec. 104: Adoption of Security System Standards > > [Summary: The private sector has 12 months to agree on a standard, > or the Secretary of Commerce will step in. Industry groups that can > participate: "representatives of interactive digital device > manufacturers and representatives of copyright owners." If industry > can agree, the secretary will turn their standard into a > regulation; if not, normal government processes apply and NTIA > takes the lead. The standard can be later modified. The secretary > must certify technologies that adhere to those standards. Also: > "The secretary shall certify only those conforming technologies > that are available for licensing on reasonable and > nondiscriminatory terms." FACA, a federal sunshine law, does not > apply, and an antitrust exemption is included.] > > Sec. 108: Enforcement > > The provisions of section 1203 and 1204 of title 17, United States > Code, shall apply to any violation of this title as if -- > > (1) a violation of section 101 or 103(a)(1) of this Act were a > violation of section 1201 of title 17, United States Code; and > > (2) a violation of section 102 or section 103(a)(2) of this Act > were a violation of section 1202 of that title. > > Sec. 109. Definitions > > In this title: > > (1) Certified security technology -- The term "certified security > technology" means a security technology certified by the Secretary > of Commerce under section 105. > > (2) Interactive computer service -- The term "interactive computer > service" has the meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the > Communications Act of 1984 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)). > > [Note: According to 47 U.S.C. 230(f), an "interactive computer > service" means "any information service, system, or access software > provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users > to a computer server, including specifically a service or system > that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or > services offered by libraries or educational institutions."] > > (3) Interactive digital device -- The term "interactive digital > device" means "any machine, device, product, software, or > technology, whether or not included with or as part of some other > machine, device, product, software, or technology, that is > designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that is > capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, > transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form." > > (4) Secretary -- The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of > Commerce [Takes effect at the date of enactment, except for > sections that wait for federal standard.] > > Title II -- Internet Security Initiatives > > [Summary: Creates 25-member federal "Computer Security Partnership > Council." Funds NIST computer security program at $50 million > starting in FY2001, increasing by $10 million a year through > FY2006. Funds computer security training program starting at $15 > million in FY2001. Creates federal "computer security awards." > Requires NIST to encourage P3P and similar privacy standards] > _________________________________________________________________ > > Penalties summarized (by Declan): > > Criminal penalties apply to violations of sec. 102 or 103(a)(2). That > includes the "interactive computer service shall store and transmit" > without removal section, and the distribute "any copyrighted material > or other protected content where the security measure associated with > a certified security technology has been removed or altered." > > The criminal penalties are: "(1) shall be fined not more than $500,000 > or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for the first > offense; and (2) shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned > for not more than 10 years, or both, for any subsequent offense." Only > someone who violates the law "willfully and for purposes of commercial > advantage or private financial gain" can be convicted. > > Civil penalties apply to violations of sec. 101 or 103(a)(1). That > includes the section talking about how it's unlawful to make systems > without security measures, and how nobody may "remove or alter any > certified security technology in an interactive digital device." > > The civil penalties include injunctions in federal court, actual > damages, and statutory damages. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From crism at maden.org Fri Sep 7 23:42:24 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Text of draft Security Systems Standards and Certification Act In-Reply-To: References: <20010907214939.C32575@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010907234053.00a51260@mail.maden.org> At 23:27 7-09-2001, Jay Sulzberger wrote: >1. Only publish books of paper and ink. Doesn't work. Most of the books on alt.binaries.ebooks are paper books (Harry Potter, Tolkein, King, Asimov). >2. Only sell recorded music that cannot be played by any mass market >thing that connects by a cable to a personal computer. Does work as long as audio-in jacks exist. >3. Only show movies in movie houses. First-run bootlegs aren't copies of videocassettes or DVDs, which don't even exist at that point, but are recorded in theaters. -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 7 23:54:19 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Letter-writing Message-ID: <20010907235419.V10111@zork.net> Tomorrow, Saturday, September 8, is a letter-writing day for supporters of Dmitry Sklyarov. In a few cities, people will gather for letter-writing parties. (People in the San Francisco Bay Area: come by the EFF Share-in Concert, in Golden Gate Park, and there will be a letter-writing table there.) Wherever you are, please write well-researched, well-written, polite letters -- on paper would be best -- to (1a) Your members of Congress, if you live in the U.S., asking for their condemnation of Dmitry Sklyarov's arrest and prosecution, as well as a reconsideration of the DMCA. http://www.congress.org/ (1b) Your local legislators or political representatives, if you don't live in the U.S., asking for help to prevent DMCA-like legislation from coming to your area. (The E.U. Copyright Directive is one concern, as are anti-circumvention provisions in a _large_ number of international treaties. Most countries do have something to worry about here; if you haven't heard about proposed anticircumvention legislation in your country, please ask me.) (2) Interim U.S. Attorney David Shapiro, in charge of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California. (His title is "US Attorney Shapiro"; address him as "Mr. Shapiro".) Address: United States Attorney's Office, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Floor 11, San Francisco, California 94102 USA. Some people have recommended a brief mention of the effect the DMCA has had on _you_ (e.g. "I have not published my PhD thesis", "I decided not to take a vacation in the U.S.", "I turned down a job offer from a U.S. company", ...). (3) Publishers which are members of the Association of American Publishers. I've been filling in their addresses on my web page http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/publishers.html but haven't quite finished yet. Again, important points: the DMCA is harmful to the freedoms of speech and press; it's shocking (outrageous!) that publishers would... ... and in conclusion, we hope that publishers will repudiate the AAP statement. Please, in your letters, get your facts straight! Double check! It's especially easy for someone to discount a letter if it has factual errors (possible examples: "Dmitry was arrested for giving a talk"). More suggestions for letter-writers, as well as some sample letters, are most welcome. I'm sorry I haven't had enough time to put together further details. -- 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 admin at seattle-chat.com Sat Sep 8 02:47:22 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] RE: [DMCA_discuss] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907191032.B86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: These fucking people got to be joking, they really want a civil war don't they. -----Original Message----- From: dmca_discuss-admin@lists.microshaft.org [mailto:dmca_discuss-admin@lists.microshaft.org]On Behalf Of Jon O . Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 7:11 PM To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org; tm@suspicious.org; free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [DMCA_discuss] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 To: politech@politechbot.com From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA Precedence: bulk Reply-To: declan@well.com X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ Text of SSSCA draft bill: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html Politech archive on DMCA: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca --- http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html New Copyright Bill Heading to DC By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically rewriting copyright laws. With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government. It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered. Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates. [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ ------------------------ http://www.anti-dmca.org ------------------------ DMCA_discuss mailing list DMCA_discuss@lists.microshaft.org http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss From kyhwana at world-net.co.nz Sat Sep 8 03:12:02 2001 From: kyhwana at world-net.co.nz (Daniel Richards) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Response to Adobe's FAQ In-Reply-To: References: <003f01c1380b$f3ed5ea0$657ba8c0@Home> Message-ID: <3B9A97B2.8932.16DD56C@localhost> On 6 Sep 2001, at 18:25, Tim Neu wrote: > > All of the problems associated with Intellectual property can easily > be resolved by keeping those who believe in it on a strict diet of > Intellectual bread and water. Why give them water? Unless they happen to own patents on it, I suppose http://www.freesklyarov.org - Free Dmitry! PGP Pub key: http://shell.world-net.co.nz/~kyhwana/DanielRPubKey.asc Fingerprint: 416D 4027 D635 AF51 F2BF 60DF 4D94 F7A0 9893 2848 From jeme at brelin.net Sat Sep 8 05:39:00 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] RE: [DMCA_discuss] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > These fucking people got to be joking, they really want a civil war > don't they. I asked my girlfriend, who has just begun law school (largely because of my influence), something like this just last night when she first heard about the DoJ's reversal on Microsoft. "Do you think we're going to win this through the existing channels or are we going to have to take to the streets and truly fight a revolution? Because we're running out of time." J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From kreizykid at hotmail.com Sat Sep 8 06:47:56 2001 From: kreizykid at hotmail.com (Josiah Draper) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA References: Message-ID: This Crap makes me sick! Just take a look at some of the exerpts from this "DMCA sequel": "It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted under section 104" "An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with integrity any security measure associated with certified security techologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other protected content such service transmits or stores" The criminal penalties are: "(1) shall be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for the first offense; and (2) shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, for any subsequent offense." Only someone who violates the law "willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain" can be convicted. Think of how badly they could twist these texts around! This is just plain "unconstitutional". -Josiah! Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:10:32 -0700 From: "Jon O ." To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org, tm@suspicious.org, free-sklyarov@zork.net Reply-To: "jono@networkcommand.com" Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 To: politech@politechbot.com From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA Precedence: bulk Reply-To: declan@well.com X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ Text of SSSCA draft bill: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html Politech archive on DMCA: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca --- http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html New Copyright Bill Heading to DC By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically rewriting copyright laws. With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government. It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached computer that disables copy protection is covered. Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source advocates. [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From keith at indierecords.com Sat Sep 8 08:06:24 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: References: Message-ID: <3B9A33F0.4035@indierecords.com> > Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:53:11 -0700 (PDT) > From: Jeme A Brelin > To: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles > > Speech can and should be restricted in very specific ways. > > For example: It should be illegal to walk up behind a person on a subway > platform and shout: "LOOOKOUT!" right behind their head as the train is > coming. If they are startled and fall down onto the rails, you are quite responsible. > > I'm perfectly happy fining and punishing people who make such speech. Yes, but in this case it has nothing to do with what you have expressed, and everything to do with the fact that you've made a loud and startling sound. You could just as easily cause the person's death by shouting "BANANA!" in the same way. -Keith From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 8 08:26:42 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA seque l: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907191032.B86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109081526.f88FQju19894@moerbeke> Thanks for the tip. I did a bit of research myself, and found some problems. Senator Hollings appears to be somewhat of a privacy advocate in the Senate. He has also been very friendly to several academic institutions, and he is playing some role in the cloning debate. Just FYI. Be careful this dangerous and sleazy character, who clearly votes for his campaign contributors and only throws the citizens a showy flourish once in a while. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ On 7 Sep, Jon O . wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- > > X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > To: politech@politechbot.com > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: declan@well.com > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > Politech archive on DMCA: > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > --- > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry lobbyists are quietly readying > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in hopes of dramatically > rewriting copyright laws. > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the powerful chairman of the > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to embed copy-protection controls > in nearly all consumer electronic devices and PCs. All types of > digital content, including music, video and e-books, are covered. > > The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), > scheduled to be introduced by Hollings, backs up this requirement with > teeth: It would be a civil offense to create or sell any kind of > computer equipment that "does not include and utilize certified > security technologies" approved by the federal government. > > It also creates new federal felonies, punishable by five years in > prison and fines of up to $500,000. Anyone who distributes copyrighted > material with "security measures" disabled or has a network-attached > computer that disables copy protection is covered. > > Hollings' draft bill, which Wired News obtained on Friday, represents > the next round of the ongoing legal tussle between content holders and > their opponents, including librarians, programmers and open-source > advocates. > > [...] > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From keith at indierecords.com Sat Sep 8 08:50:23 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My reply to USNews Message-ID: <3B9A3E3F.29C1@indierecords.com> I was unable to send this to the C-FIT list. It kept bouncing back. Seth Johnson wrote: > > (Forwarded from DMCA_Discuss list) > > -------- Original Message -------- > Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:55:17 -0500 > From: "James S. Huggins \(DMCA Discuss\)" > > An invitation to express YOUR opinion from U. S. News > > ... James S. Huggins > > http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/010910/opinion/10atlarge.htm > > Reply to: letters@usnews.com Just felt like sharing what I came up with: _______________________________________________________________________ As a generally cynical and jaded person, particularly with regard to the wealthy and powerful among us, my tendency is to immediately assume the worst of the DMCA's proponents. It's hard not to perceive this orgy of cooperation between big media and the federal government as a techno- tyranny rising in a corrupted America, all participants willingly sinking to any ethical depth to maintain cash flow in an otherwise obsolete industry. My general feeling is that this law doesn't protect or benefit a single artist, musician, author, or programmer, but only the parasitic and non-creative middleman, the "publisher". However, just this once, I'm willing to briefly give DMCA proponents the benefit of the doubt -- allow me for a moment to assume that there are a great many in favor of this law who genuinely feel it to be in the spirit of fostering creativity. By passing more laws, stricter laws, and harsher laws, can we teach society respect for the creative mind? By putting terminal fear into the hearts of anyone who may be an accomplice to an accomplice to an accomplice of a POSSIBLE copyright infringement, will we fill the world with great art, software, music, and literature? How well is this approach working for the so-called "war on drugs"? If our industries and government are so concerned with fostering creativity and originality, then why is there so little call for encouragement of these qualities in children who attend public schools? (And isn't there something not-quite-right about beating the individual spirits out of children for twelve years, and then threatening to lock them up for figuring out how a DVD works, all on their tax dollars?) If the music industry is so concerned with originality, then why are so many clone bands and sample-loopers being signed and promoted? And why is the film industry jumping on every cash-cow sequel and remake it can conceive of, or Bill Gates making billions off of slight modifications to a glorified Macintosh interface? Do these examples represent the kinds of "work of the mind" that need to be cultivated and protected? Could it be that the role of a "publisher" is scarcely different from that of a "pirate", and that "protection against piracy" boils down to protection from unwanted competition? To the best of my understanding, copyright and patent laws were designed to protect the creative individual's opportunity to make some money from his/her work. The use/misuse/abuse of such laws over time has turned them against individual freedom in favor of corporate interests, and new laws and bills continue to further distort the concept. The prevailing mentality now is that anyone who works for (or holds stock in) a large corporation has a right to guaranteed income from it, while anyone foolish enough to be independent or work for a smaller company is just asking for problems, and therefore deserves to go broke from lawsuits he/she can't afford to fight. The eerie subtext in all of this is "join us or die". As a musician, writer, artist *and* programmer, I can tell you definitively that money is *not* a primary incentive to create something original, and the extent to which any artist *is* financially propelled is generally inversely proportional to his/her actual creativity. This is not to say that I want to work a day job for the rest of my life, but I certainly wouldn't call on government storm troopers to stop anyone from passing my work around; I would first and foremost be glad that people were enjoying it. Yes, this is probably the very sentiment that allows publishers to rip their own clients off so easily, but we all decide what's most important to us, and we perservere. -Keith Handy From declan at well.com Sat Sep 8 09:21:31 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010908121531.00a6b010@mail.well.com> I've put the complete SSSCA draft text in a PDF file here: http://www.well.com/~declan/sssca-draft.pdf Can I talk some folks who can spare the bandwidth into mirroring it and sending me the URL? The file's 2.5 MB, and I don't want to overload the Well's poor servers. Then I'll distribute a list of the original and the mirror sites. Thanks, Declan From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 8 09:46:09 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010908121531.00a6b010@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <200109081646.f88GkCu20439@moerbeke> It is no problem to host this at GNU-Darwin. It is helpful to our users, and we are glad to do it. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/tsssca-draft.pdf Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ On 8 Sep, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I've put the complete SSSCA draft text in a PDF file here: > http://www.well.com/~declan/sssca-draft.pdf > > Can I talk some folks who can spare the bandwidth into mirroring it and > sending me the URL? The file's 2.5 MB, and I don't want to overload the > Well's poor servers. Then I'll distribute a list of the original and the > mirror sites. > > Thanks, > Declan > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From declan at well.com Sat Sep 8 09:54:47 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: <200109081646.f88GkCu20439@moerbeke> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010908121531.00a6b010@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010908125356.00ab8ca0@mail.well.com> Thanks! We've got plenty of mirrors, including: http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/sssca-draft.pdf http://www.nullify.org/sssca-draft.pdf http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/sssca-draft.pdf You folks are fantastic. -Declan At 12:46 PM 9/8/01 -0400, proclus@iname.com wrote: >It is no problem to host this at GNU-Darwin. It is helpful to our >users, and we are glad to do it. > >http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/tsssca-draft.pdf > >Regards, >proclus >http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > >On 8 Sep, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > I've put the complete SSSCA draft text in a PDF file here: > > http://www.well.com/~declan/sssca-draft.pdf > > > > Can I talk some folks who can spare the bandwidth into mirroring it and > > sending me the URL? The file's 2.5 MB, and I don't want to overload the > > Well's poor servers. Then I'll distribute a list of the original and the > > mirror sites. > > > > Thanks, > > Declan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > >-- >Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O >M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ >h--- r+++ y++++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From admin at seattle-chat.com Sat Sep 8 10:11:34 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010908125356.00ab8ca0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: Hey everyone, I just had a thought, my dad is a amateur radio type of guy, and this bill would irk him to no end, we should contact ham radio organizations. These are the people that that usually provide the only good working communications during natural disasters. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 9:55 AM To: proclus realm Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help Thanks! We've got plenty of mirrors, including: http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/sssca-draft.pdf http://www.nullify.org/sssca-draft.pdf http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/sssca-draft.pdf You folks are fantastic. -Declan At 12:46 PM 9/8/01 -0400, proclus@iname.com wrote: >It is no problem to host this at GNU-Darwin. It is helpful to our >users, and we are glad to do it. > >http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/tsssca-draft.pdf > >Regards, >proclus >http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > >On 8 Sep, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > I've put the complete SSSCA draft text in a PDF file here: > > http://www.well.com/~declan/sssca-draft.pdf > > > > Can I talk some folks who can spare the bandwidth into mirroring it and > > sending me the URL? The file's 2.5 MB, and I don't want to overload the > > Well's poor servers. Then I'll distribute a list of the original and the > > mirror sites. > > > > Thanks, > > Declan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > >-- >Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O >M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ >h--- r+++ y++++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From schoen at loyalty.org Sat Sep 8 10:26:58 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [dave@farber.net: IP: Canadian "DMCA" in the Works - Short Deadline] Message-ID: <20010908102658.A10111@zork.net> I've seen this before, but it's a good letter-writing target for those in Canada. ----- Forwarded message from David Farber ----- Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 03:33:32 -0400 To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com From: David Farber Subject: IP: Canadian "DMCA" in the Works - Short Deadline >ALERT: Canadian "DMCA" in the Works - Short Deadline > > Tell Canada to Reject Anti-Technology Bans > > Electronic Frontier Foundation ACTION ALERT > > (Issued: Friday, September 7, 2001 / Deadline: Saturday, September 15, > 2001) > > Introduction: > > Canadian citizens, and others, are urged to contact the Canadian > government and express their opposition to legislation, similar to the > Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the U.S., that would outlaw > circumvention of technological restrictions put in place by copyright > holders. The Canadian government is accepting public comment until > September 15, 2001 on its proposed "Consultation Paper on Digital > Copyright Issues" which considers such measures. > > These anti-technology bans violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and > Freedom's guarantee of freedom of speech, and similar guarantees in > the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, since such tools are > necessary to exercise lawful uses, including fair use. They would turn > scientists, fair users, journalists, programmers, and archivists into > criminals. While protecting copyright is important, passing measures > that also censor much lawful speech goes too far, without ever > achieving its objective. > > Canada is considering adopting anti-circumvention legislation in > response to the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) 1996 > Copyright Treaty. This treaty, however, does not require enacting > national legislation that outlaws technology with many lawful uses. > Given the dismal US experience with the DMCA, other countries should > learn from and steer clear of the U.S. Congress's mistake. > > What YOU Can Do: > > EFF calls upon the citizens of Canada, and other interested parties > around the world, to submit comments by Sept. 15, urging the Canadian > agency Intellectual Property Policy Directorate to remove the > provisions of the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues that > outlaw the act of circumvention and forbid providing tools for > circumvention of technological protection measures restricting use of > copyrighted works. > > Comments, to be received by the government by September 15, 2001, > should be submitted to: > > Comments - Government of Canada Copyright Reform > c/o Intellectual Property Policy Directorate > Industry Canada > 235 Queen Street > 5th Floor West > Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H5 Canada > fax: (613) 941-8151 > copyright-droitdauteur@ic.gc.ca (text, HTML, WordPerfect and MSWord > formats accepted) > > Sample Letter: > > This is just an example. It will be most effective if you send > something similar but in your own words. > > To Industry Canada, the Department of Canadian Heritage, the > Intellectual Property Policy Directorate and other concerned > agencies: > > I write to express my grave concern regarding the extreme > intellectual property provisions of the Consultation Paper on > Digital Copyright Issues (CPCDI). > > These measures, based on the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act > (DMCA), give far too much power to publishers, at the expense of > indivdiuals' rights. The DMCA itself is already under legal > challenge in the US, has gravely chilled scientists' and computer > security researchers' freedom of expression around the world for > fear of being prosecuted in the US, and resulted in the arrest of a > Russian programmer. The CPDCI provisions, which serve no one but > (largely American) corporate copyright interests, are just as > overbroad as those of the DMCA. > > These provisions would amend the Canadian Copyright Act to ban, > with few or no exceptions, software and other tools that allow copy > prevention technologies to be bypassed. This would violate the > Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantee of freedom of speech, and > similar guarantees in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, > since such tools are necessary to exercise lawful uses, including > fair use, reverse engineering, computer security research and many > others. > > I urge you to remove these controversial and anti-freedom > provisions from the CPDCI language. The DMCA is already an > international debacle. Its flaws should not be imported and forced > on Canadians. > > Sincerely, > [Your full name] > [Your address] > > Background: > > For more information about the Canadian Copyright Act amendment > process, including the proposed digital copyright measures and how > Canadian citizens can become involved, see the following Web site: > http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp01100e.html > > About EFF: > > The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties > organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded > in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and > government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the > information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and > maintains one of the most linked-to Web sites in the world: > http://www.eff.org > > Contact: > > Will Doherty, EFF Online Activist / Media Relations > wild@eff.org > +1 415 436 9333 x111 > > Robin Gross, EFF Intellectual Property Attorney > robin@eff.org > +1 415 436 9333 x112 > > - end - For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- 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 david at desjardins.org Sat Sep 8 11:34:21 2001 From: david at desjardins.org (David desJardins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #220 - 45 msgs References: Message-ID: <200109081834.LAA17408@happy.xkey.com> Xcott Craver writes: > Her complaint, in a nutshell, is that all this DRM crap was thrown in > without any warning sticker on the box. This apparently isn't true. There's a label on the box that discloses the copy protection, but her lawyer alleges that it isn't lengthy or explicit enough. I'm not sure I think these people are on my side. Do we really gain if the outside of every box is covered with lengthy legal mumbo-jumbo that no one actually reads? -- David desJardins From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 8 11:43:34 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #220 - 45 msgs In-Reply-To: <200109081834.LAA17408@happy.xkey.com> Message-ID: <200109081843.f88Ihbu20762@moerbeke> On 8 Sep, David desJardins wrote: > Xcott Craver writes: >> Her complaint, in a nutshell, is that all this DRM crap was thrown in >> without any warning sticker on the box. > > This apparently isn't true. There's a label on the box that discloses > the copy protection, but her lawyer alleges that it isn't lengthy or > explicit enough. > > I'm not sure I think these people are on my side. Do we really gain if > the outside of every box is covered with lengthy legal mumbo-jumbo that > no one actually reads? Actually, such a label could dangerously legitimize such practices, and inure people to the fact that their liberties are being stolen. It all depends on the appearance and wording. I don't think that it is worth the risk. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > -- David desJardins > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From sisgeek at yahoo.com Sat Sep 8 12:41:56 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010908194156.70197.qmail@web13906.mail.yahoo.com> something must be done in the "backyard" of the legislators to begin immediately threatening their re-election prospects when they sponsor these type of repressive measures - it is the only thing they will understand. --- "Jon O ." wrote: > > It's all right here: > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib/N00002423.htm > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus/N00002423.htm > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Industries > > The top industries supporting Ernest F. Hollings > are: > > 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,215,300 > 2 TV/Movies/Music $287,534 > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Contributors > > 1 AT&T $35,610 > 2 FedEx Corp $33,500 > 2 Time Warner $33,500 > 4 Ness, Motley et al $32,550 > 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 > 6 News Corp $28,224 > 7 Philip Morris $27,050 > 8 Medical University of South Carolina $23,200 > 9 Loral Spacecom $23,000 > 10 Sprint Corp $22,950 > 11 National Assn of Broadcasters $22,000 > 12 Scana Corp $21,750 > 13 Baron & Budd $20,000 > 13 Lipper & Co $20,000 > 15 Robins, Kaplan et al $18,695 > 16 Burlington Industries $18,500 > 16 Walt Disney Co $18,500 > 18 McNair Law Firm $17,250 > 19 Beasley, Wilson et al $17,000 > 20 CBS Corp $16,632 > > > > > > On 07-Sep-2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400, Declan > McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > > > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh > ----- > > > > > > From: Declan McCullagh > > > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce > DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > > > To: politech@politechbot.com > > > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > > > X-URL: Politech is at > http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > > > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > > > > > Politech archive on DMCA: > > > > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > > > > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > > > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > > > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > > > > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry > lobbyists are quietly readying > > > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in > hopes of dramatically > > > rewriting copyright laws. > > > > > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), > the powerful chairman of the > > > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to > embed copy-protection controls > > > in nearly all consumer electronic devices > and PCs. All types of > > > digital content, including music, video and > e-books, are covered. > > > > Anyone got a campaign finance roster on Fritz? > > > > -- > > Karsten M. Self > http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ > > What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? > There is no K5 cabal > > http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ > http://www.kuro5hin.org > > Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! > http://www.freesklyarov.org > > Geek for Hire > http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Sat Sep 8 13:05:03 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] About Copyright Message-ID: The About.com site is visited by many "everyday" people looking for information. Here is one page in the Publishing section dealing with Copyright. Myth #1: Copyright is Dead This is a popular mantra among young Napster enthusiasts, but it is a myth. Copyright may be facing new challenges, but copyright law is still alive and kicking. In fact, in the United States it's kicking with new authoritarian steel-toed boots thanks to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). Note also the links to the Intellectual Property Essay Contests. I wonder if Wendy Butler (the guide) might write a little about our issue? http://publishing.about.com/library/weekly/aa090401a.htm James S. Huggins From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 8 13:04:14 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Watch out for the second bill In-Reply-To: <20010804110604.C84824@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109082004.f88K4Hu20929@moerbeke> I saw this scary warning about the fake and punch strategy that is sometimes used in Congress with unpalatable measures like this. http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-09-08-012-20-NW-0001 Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 8 13:34:02 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com>; from jono@microshaft.org on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 07:57:36PM -0700 References: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect> <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010908133401.C17331@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 07:57:36PM -0700, Jon O . (jono@microshaft.org) wrote: > > It's all right here: > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib/N00002423.htm > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus/N00002423.htm > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Industries > > The top industries supporting Ernest F. Hollings are: > > 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,215,300 > 2 TV/Movies/Music $287,534 > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Contributors Who are the "names"? Law firms? Or covers for other groups? > 1 AT&T $35,610 > 2 FedEx Corp $33,500 > 2 Time Warner $33,500 > 4 Ness, Motley et al $32,550 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > 6 News Corp $28,224 > 7 Philip Morris $27,050 > 8 Medical University of South Carolina $23,200 > 9 Loral Spacecom $23,000 > 10 Sprint Corp $22,950 > 11 National Assn of Broadcasters $22,000 > 12 Scana Corp $21,750 > 13 Baron & Budd $20,000 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > 13 Lipper & Co $20,000 > 15 Robins, Kaplan et al $18,695 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > 16 Burlington Industries $18,500 > 16 Walt Disney Co $18,500 > 18 McNair Law Firm $17,250 > 19 Beasley, Wilson et al $17,000 > 20 CBS Corp $16,632 -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010908/4e10234b/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 8 13:38:52 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My reply to USNews In-Reply-To: <3B9A3E3F.29C1@indierecords.com>; from keith@indierecords.com on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 11:50:23AM -0400 References: <3B9A3E3F.29C1@indierecords.com> Message-ID: <20010908133851.D17331@navel.introspect> on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 11:50:23AM -0400, Keith Handy (keith@indierecords.com) wrote: > I was unable to send this to the C-FIT list. It kept bouncing back. <...> > How well is this approach working for the so-called "war on drugs"? Be careful in confounding issues. As much as I'm in agreement with your thinking, the _reason_ that the WoD continues despite the rather blatent failure of it to accomplish even a fraction of its goals, and at a tremendous cost to civil liberties, is that it is as contentious as it is. Eric Raymond, in free software circles, deserves similar criticism for his insistance on placing gun rights statements in his writings. It causes needless confusion. Stick to a single issue, or if you *are* going to draw parallels to an outside cause, make it extremely Mom & Apple Pie. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010908/2e299229/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Sat Sep 8 15:56:01 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: In-Reply-To: <3B9A33F0.4035@indierecords.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Keith Handy wrote: > Yes, but in this case it has nothing to do with what you have > expressed, and everything to do with the fact that you've made a loud > and startling sound. You could just as easily cause the person's > death by shouting "BANANA!" in the same way. I agree and that's why CONTENT BASED restrictions are rejected by the Court. It's not illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater... that is to say, there is and can be no law that outlaws the word specifically. It would be just as criminal to incite panic by screaming "Man-eating ants!" or something else that caused people to panic and was wholly untrue. I think I was misunderstood originally (probably due to my own ambiguity of language). I'm not saying that it is sensible to outlaw some speech because of what it MIGHT cause, I'm saying that it is sensible to criminalize (or extend civil liabilty to) some speech after it has caused something. Just as the Courts have done. Pre-emptive restriction is unworkable and probably counter-productive. However, that doesn't mean that consequences of speech can be confered to the speaker. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From declan at well.com Sat Sep 8 16:17:35 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010908133401.C17331@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 01:34:02PM -0700 References: <20010907214919.B32575@cluebot.com> <20010907193922.A5958@navel.introspect> <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> <20010908133401.C17331@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010908191735.A19034@cluebot.com> On Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 01:34:02PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well-connected DC firm. Does lobbying work for MS, I recall, and probably thousands of other clients. -Declan From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Sat Sep 8 16:29:16 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:10 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ===== > Don't forget our secret weapon, the concerned Adobe employees. > We should do everything we can to keep them on our side, ===== ============= I don't think Adobe employees are on our side, on the whole. Adobe seems to have given them quite a bit of propaganda. ============= Ok. So, in an ideal world, how would we correct that? If having Adobe employees "on our side" is important, what tactics can be done to correct it? James S. Huggins From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Sat Sep 8 17:27:36 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <20010908194156.70197.qmail@web13906.mail.yahoo.com>; from sisgeek@yahoo.com on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 15:41:56 -0400 References: <20010907195736.D86586@networkcommand.com> <20010908194156.70197.qmail@web13906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20010908202736.G13941@www2> Right That is the goal of NYFAIRUSE And we are starting a Campain Tomorrow at 9AM, old fashion door knocking and buttons at Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn NY <> --- "Jon O ." wrote: > > It's all right here: > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib/N00002423.htm > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus/N00002423.htm > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Industries > > The top industries supporting Ernest F. Hollings > are: > > 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,215,300 > 2 TV/Movies/Music $287,534 > > > ERNEST F. HOLLINGS (D-SC) > Top Contributors > > 1 AT&T $35,610 > 2 FedEx Corp $33,500 > 2 Time Warner $33,500 > 4 Ness, Motley et al $32,550 > 5 Verner, Liipfert et al $28,508 > 6 News Corp $28,224 > 7 Philip Morris $27,050 > 8 Medical University of South Carolina $23,200 > 9 Loral Spacecom $23,000 > 10 Sprint Corp $22,950 > 11 National Assn of Broadcasters $22,000 > 12 Scana Corp $21,750 > 13 Baron & Budd $20,000 > 13 Lipper & Co $20,000 > 15 Robins, Kaplan et al $18,695 > 16 Burlington Industries $18,500 > 16 Walt Disney Co $18,500 > 18 McNair Law Firm $17,250 > 19 Beasley, Wilson et al $17,000 > 20 CBS Corp $16,632 > > > > > > On 07-Sep-2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:49:19PM -0400, Declan > McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > > > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh > ----- > > > > > > From: Declan McCullagh > > > Subject: FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce > DMCA sequel: The SSSCA > > > To: politech@politechbot.com > > > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 21:22:25 -0400 > > > X-URL: Politech is at > http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > > > Text of SSSCA draft bill: > > > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html > > > > > > Politech archive on DMCA: > > > > http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=dmca > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html > > > > > > New Copyright Bill Heading to DC > > > By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) > > > 4:19 p.m. Sep. 7, 2001 PDT > > > > > > WASHINGTON -- Music and record industry > lobbyists are quietly readying > > > an all-out assault on Congress this fall in > hopes of dramatically > > > rewriting copyright laws. > > > > > > With the help of Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), > the powerful chairman of the > > > Senate Commerce committee, they hope to > embed copy-protection controls > > > in nearly all consumer electronic devices > and PCs. All types of > > > digital content, including music, video and > e-books, are covered. > > > > Anyone got a campaign finance roster on Fritz? > > > > -- > > Karsten M. Self > http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ > > What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? > There is no K5 cabal > > http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ > http://www.kuro5hin.org > > Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! > http://www.freesklyarov.org > > Geek for Hire > http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sat Sep 8 20:08:06 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ References: Message-ID: <3B9ADD16.F6673C86@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> That's not exactly the right question, organizationally speaking. In any group, especially an entrenched workforce, there will be strong counterforces. The real question is how to identify those who have the right analysis. You do that by putting out unflinching, principled and volatile line. You delineate the non-buyers and the political cops that way, while recruiting those with a solid inclination to support the cause, who will be immensely more valuable than those who might have some interest and sympathy as a result of "spin doctoring" or "consciousness raising." Seth Johnson "James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)" wrote: > > ============= > I don't think Adobe employees are on our side, on the whole. Adobe seems > to have given them quite a bit of propaganda. > ============= > > Ok. So, in an ideal world, how would we correct that? > > If having Adobe employees "on our side" is important, what tactics can be > done to correct it? From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Sat Sep 8 20:34:21 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: <3B9ADD16.F6673C86@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>; from seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 23:08:06 -0400 References: <3B9ADD16.F6673C86@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20010908233421.A15964@www2> When your starting out, your analysis is correct. But over time, "spin doctoring" and propaganda is what Corperate America does to make Red Blue and Blue Red. Also, this doesn't lead to a consencous or a solution. If the propaganda being put out by Time Warner leads to a majority of opposition...what are you going to do with your army of choirboys? Are you ready then to arm them? Ruben ______________________________ <> -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sat Sep 8 20:43:10 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #220 - 45 msgs References: <200109081843.f88Ihbu20762@moerbeke> Message-ID: <3B9AE54E.786964D9@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> I'm with you there . . . Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology proclus@iname.com wrote: > > Actually, such a label could dangerously legitimize such practices, and > inure people to the fact that their liberties are being stolen. It all > depends on the appearance and wording. I don't think that it is worth > the risk. From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 8 20:46:14 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Text of SSSCA, Anti-SSSCA petition asks Congress not to pass draft bill Message-ID: <20010908204614.F24551@navel.introspect> Declan McCullaugh has alerted his readers to a draft bill sponsored by Fritz Hollings (D, NC) and Richard Stevens (R, AK), which would greatly extend the scope of the current DMCA. By some appearances, it would make free software illegal in the US. Full text of the draft is now available in HTML form on the Cryptome website, as well as several mirrors. A petition drive to oppose the bill has been started. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Anti-SSSCA petition asks Congress not to pass draft bill Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 22:33:33 -0400 Size: 7206 Url: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010908/ad0e2959/attachment.mht From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sat Sep 8 22:09:43 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ References: <3B9ADD16.F6673C86@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <20010908233421.A15964@www2> Message-ID: <3B9AF997.FAB7B4BE@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Margaret Mead said it very well: Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. Ruben, corporate America is the problem. It will continue to be the problem as long as they make red blue and blue red. Seth Johnson Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > > When your starting out, your analysis is correct. But over time, "spin > doctoring" and propaganda is what Corperate America does to make Red Blue > and Blue Red. From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Sun Sep 9 01:03:13 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Adobe FAQ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >>> Don't forget our secret weapon, the concerned Adobe employees. >>> We should do everything we can to keep them on our side, >> I don't think Adobe employees are on our side, on the whole. Adobe seems >> to have given them quite a bit of propaganda. > Ok. So, in an ideal world, how would we correct that? Adobe employs many incredibly smart and free-thinking people. I have a scattered campaign to reach them through Yahoo investor boards (ADBE). Employees often read these places. Look at everything Adobe has said so far, and it adds up to a pretty shoddy operation. This is an indicator that they're in spin mode and aren't unified internally. How could they be when their position is so incoherant? As much as the DMCA would benefit Adobe the company, I believe many of Adobe's people know better. Communicating the injustice of the law to them weakens Adobe's resolve. This is a secondary issue to boycotting, bad-mouthing, and circumventing Adobe publicly. Those teeth will make the next guy think twice. From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sun Sep 9 04:59:27 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [NY Activists! Register for NINCH New York Town Meeting by Monday] Message-ID: <3B9B599F.41605C0B@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> NY anti-DMCA and anti-SSSCA Activists! Register for this Town Meeting at the NY Public Library by this Monday. Let's tell them what's really on the line. In the meantime, NY Fair Use will be conducting their regular Monday demonstrations out of the front steps. Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology (Forwarded from C-FIT_Community list) -----Original Message----- From: Linda Tadic Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:25:46 EDT Posted on behalf of NINCH: NEW YORK CITY COPYRIGHT TOWN MEETING * * * Free of Charge * * * REGISTRATION DEADLINE: MONDAY SEPT 10 REGISTER ONLINE AT: http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" Monday September 24: New York Public Library Celeste Bartos Forum Fifth Avenue at 42nd St 8:30am-5:00pm http://www.nypl.org/research/copyright/index.html * * * Monday September 10 is the registration deadline for the New York City NINCH Copyright Town Meeting to be held at the New York Public Library on Monday September 24. This meeting is free of charge. If you intend to Participate please register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/ copyright/registration.cfm THEME: "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: Professor Peter Jaszi (Washington College of Law, American University) and Linda Tadic (Manager of the Digital Library, Home Box Office). PANEL ONE "Intellectual Property Owners in the Digital Environment" * Ryan Craig, Fathom co-founder, Warburg Pincus * Adam Eisgrau, The Wexler Group; Counsel for the American Library Association (1995-1999) * Donald J. Waters, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. PANEL TWO "Intellectual Property Users in the Digital Environment" * Hank Barry, CEO, Napster (May 2000-July 2001); Hummer Winblad Venture Partners * Howard Besser, UCLA School of Education and Information Studies * Robert Kolker, film scholar; Chair of the School of Literature, Communication, and Culture, Georgia Institute for Technology * * * The NINCH Copyright Town Meetings balance expert opinion and audience participation on the basics of copyright law, the implications of copyright online, recent changes in copyright law and practice, and practical issues related to the networking of cultural heritage materials. The program will include time for audience questions, comments and discussion. Register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm For information on all the NINCH 2001 Copyright Town meetings, see http:/ /www.ninch.org/copyright/townmeetings01/2001.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Local committees organize the NINCH Copyright Town Meetings, coordinated and reviewed by the NINCH Town Meetings Working Group. The Copyright Town Meetings series is a component of the NINCH Copyright Education Program, organized by the NINCH Advocacy Working Group. NYC LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Patricia Barnett, The Frick Collection Jacqueline F. Bausch, The New York Public Library Daniel Dex, The New York Public Library Heike Kordish, The New York Public Library Madeleine Nichols, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts Robert J. Vanni, The New York Public Library Jennifer Vinopal, New York University Libraries Matthew Zimmerman, New York University Information Technology Services NINCH TOWN MEETINGS WORKING GROUP: Kathe Albrecht, American University/Visual Resources Association Mary Case, Association of Research Libraries Robert Baron, Independent Scholar Kenneth Crews, Indiana University Georgia Harper, University of Texas Christine Sundt, University of Oregon/Visual Resources Association/NINCH BOARD Marta Teegen, College Art Association Sanford Thatcher, Pennsylvania State University Press/Association of American University Presses Peter Walsh, College Art Association Committee on Intellectual Property Patricia Williams, Americans for the Arts Martha Winnacker, University of California * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- C-FIT Community Discussion List List Parent: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org C-FIT Home: http://RealMeasures.dyndns.org/C-FIT To Subscribe/Unsubscribe: ------------------------------------------------------------ Send "[Un]Subscribe C-FIT_Community" To Listserv@RealMeasures.dyndns.org From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Sun Sep 9 05:07:12 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [fairuse] [NY Activists! Register for NINCH New York Town Meeting by Monday] In-Reply-To: <3B9B599F.41605C0B@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>; from seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 07:59:27 -0400 References: <3B9B599F.41605C0B@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20010909080712.C19176@www2> We can register while we are there - right? We can wear our new buttons ____________________________ On 2001.09.09 07:59:27 -0400 Seth Johnson wrote: NY anti-DMCA and anti-SSSCA Activists! Register for this Town Meeting at the NY Public Library by this Monday. Let's tell them what's really on the line. In the meantime, NY Fair Use will be conducting their regular Monday demonstrations out of the front steps. Seth Johnson Committee for Independent Technology (Forwarded from C-FIT_Community list) -----Original Message----- From: Linda Tadic Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:25:46 EDT Posted on behalf of NINCH: NEW YORK CITY COPYRIGHT TOWN MEETING * * * Free of Charge * * * REGISTRATION DEADLINE: MONDAY SEPT 10 REGISTER ONLINE AT: http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" Monday September 24: New York Public Library Celeste Bartos Forum Fifth Avenue at 42nd St 8:30am-5:00pm http://www.nypl.org/research/copyright/index.html * * * Monday September 10 is the registration deadline for the New York City NINCH Copyright Town Meeting to be held at the New York Public Library on Monday September 24. This meeting is free of charge. If you intend to Participate please register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/ copyright/registration.cfm THEME: "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age" KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: Professor Peter Jaszi (Washington College of Law, American University) and Linda Tadic (Manager of the Digital Library, Home Box Office). PANEL ONE "Intellectual Property Owners in the Digital Environment" * Ryan Craig, Fathom co-founder, Warburg Pincus * Adam Eisgrau, The Wexler Group; Counsel for the American Library Association (1995-1999) * Donald J. Waters, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. PANEL TWO "Intellectual Property Users in the Digital Environment" * Hank Barry, CEO, Napster (May 2000-July 2001); Hummer Winblad Venture Partners * Howard Besser, UCLA School of Education and Information Studies * Robert Kolker, film scholar; Chair of the School of Literature, Communication, and Culture, Georgia Institute for Technology * * * The NINCH Copyright Town Meetings balance expert opinion and audience participation on the basics of copyright law, the implications of copyright online, recent changes in copyright law and practice, and practical issues related to the networking of cultural heritage materials. The program will include time for audience questions, comments and discussion. Register online at http://www2.nypl.org/home/copyright/registration.cfm For information on all the NINCH 2001 Copyright Town meetings, see http:/ /www.ninch.org/copyright/townmeetings01/2001.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Local committees organize the NINCH Copyright Town Meetings, coordinated and reviewed by the NINCH Town Meetings Working Group. The Copyright Town Meetings series is a component of the NINCH Copyright Education Program, organized by the NINCH Advocacy Working Group. NYC LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Patricia Barnett, The Frick Collection Jacqueline F. Bausch, The New York Public Library Daniel Dex, The New York Public Library Heike Kordish, The New York Public Library Madeleine Nichols, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts Robert J. Vanni, The New York Public Library Jennifer Vinopal, New York University Libraries Matthew Zimmerman, New York University Information Technology Services NINCH TOWN MEETINGS WORKING GROUP: Kathe Albrecht, American University/Visual Resources Association Mary Case, Association of Research Libraries Robert Baron, Independent Scholar Kenneth Crews, Indiana University Georgia Harper, University of Texas Christine Sundt, University of Oregon/Visual Resources Association/NINCH BOARD Marta Teegen, College Art Association Sanford Thatcher, Pennsylvania State University Press/Association of American University Presses Peter Walsh, College Art Association Committee on Intellectual Property Patricia Williams, Americans for the Arts Martha Winnacker, University of California * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- C-FIT Community Discussion List List Parent: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org C-FIT Home: http://RealMeasures.dyndns.org/C-FIT To Subscribe/Unsubscribe: ------------------------------------------------------------ Send "[Un]Subscribe C-FIT_Community" To Listserv@RealMeasures.dyndns.org ____________________________ New Yorkers for Fair Use - because it's either fair use or useless.... -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From nbhs2 at i-2000.com Sun Sep 9 05:16:30 2001 From: nbhs2 at i-2000.com (Michael Scottaline) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Text of SSSCA, Anti-SSSCA petition asks Congress not to pass draft bill In-Reply-To: <20010908204614.F24551@navel.introspect> References: <20010908204614.F24551@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010909081630.5db2bba8.nbhs2@i-2000.com> On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:46:14 -0700 "Karsten M. Self" insightfully noted: KS> Declan McCullaugh has alerted his readers to a draft bill sponsored by KS> Fritz Hollings (D, NC) and Richard Stevens (R, AK), which would KS> greatly KS> extend the scope of the current DMCA. By some appearances, it would KS> make free software illegal in the US. KS> KS> Full text of the draft is now available in HTML form on the Cryptome KS> website, as well as several mirrors. A petition drive to oppose the KS> bill has been started. ===================== Relevant links: John Young has put his amazing OCR software to work. He emailed me this link to the HTML text of the entire bill: http://cryptome.org/sssca.htm It's even on the Mojo Nation anonymous publishing network: http://localhost:4004/id/gWvulP_HqA23QJgxGQdoMZgm_l8/ An anti-SSSCA petition is here: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/SSSCA/petition.html Mike -- "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Benjamin Franklin From seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org Sun Sep 9 05:19:17 2001 From: seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [nylug-talk] Re: [fairuse] [NY Activists! Register for NINCH New York Town Meeting by Monday] References: <3B9B599F.41605C0B@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <20010909080712.C19176@www2> Message-ID: <3B9B5E45.2F7F49A8@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> No -- the deadline is Monday. That's my understanding. Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > > We can register while we are there - right? > > We can wear our new buttons From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 9 11:33:46 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Text of SSSCA, Anti-SSSCA petition asks Congress not to pass draft bill In-Reply-To: <20010908204614.F24551@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 08:46:14PM -0700 References: <20010908204614.F24551@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010909113346.C9522@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/4d047d79/attachment.pgp From crism at maden.org Sun Sep 9 12:51:13 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Vote vote vote! Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010909125041.00a6ce60@mail.maden.org> There's a wonderful Dmitry reference on Dilbert's List of the Day today. Vote it to the top! -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 9 13:13:34 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [tescoil@irtc.net: [linux-elitists] Anti-SSSCA strategy.] Message-ID: <20010909131334.G9522@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/6c056fcd/attachment.pgp From schoen at loyalty.org Sun Sep 9 13:19:50 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [tescoil@irtc.net: [linux-elitists] Anti-SSSCA strategy.] In-Reply-To: <20010909131334.G9522@navel.introspect> References: <20010909131334.G9522@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010909131950.I10111@zork.net> Karsten M. Self writes: > (b) EXCEPTION -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for > sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any > previously-owned interactive digital device, if such device was > legally manufactured or imported, and sold, prior to the > effective date of regulations adopted under section 104 and not > subsequently modified in violation of subsection (a) or 103(a) > > [The prohibition (here) of modifying code contravenes the GNU GPL, > definition of FSF Free Software, and OSI Open Source.] That isn't necessarily true, because the licenses don't require that the recipient be allowed to make modifications (or uses or redistributions), just that the distributor will not forbid the recipient to do these things. You might remember that a lot of licenses tried to forbid people from exporting software in violation of U.S. export law. I argued against those provisions and also pointed out that the U.S. export law would apply to people in the U.S. whether or not it was mentioned in the licenses. Although export law prevented people from exercising some rights granted by license -- as well as, many of us argued, some rights of free speech -- its existence didn't directly contradict or invalidate free licenses. Software patents, similarly, don't contradict these licenses, even though they are harmful to free software and prevent some people from exercising rights. Free software licenses do not insist that the law in some place be sane or just; they just say "I, the copyright holder, will give you one fewer problem". -- 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 ath at limm.mgimo.ru Sat Sep 8 09:54:37 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:11 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Senator plans anti-piracy bill] References: Message-ID: <000201c1396d$129fb700$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, Olia! AFAIK, only one Russian-language mailing list. http://ezhe.ru/elcomsoft/ - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ > Dear all, > please advise me is any groups or mailing lists in Ukraine exist? > > Best regards, > Olia Bin'kovskaya > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 9 13:27:03 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [tescoil@irtc.net: [linux-elitists] Anti-SSSCA strategy.] In-Reply-To: <20010909131950.I10111@zork.net>; from schoen@loyalty.org on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 01:19:50PM -0700 References: <20010909131334.G9522@navel.introspect> <20010909131950.I10111@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010909132703.B10515@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 01:19:50PM -0700, Seth David Schoen (schoen@loyalty.org) wrote: > Karsten M. Self writes: > > > (b) EXCEPTION -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for > > sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any > > previously-owned interactive digital device, if such device was > > legally manufactured or imported, and sold, prior to the > > effective date of regulations adopted under section 104 and not > > subsequently modified in violation of subsection (a) or 103(a) > > > > [The prohibition (here) of modifying code contravenes the GNU GPL, > > definition of FSF Free Software, and OSI Open Source.] > > That isn't necessarily true, because the licenses don't require that > the recipient be allowed to make modifications (or uses or > redistributions), just that the distributor will not forbid the > recipient to do these things. GNU GPL v2, Section 7 (emphasis added): 7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. > Software patents, similarly, don't contradict these licenses, The do and are explicitely enumerated in the section of the GPL quoted above. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/76d024d5/attachment.pgp From keith at indierecords.com Sun Sep 9 15:37:40 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My reply to USNews References: Message-ID: <3B9BEF34.5041@indierecords.com> > Message: 17 > Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 13:38:52 -0700 > From: "Karsten M. Self" > To: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] My reply to USNews > > > --UfEAyuTBtIjiZzX6 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > on Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 11:50:23AM -0400, Keith Handy (keith@indierecords.c= > om) wrote: > > I was unable to send this to the C-FIT list. It kept bouncing back. > > <...> > > > How well is this approach working for the so-called "war on drugs"? > > Be careful in confounding issues. As much as I'm in agreement with > your thinking, the _reason_ that the WoD continues despite the rather > blatent failure of it to accomplish even a fraction of its goals, and at > a tremendous cost to civil liberties, is that it is as contentious as it > is. This is the second time I've received this exact same criticism, and I wasn't 100% sure whether to include the line in the first place. Therefore, I will cut the line from any future forwardings, and anyone else who wishes to quote or forward my essay may either cut it as well, or, depending on the audience, add an editorial footnote to that line indicating that it was only a "first draft" inclusion. I appreciate the feedback! -Keith From kafer77a at ameritech.net Sun Sep 9 17:19:47 2001 From: kafer77a at ameritech.net (Peter Snyder) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Radio Report Message-ID: <1000081188.26658.11.camel@debian> Hello fellow freedom lovers :-). My name is Peter Snyder and I am a reporter for IndyMedia , a group of grassroots reporters that yadda, yadda, yadda (you can get all the background on the orginisation on the site). Speciffically, I am with the Chicago branch. I work with the radio branch, and I was wondering if anyone here had anyideas of people who would be key to interview. Anyone with any decent size of knowledge on the subject would be great (hey, perhaps even some one here), but It would be best (almost necessary) if it was someone who had some public standing/title that would lend credence to what ever they had to say (read: If you aren't some sort of public figure, be it software developer, well know advocate [electronic or political], have some significant knowledge that wouldn't be avaliable to others, or something of a similar vein, then you wouldn't make a great interview. Not to say that you don't know your stuff, but you understand). Anyway, if you think you could be of help, either as an intervie your self or pointing me towards a different source, I would really apreciate it. Peter Snyder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/8f4f9302/attachment.html From proclus at iname.com Sun Sep 9 18:32:56 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109100133.f8A1WxI02697@moerbeke> FYI, I took this up with a Ham radio enthusiast friend of mine. He was unfamiliar with the issue, but he said that he would look into it. I told him about the CCCSA, and he immediately started talking about circumvention measures in a very practical and straight-forward way, the true hacker ideal. I informed him that such measures would be a felony under the CCCSA, and he gave me a very dumbfounded look. I think that it was quite impressive. Thanks for the suggestion! Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ On 8 Sep, Charles Eakins wrote: > Hey everyone, I just had a thought, my dad is a amateur radio type of guy, > and this bill would irk him to no end, we should contact ham radio > organizations. These are the people that that usually provide the only good > working communications during natural disasters. > > -----Original Message----- > From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net > [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh > Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 9:55 AM > To: proclus realm > Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help > > > Thanks! We've got plenty of mirrors, including: > > http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/sssca-draft.pdf > http://www.nullify.org/sssca-draft.pdf > http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/sssca-draft.pdf > > You folks are fantastic. > > -Declan > > > At 12:46 PM 9/8/01 -0400, proclus@iname.com wrote: >>It is no problem to host this at GNU-Darwin. It is helpful to our >>users, and we are glad to do it. >> >>http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/tsssca-draft.pdf >> >>Regards, >>proclus >>http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ >> >> >>On 8 Sep, Declan McCullagh wrote: >> > I've put the complete SSSCA draft text in a PDF file here: >> > http://www.well.com/~declan/sssca-draft.pdf >> > >> > Can I talk some folks who can spare the bandwidth into mirroring it and >> > sending me the URL? The file's 2.5 MB, and I don't want to overload the >> > Well's poor servers. Then I'll distribute a list of the original and the >> > mirror sites. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Declan >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > free-sklyarov mailing list >> > free-sklyarov@zork.net >> > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov >> >>-- >>Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ >>-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >>Version: 3.1 >>GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O >>M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ >>h--- r+++ y++++ >>------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From schoen at loyalty.org Sun Sep 9 18:40:39 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: <200109100133.f8A1WxI02697@moerbeke> References: <200109100133.f8A1WxI02697@moerbeke> Message-ID: <20010909184039.K10111@zork.net> proclus@iname.com writes: > FYI, I took this up with a Ham radio enthusiast friend of mine. He was > unfamiliar with the issue, but he said that he would look into it. I > told him about the CCCSA, and he immediately started talking about > circumvention measures in a very practical and straight-forward way, the > true hacker ideal. I informed him that such measures would be a felony > under the CCCSA, and he gave me a very dumbfounded look. I think that > it was quite impressive. Thanks for the suggestion! However, it's the SSSCA. (We're still having trouble with people saying "DCMA", years later.) -- 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 proclus at iname.com Sun Sep 9 18:44:26 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Request for SSSCA mirror help In-Reply-To: <20010909184039.K10111@zork.net> Message-ID: <200109100144.f8A1iTI02718@moerbeke> On 9 Sep, Seth David Schoen wrote: > proclus@iname.com writes: > >> FYI, I took this up with a Ham radio enthusiast friend of mine. He was >> unfamiliar with the issue, but he said that he would look into it. I >> told him about the CCCSA, and he immediately started talking about >> circumvention measures in a very practical and straight-forward way, the >> true hacker ideal. I informed him that such measures would be a felony >> under the CCCSA, and he gave me a very dumbfounded look. I think that >> it was quite impressive. Thanks for the suggestion! > > However, it's the SSSCA. (We're still having trouble with people > saying "DCMA", years later.) > Ack! thanks. Fortunately, I got it right on the website ;-}. Regards, proclus -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From jono at microshaft.org Sun Sep 9 19:39:01 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] Real-life example of the future Message-ID: <20010909193901.K87902@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message from T P <> ----- From: "Tom P" To: "RLUG" Cc: Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 16:09:15 -0700 Hi: Here's a real-life example of the future under DMCA and SSSCA: This is an exerpt from a bid proposal for North Carolina, not atypical of many such bids being promulgated through State and Federal governmental agencies. This bid proposal can be seen in its entirety at: http://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/AGENCY/PDF/01943100.pdf The present NT Server will be replaced by "certified" and "approved" server, most likely. The support of importing DICOM files will require additional equipment and "approved" and "certified" security measures. The web server will most likely be replaced by - - - Well, I think you can see just how disruptive and destructive the DMCAS [the S is for shit] and SSSCA legislation will be. Not to mention the number of governmental agencies that are about to become outright criminals! Read and enjoy: [from bid no:63- TTA7386 at: http://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/] Specifications & Requirements 1. The system must be a College of Veterinary Medicine on-site NT Server Application Service Provider (ASP) model. Major server functions should include the following: a. Support of importing DICOM files, including DICOM video b. Web server for interaction with enterprise desktops c. IBM DB2 or similar relational database The system must be able to support the storage of DICOM files for a finite period of time and be able to keep compressed studies for an infinite amount of time for immediate real-time queries from any diagnostic workstation or web accessible machine. Meets: ____ Does not meet: ____ Specify: __________________________________________ 2. The system should be a standard, non-proprietary Web (browser) based Medical Image Management System. The web server must provide pure Internet standards support, such as using the native capability of the web server to stream media without having the entire file in the workstation's memory. No compression or coding of images on the fly is allowed. The system must adhere strictly to Internet standards when it comes to query (HTTP) and reply protocols (XML). The system must come with an unlimited number of functional image web viewers. Meets: ____ Does not meet: ____ Specify: __________________________________________ 3. Workstation users must be able to retrieve images from DICOM Query/Retrieve Service Class Providers and compressed images re-constructed to DICOM, as well as importing external DICOM files. The College can construct rules to automatically route DICOM studies to DICOM workstations for primary diagnosis. _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Sun Sep 9 20:51:23 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fair Use Message-ID: I was reviewing an old article ABCNews.com 24.Jul.2001 http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/antipirate_cd010724.html It discusses the new encoding on CDs designed to prevent copying. Particularly relevant are the quotes from people like Bill Krepik of Macrovision. Consider: But since the AHRA [Audio Home Recording Act] dealt with ?digital recording technologies? other than PCs and MP3 players, Macrovision?s Krepick and others believe the ?fair use? concept doesn?t apply in this case. ?There is no law that gives them the right to [rip CDs],? says Krepick. [end quote] They believe that "fair use" is a product of affirmative law, and that without a law granting "fair use", that there is no "fair use". Unbelievable. James S. Huggins From jono at microshaft.org Sun Sep 9 21:20:35 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Draft Bill on privacy/security -- requires certified security technologies in all devices]] Message-ID: <20010909212034.A99475@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message ----- To: it_union@lists.microshaft.org Cc: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Reply-To: "jono@networkcommand.com" Subject: [DMCA_discuss] Draft Bill on privacy/security -- requires certified security technologies in all devices] Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 21:16:15 -0700 I just sent the email below to bugtraq, I'm not sure if the moderator will allow it, but we'll see. Anyway, as for what this law could do...I see it like the ID they were trying to put on all Pentium III chips, but much, much worse. See below. I didn't spell it out in this email to bugtraq, but here are some things that need to be examined. 1. Companies make flawed, insecure software. There is no "Underwriters Labs" to make sure they are not spying on you, stealing personal info or just putting you at risk of a hack. That is why security and the research and pusuit of it by anyone and everyone must be encouraged. 2. Researchers/engineers/hackers find vulnerbilities and publish them. The companies then fix the holes and make stronger (hopefully) software. This law would stop that because by researching a vulnerability you would also be tampering with the "certified security technologies." There may be exemptions in this law, but like the DMCA they probably won't work or be worth anything. 3. The law could do bad things to Open Source. Open Source is the opposite of this type of law. It allows tweaking of code for *anything*, thereby again removal of the "certified security technologies" would be very simple. Therefore, Open Source/Linux/BSD would eat it. 4. Read this: The Right to Read: Richard M. Stallman http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html Take note about how the activities of the students are reported to Central Licensing. Compare the Central Licensing idea with this: SSSCA SECTION 102: "An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with integrity any security measure associated with certified security technologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other protected content such service transmits or stores." Yes, please pick your jaw back up off the floor. The very fact that they are even proposing this means we are in *VERY* Big Trouble. Now, I just quickly skimmed over the proposed bill so I could be way off, also I am not a lawyer. Anyway, feel free to pass this mail to anyone and correct me where I may be misunderstanding something. ----- Forwarded message ----- Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 15:01:40 -0700 To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com Subject: Draft Bill on privacy/security -- requires certified security technologies in all devices Bugtraq: I know some of the recent issues surrounding certain laws (DMCA) and copyright "enhancements" are a departure from certain pretenses of this list. However, as you probably already have found they are very relevant to our field and may even begin influencing our work. There is a new draft Bill created by Senator Hollings (SC) which would require "certified security technologies" approved by the federal government in all new "interactive digital devices." Of course this is all being done under the pretense of protecting companies from piracy, etc. The draft Bill is being called The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) Here are some quotes of the exact verbage (quoted under fair use): SEC. 101. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN DEVICES (a) IN GENERAL.--It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security systems standards adopted under section 104. ... SEC. 102. PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF SECURITY. An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with integrity any security measure associated with certified security technologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other protected content such service transmits or stores. As a bugtraq reader I'm sure you can understand the implications of this type of law. Your PC has become a copyright enforcement tool and these provisions above may have implications for Open Source development activities. The bill itself can be reviewed here: http://cryptome.org/sssca.htm More information can be found here: http://216.110.42.179/docs/hollings.090701.html http://www.anti-dmca.org Thanks, Jon ________________________________ Mathematicians speak in Symbols. Deaf people speak with their Hands. Programmers speak in Code. ----- 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 jono at microshaft.org Sun Sep 9 21:47:58 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [DMCA_discuss] FC: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA In-Reply-To: <01090921425802.13608@aether>; from tompoe@renonevada.net on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 09:42:58PM -0700 References: <01090921425802.13608@aether> Message-ID: <20010909214758.F99475@networkcommand.com> On 09-Sep-2001, tom poe wrote: > On Sunday 09 September 2001 21:56, Eric wrote: > > I think it would be great if someone could set forth a comprehensive list > > of specific activities that we now currently do but that would be > > prohibited under the proposed bill. It is hard for me to explain to my > > friends how sucky this bill is unless I can present a parade of horribles > > of this bill. And it would be nice to have my facts straight on specific, > > deleterious consequences of this bill before I do so. > > > > Hello: I'm gonna take a worst case scenario. > Manufacturers will be required to put "security" into all computers, cdroms, > floppy disk drives, hard drives, cpu's, motherboards, monitors, speakers, ad > infinitem? > > The "security" code will be such that if anyone attempts to use an > "unregistered" cd, floppy disk, application, the next time your modem is > hooked up, or cable, or whatever to access the Internet, the "authorities" > will be notified, not to mention, you won't be able to type "hello, world" > without someone's receiving the "proper registration" beforehand. > > I'm now watching for info about "registering" to use the damn internet. That > will be interesting. Just a thought, Tom > _______________________________________________ This is not worst case, see my previous email: 4. Read this: The Right to Read: Richard M. Stallman http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html Take note about how the activities of the students are reported to Central Licensing. Compare the Central Licensing idea with this: SSSCA SECTION 102: "An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with integrity any security measure associated with certified security technologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other protected content such service transmits or stores." Yes, please pick your jaw back up off the floor. The very fact that they are even proposing this means we are in *VERY* Big Trouble. Now, I just quickly skimmed over the proposed bill so I could be way off, also I am not a lawyer. Anyway, feel free to pass this mail to anyone and correct me where I may be misunderstanding something. > > > ------------------------ > http://www.anti-dmca.org > ------------------------ > > DMCA_discuss mailing list > DMCA_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 9 22:15:31 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fair Use In-Reply-To: ; from FreeSklyarov@ZName.com on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 10:51:23PM -0500 References: Message-ID: <20010909221531.C16889@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 10:51:23PM -0500, James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov) (FreeSklyarov@ZName.com) wrote: > > I was reviewing an old article > ABCNews.com 24.Jul.2001 > http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/antipirate_cd010724.html > > It discusses the new encoding on CDs designed to prevent copying. > > Particularly relevant are the quotes from people like Bill Krepik of > Macrovision. > > Consider: > But since the AHRA [Audio Home Recording Act] dealt with ?digital > recording technologies? other than PCs and MP3 players, > Macrovision?s Krepick and others believe the ?fair use? concept > doesn?t apply in this case. ?There is no law that gives them the > right to [rip CDs],? says Krepick. [end quote] > > They believe that "fair use" is a product of affirmative law, and that > without a law granting "fair use", that there is no "fair use". Factually relevant. However, Fair Use dates from a time at which copyright doctrine didn't tie the hands of those who wished to engage in it. One argument calls for various forms of compulsory fair use access or compulsory licensing of works (Cf: 17 USC 115) if law and/or technology doesn't allow for exercise of fair use rights. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/a8ddc9ce/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Sun Sep 9 22:55:18 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA = Digital Rectal Thermometer Security Act ? (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:55:51 -0400 From: Ronald L. Rivest To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com, farber@cis.upenn.edu Subject: SSSCA = Digital Rectal Thermometer Security Act ? Hi all -- I just sat down and read the proposed text of the Holling's SSSCA bill. http://cryptome.org/sssca.htm Boy is this bill breathtaking in its breadth! I have tried to understand its language. It says in Section 101: "It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security systems standards adopted under section 104." and says in Section 109: "The term "interactive digital device" means any machine, device, product, software, or technology, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine, device, product, software, or technology, that is designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form." Putting 2+2 together, we see that essentially all digital devices and software will have to have "certified security technologies" in them. Anything that works primarily with digital data is covered. My feeble brain came up with the following list of things that would have to be secured. I'm sure you can think of lots more. -- All bar-code scanners -- All computer-controlled ignition systems -- All metro ticket readers -- All digital watches and calculators -- All ATM machines -- All digital cellular phones -- All digital answering machines -- All GPS receivers -- All sports scoreboards and the marquee signs in Times Square -- All electronic parking meters -- Almost all lab equipment (everything is digital these days) -- All software, for sure -- All digital cameras and digital movie cameras -- All PC's and game consoles -- All remote key-entry systems and most home security systems -- All stop-light controllers Well, I should leave some of the fun to you. But of course my favorite should be listed: -- All digital rectal thermometers Presumably some staffers will try to rescue this laughable (albeit a bit scary) lobbyist-written proposal. Of course, just letting the bill die is probably best. But if they want to fix things, they should consider adding language that makes it ILLEGAL to sell copy-protection technology that doesn't permit at least -- fair use, including time-shifting and making a reasonable number of copies for personal or educational use, or for backups, -- free use of a copyrighted item once the copyright has expired (This list should be expanded.) But in any case, making any security technology *mandatory* on all digital devices and computers is clearly a non-starter. Why, we'd probably have to close down all the country's computer science departments (can't have these kids making unsecured devices, you know, even if it is their homework assignment to build a computer...) Cheers, Ron Rivest Ronald L. Rivest Room 324, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge MA 02139 Tel 617-253-5880, Fax 617-258-9738, Email --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From jays at panix.com Sun Sep 9 23:18:25 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:12:09 -0700 From: jamesd@echeque.com To: Carsten Kuckuk , Jay Sulzberger Cc: Declan McCullagh , cryptography@wasabisystems.com, Jay Sulzberger Subject: Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA -- On 10 Sep 2001, at 0:26, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > All "interactive digital" systems that directly connect to the > net will have to licensed. Most that do not connect directly > will also have to be licensed. License costs will be high > enough so that only a few large companies can afford them. > Individuals will not be allowed to assemble components to make > a computer for themselves, unless they spend millions on a > license, and wait some months for the paperwork to go through. When the chinese invented paper, the government eventually decided that this led to dangerous communication of dangerous thoughts, and prohibited private production of paper. It made paper making a state secret, and castrated all paper makers so that the secret would not be passed from father to son, but only transmitted in government approved channels. Thereafter paper was used only to transmit government approved thoughts through government channels, and to the populace. Computers are similarly dangerous. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG pEyJYvluyMSWgNZ7GAkKeNzQ3mshy+SsKVJ/wMhs 4sKLUftGKcn9X/CXUOs7SZPnTiZHI8M0IpiNhuyx6 From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 9 23:25:16 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) Message-ID: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect> ...and not altogether unbiased. I'd be interested to hear other's reads of this, I think I'm on relatively firm ground for most of the analysis here, but it's pretty breathtaking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Looks like this might be what our CPRM friends have been up to, among others. A (very quick and dirty) analysis of SSCA. | ======================================================================== | | [19 pages] | [header] S:\SP5HR\LEGCNSL\XYWRITE\COMMS\COPYRITE.5A | [footer] August 6, 2001 (10:37 a.m.) | | | [STAFF WORKING DRAFT] | AUGUST 6, 2001 | | 107TH CONGRESS | 1ST SESSION | | S.____________ | | | To provide for private sector development of workable security | systems standards and a certification protocol that could be | implemented and enforced by Federal regulation, and for other | purposes. | | ---------------------------------------- | | IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES | SEPTEMBER __, 2001 | | Mr. HOLLINGS (for himself and Mr. STEVENS) introduced the following bill | which was read twice and referred to the Committee on _________________. | | ---------------------------------------- | | | A BILL | | | To provide for private sector development of workable security | system standards and a certification protocol that could be | implemented and enforced by Federal regulations, and for other | purposes. E.g.: the US Government is going into the business of specifying and enforcing security standards. | Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the | United States of America in Congress assembled, | | | | SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE: TABLE OF SECTIONS. | | (a) SHORT TITLE. -- This Act may be cited as the "Security Systems | Standards and Certification Act". | | (b) TABLE OF SECTIONS. -- The table of sections for this Act is as | follows: | | Sec 1. Short title, table of sections. | Sec 2. Findings. | | TITLE 1 -- SECURITY SYSTEM STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION | | Sec 101. Prohibition of certain devices. | Sec 102. Preservation of the integrity of security. | Sec 103. Prohibited acts. | Sec 104. Adoption of security system standards. | Sec 105. Certification of technologies. | Sec 106. Federal Advisory Committee Committee Act Exemption. | Sec 107. Antitrust Exemption. | Sec 108. Enforcement. | Sec 109. Definitions. | Sec 110. Effective date. | | TITLE II -- INTERNET SECURITY INITIATIVES | | Sec 201. Findings. | Sec 202. Computer Security Partnership Counsel. | Sec 203. Research and development. | Sec 204. Computer security training programs. | Sec 205. Government Information Security Standards. | Sec 206. Recognition of quality in computer security practices. | Sec 207. Development of automated privacy controls. | | | | Sec 2. Findings. | | (TO BE SUPPLIED) Note that the justifications for this act have yet to be enumerated. "It's good for you, we'll die without it, it will bring forth a Grand New Age of Prosperity For All". Why am I not convinced? Watch this space. | TITLE 1 -- SECURITY SYSTEM | STANDARDS | | Sec. 101. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN DEVICES. | | (a) IN GENERAL -- It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to | the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital | device that does not include and utilize certified security | technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted | under section 104. As this is written and terms defined, it effectively outlaws free software. It violates the terms of the GNU GPL, and the definitions of FSF Free Software and OSI Open Source. "Offer to the public" and "provider or otherwise traffic in" would apply to common modes of distribution of free software. As defined in 109, "interactive digital device" includes "software". GNU GPL v2, Section 7 (emphasis added): 7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. OSI Open Source Definition 6: No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor: http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. Note that the safty/security aspects of this measure can be accomplished by legislating effects (liability for security compromise) rather than means (software/hardware). At far less impact on civil liberties, I might add, but the Estimable Senators of SC and AK clearly don't care. | (b) EXCEPTION -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for sale | or provision of, or other trafficking in, any previously-owned | interactive digital device, if such device was legally manufactured | or imported, and sold, prior to the effective date of regulations | adopted under section 104 and not subsequently modified in violation | of subsection (a) or 103(a) This effectively prohibits free modification of free software. | | | Sec. 102. PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF SECURITY. | | An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with | integrity and security measures associated with certified security | technologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or | other protected content such service transmits or stores. This effectively mandates security levels, practices, and procedures to be used by any binary device. See definitions section 109 below. | | Sec. 103. PROHIBITED ACTS. | | (a) REMOVAL OR ALTERATIONS OF SECURITY. -- No person may-- | | (1) remove or alter any certified security technology in an | interactive digital device; or | | (2) transmit or make available to the public any copyrighted | material or other protected content where the security measure | associated with a certified technology has been removed or | altered. I'd be repeating myself. Outlaws/restricts free software, modification of, and/or distribution of. | (b) PERSONAL TIME-SHIFTING COPIES CANNOT BE BLOCKED. -- No person | may apply a security measure that uses a certified security | technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy | for time-shifting purposes of programming at the time it is | lawfully performed on an over-the-air broadcast, non-premium cable | channel, or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast | station (as defined in section 122(j)(5)(A) of title 17, United | States Code), a cable system (as defined in section 111(f) of such | title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of | such title). Interesting. We're going to shit on the IT sector and free software. But we're not going to disturb the masses who want to tape the football game, last night's WWF (too drunk to watch), or the afternoon's episode of As the World Churns (economy's in the tank, Mom's got to work). | | | Sec. 104. ADOPTION OF SECURITY SYSTEM STANDARDS. | | (a) CRITERIA. -- In achieving the goals of setting standards that | will provide effective security for content and certifying as many | conforming technologies as possible to develop a competitive and | innovative marketplace, the following criteria shall be applied to | the development of security system standards and certified security | technologies: | | (1) Reliability. | (2) Renewability. | (3) Resistance to attack. | (4) Base of implementation. | (5) Modularity. | (6) Applicability to multiple technology platforms. Estimable goals, but why not allow these to emerge otherwise? | (b) PRIVATE SECTOR EFFORTS. -- | | (1) IN GENERAL. -- The Secretary shall make a determination, | not more than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, | as to whether -- | | (A) representatives of interactive digital device | manufacturers and representatives of copyright owners have | reached agreement on security system standards for use in | interactive digital devices; and | | (B) the standards meet the criteria in subsection (a). Security standards are to be established by executive fiat. | (2) EXTENSION OF 12-MONTH PERIOD. -- The Secretary may, for good | cause shown, extend the 12-month period in paragraph (1) for a | period of not more than 6 months if the Secretary determines | that -- | | (A) substantial progress has been made by those | representatives toward development of security system | standards that will meet those criteria; | | (B) those representatives are continuing to negotiate in | good faith; and | | (C) there is a reasonable expectation that final agreement | will be reached by those representatives before the | expiration of the extended period of time. We'll allow corporate collusion for a reasonable amount of time, and then some. | (c) AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION. -- If the Secretary makes a | determination under subsection(b)(1) that an agreement on security | system standards that meet the criteria in subsection (a) has been | reached by these representatives, then the Secretary shall -- | | (1) initiate a rulemaking within 30 days after the date on which | the determination is made to adopt these standards; and | | (2) publish a final rule pursuant to that rulemaking not later | than 90 days after initiating the rulemaking that will take | effect 1 year after its publication. | | (d) NEGATIVE DETERMINATION. -- If the Secretary makes a determination | under subsection (b)(1) that an agreement on security system | standards that meet the criteria in subsection (a) has not been | reached by those representatives, then the Secretary -- | | (1) in consultation with the representatives described in | subsection (b)(1)(A), the National Institute of Standards and | Technology and the Register of Copyrights, shall initiate a | rulemaking within 30 days after the date on which the | determination is made to adopt security system standards that | meet those criteria to provide effective security for | copyrighted material and other protected content; and | | (2) publish a final rule pursuant to that rulemaking not later | than 1 year after initiating the rulemaking that will take | effect 1 year after its publication. If corporate collusion doesn't work, government mandate shall establish the standard. | (e) MEANS OF IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS. -- The security system | standards adopted under subsection (c) or (d) shall provide for | secure technical means of implementing directions of copyright | owners, for copyrighted material, and rights holders, for other | protected content with regard to the reproduction, performances, | display, storage, and transmission of such material or content. For all this bill refers to security, it's really the Copyright Robber Barron's Evisceration of the Public Rights Act of 2001. There's no concern for the typical issues of system security, and no effective protection given in any event. System security cannot be legislated, it has to be designed into the system, and afforded by competent administration. Bruce Schneier: Security is not a product. Security is not a state. Security is a process. Let's disabuse ourselves of the shibboleth of "security" in this act. It is *not* about computer security. It's about security to eviscerate the public of its rights, by Disney, et al (see Holling's campaign contributions list, posted by McCullaugh). | (f) SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATION; NEW STANDARDS. -- The Secretary may | conduct subsequent rulemakings to modify any standards established | under subsection (c) or (d) or adopt new security system standards | that meet the criteria in subsection (a). In conducting any such | subsequent rulemaking, the Secretary shall consult with | representatives of interactive digital device manufacturers, | representatives of copyright owners, the National Institute of | Standards and Technology, and the Register of Copyrights. Any final | rule published in subs a subsequent rulemaking shall -- If we didn't bend you over hard enough the first time, we'll come around and do it again. | (1) apply prospectively only; and But not retrospectively. Thank us for this profusely, please. Your gratitude will be rewarded in future Robber Barron Power Extension Acts. | (2) take into consideration the effect of adoption of the | modified or new security system standards on consumers' ability | to utilize interactive digital devices manufactured before the | modified or new standards take effect. We wouldn't want the hoi polloi complaining to Congress, now would we? That might make our (Hollings, Stephens) live hard. | | | Sec. 105. CERTIFICATION OF TECHNOLOGIES. | | The Secretary shall certify technologies that adhere to the security | system standards adopted under section 104. The Secretary shall | certify only those conforming technologies that are available for | licensing on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms. Note on "reasonable and nondiscriminatory". This is a standard term used in establishing standards. It means that the terms used to license any patents shall be equivalent, and sufficiently non-avaricious that a typical commercial participant won't be precluded from using the technology. The problem is that it's a non-starter for free software. RF (royalty free) terms for standards must be specified for standards to be utilizeable by free software. In a world in which free software is a significant player, non-RF standards won't be readily adopted. This Act largely precludes FS being a significant player. | | | Sec. 106. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMITTEE ACT EXEMPTION. | | The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Ap.) does not apply to | any committee, board, commission, council, conference, panel, task | force, or other similar group of representatives of interactive | digital devices and representatives of copyright owners convened | for the purpose of developing the security system standards | described in section 104. No sunshine. 5 USC Appendix dictates that all meetings, hearings, etc., that concern the making of public policy be open to public participation and/or viewing. Specifically, 5 USC 522b holds: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/552b.text.html (a)(1) the term ''agency'' means any agency, as defined in section 552(e) [1] of this title, headed by a collegial body composed of two or more individual members, a majority of whom are appointed to such position by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, and any subdivision thereof authorized to act on behalf of the agency; <...> (b) Members shall not jointly conduct or dispose of agency business other than in accordance with this section. Except as provided in subsection (c), every portion of every meeting of an agency shall be open to public observation. (f) (1) For every meeting closed pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (10) of subsection (c), the General Counsel or chief legal officer of the agency shall publicly certify that, in his or her opinion, the meeting may be closed to the public and shall state each relevant exemptive provision. <...> (2) The agency shall make promptly available to the public, in a place easily accessible to the public, the transcript, electronic recording, or minutes (as required by paragraph (1)) of the discussion of any item on the agenda, or of any item of the testimony of any witness received at the meeting, except for such item or items of such discussion or testimony as the agency determines to contain information which may be withheld under subsection (c). Copies of such transcript, or minutes, or a transcription of such recording disclosing the identity of each speaker, shall be furnished to any person at the actual cost of duplication or transcription. The agency shall maintain a complete verbatim copy of the transcript, a complete copy of the minutes, or a complete electronic recording of each meeting, or portion of a meeting, closed to the public, for a period of at least two years after such meeting, or until one year after the conclusion of any agency proceeding with respect to which the meeting or portion was held, whichever occurs later. All waived. | | Sec. 107. ANTITRUST EXEMPTION. | | (a) IN GENERAL. -- Any person described in section 104(b)(1)(A) may | file with the Secretary of Commerce a request for authority for a | group of 2 or more such persons to meet and enter into discussions, | if the sole purpose of the discussions is to discuss the development | of security system standards under section 104. The Secretary shall | grant or deny the request within 10 days after it is received. Permission for industrial collusion is granted on request. | (b) PROCEDURE. -- The Secretary shall establish procedures within | 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act for filing requests | for an authorization under subsection (a). | | (c) EXEMPTION AUTHORIZED. -- When the Secretary fiends that it is | required by the public interest, the Secretary shall exempt a person | participating in a meeting or discussion described in subsection (a) | from the antitrust laws to the extent necessary to allow the person | to proceed with the activities approved in the order. Antitrust provisions are waived. The above gives full rein to groups such as the CPRM to operate in secrecy, without accountability, and with no public oversite, despite the impacts their actions will have on hundreds of millions of Americans, and by extension, the billions of inhabitants of this planet. | (d) ANTITRUST LAWS DEFINED. -- In this section, the term "antitrust | laws" has the meaning given that term in the first section of the | Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12). | | | | Sec. 108. ENFORCEMENT. | | The provisions of section 1203 and 1204 of title 17, United States | Code, shall apply to any violation of this title as if -- | | (1) a violation of section 101 or 103(a)(1) of this Act were a | violation of section 1201 of title 17, United States Code; and | | (2) a violation of section 102 or section 103(a)(2) of this Act | were a violation of section 1202 of that title. You remember that outrageous shit we slipped by you in the DMCA? Bend over, here it comes again. | | | Sec. 109. DEFINITIONS. | | In this title: | | (1) CERTIFIED SECURITY TECHNOLOGY. -- The term "certified | security technology" means a security technology certified by the | Secretary of Commerce under section 105. We say what's safe. You'll believe us. You have no choice. | (2) INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE. -- The term "interactive | computer service" has the meaning given that term in section | 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1984 (47 U.S.C 230(f)). Viz: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.text.html The term ''interactive computer service'' means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions. | | (3) INTERACTIVE DIGITAL DEVICE. -- The term "interactive | digital device" means any machine, device, product, software, or | technology, whether or not included with or as a part of some | other machine, device, product, software, or technology, that is | designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that | is capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, | transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form. Eg, anything that slings bits. Including your PC, laptop, handheld, cell phone, and, incidentally, Linux and all other free software. | (4) SECRETARY. -- The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of | Commerce. Seig Heil! | | | Sec. 110. EFFECTIVE DATE. | | This title shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act, | except that sections 101, 102, and 103 shall take effect on the day | on which the final rule published under section 104(c) or (d) takes | effect. | | | TITLE II -- INTERNET SECURITY INITIATIVES | | | | Sec. 201. FINDINGS. | | The Congress finds the following: | | (1) Good computer security practices are an underpinning of any | privacy protection. The operator of a computer system should | protect the system from unauthorized use and secure any sensitive | information. ...and Mom and apple pie... | (2) The Federal Government should be a role model in securing | its computer systems and should ensure the protection of | sensitive information controlled by Federal agencies. ...and, press notwithstanding, the Governement tends to do a relatively decent job. I didn't say perfect, or even admirable. I said relatively decent. This is in large part due to the fact that it's easier to publicize problems involving Government sites than those effecting commercial ones. Sunshine is good. | (3) The National Institute of Standards and Technology has the | responsibility for developing standards and guidelines needed to | ensure the cost-effective security and privacy of sensitive | information in Federal computer systems. ...but there are many other means of establishing standards, including, as an example, the IETF. | (4) This Nation faces a shortage of trained, qualified | information technology workers, including computer security | professionals. As the demand for information technology workers | grows, the Federal government will have an increasingly | difficult time attracting such workers into the Federal | workforce. It does? [Hollings: Memo to Self: must rewrite draft to reflect current economic conditions. Naw, everyone's eyes will be sufficiently glazed over at this point they'll never notice]. But the finding does point to the fact that you've got to pay people commensurate with the responsibilities of their work. H1-B or no H1-B. | (5) Some commercial off-the-shelf hardware and off-the-shelf | software components to protect computer systems are widely | available. There is still a need for long-term computer | security research, particularly in the area of infrastructure | protection. ...many of which are, in fact, free...and will be adversely effected by the proposed legislation. | (6) The Nation's information infrastructures are owned, for the | most part, by the private sector, and partnerships and | cooperation will be needed for the security of these | infrastructures. | | (7) There is little financial incentive for private companies to | enhance the security of the Internet and other infrastructures | as a whole. The Federal government will need to make | investments in this area to address issues and concerns not | addressed by the private sector. | | | | Sec. 202. COMPUTER SECURITY PARTNERSHIP COUNSEL. In which The Cabal is formed. One wonders if they too will have black cats? | (a) ESTABLISHMENT. -- The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation | with the Presidents Information Technology Advisory Committee | established by Executive Order No. 13035 of February 11, 1997 (62 | F.R. 7281), shall establish a 25-member Computer Security | Partnership Council the membership of which shall be drawn from | Federal, State, and local governments, universities, and businesses. | | (b) PURPOSE. -- The purpose of the Council is to collect and share | information about, and to increase public awareness of, information | security practices and programs, threats to information security, | and responses to those threats. | | (c) STUDY. -- Within 12 months after the date of enactment of this | Act, the Council shall publish a report which evaluates and | describes areas of computer security research and development that | are not adequately developed or funded. | | | | Sec. 203. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. | | Section 20 of The National Institute of Standards and Technology Act | (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) is amended -- | | (1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections | (d) and (e), respectively; and | | (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: | | "(c) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROTECTION | TECHNOLOGIES. -- | | "(1) IN GENERAL. -- The Institute shall establish a | program at The National Institute of Standards and | Technology to conduct, or to fund the conduct of, | research and development of technology and | techniques to provide security for advanced | communications and computing systems and networks | including the Next Generation Internet, the | underlying structure of the Internet, and networked | computers. | | "(2) PURPOSE. -- A purpose of the program | established under paragraph(1) is to address issues | or problems that are not addressed by market-driven, | private sector information security research. This | may include research -- | | "(A) to identify internet security problems | which are not adequately addressed by current | security technologies; | | "(B) to develop interactive tools to analyze | security risks in an easy-to-understand manner; | | "(C) to enhance the security and reliability of | the underlying Internet infrastructure while | minimizing other operational impacts such as | speed; and | | "(D) to allow networks to become self-healing | and provide for better analysis of the state of | Internet and infrastructure operations and | security. | | "(3) MATCHING GRANTS. -- A grant awarded by the | Institute under the program established under | paragraph (1) to a commercial enterprise may not | exceed 50 percent of the cost of the project to be | funded by the grant. | | "(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. -- There are | authorized to be appropriated to the Institute to | carry out this subsection -- | | "(A) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2001; | "(B) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; | "(C) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; | "(D) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; | "(E) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and | "(F) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;" | | | | | Sec. 204. COMPUTER SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAMS. | | (a) IN GENERAL. -- The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with | appropriate Federal agencies, shall establish a program to support | the training of individuals in computer security, Internet security, | and related fields at institutions of higher education located in | the United States. | | (b) SUPPORT AUTHORIZED. -- Under the program established under | subsection (a), the Secretary may provide scholarships, loans, and | other forms of financial aid to students at institutions of higher | education. The Secretary shall require a recipient of a scholarship | under this program to provide a reasonable period of service as an | employee of the United States government after graduation as a | condition of the scholarship, and may authorize full or partial | forgiveness of indebtedness for loans made under this program in | exchange for periods of employment by the United Sates government. | | (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATENESS. -- There are authorized to be | appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be necessary to carry | out this section -- | | (A) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2001; | (A) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; | (A) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; | (A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; | (A) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and | (A) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; | | | | Sec. 205. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SECURITY STANDARDS. | | (a) IN GENERAL. -- Section 20(b) of The National Institute of | Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3(b)) is amended -- | | (1) by striking "and" after the semicolon in paragraph (4); | | (2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and | | (3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following; | | "(5) to provide guidance and assistance to Federal agencies | in the protection of interconnected computer systems and to | coordinate Federal response efforts related to unauthorized | access to Federal computer systems; and". | | (b) FEDERAL COMPUTER SYSTEM SECURITY TRAINING. -- Section 5(b) of | the Computer Security Act of 1987 (49 U.S.C. 759 note) is amended -- | | (1) by striking "and" at the end of paragraph (1); | | (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and | inserting in lieu thereof "; and"; and | | (3) by adding at the end of the following new paragraph; | | "(3) to include emphasis on protecting the availability of | Federal electronic citizen services and protecting sensitive | information in Federal databases and Federal computer sites | that are accessible through public networks.". | | | | Sec. 206. RECOGNITION OF QUALITY IN COMPUTER SECURITY PRACTICES. | | Section 20 of The National Institute of Standards and Technology Act | (15 U.S.C. 279g-3), as amended by section 203, is further amended -- | | (1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (e) | and (f), respectively; and | | (2) by inserting after subsection (c), the following; | | "(d) AWARD PROGRAM. -- The Institute may establish a program | for the recognition of excellence in Federal computer system | security practices, including the development of a goal, | symbol, mark, or logo that could be displayed on the website | maintained by the operator of such a system recognized under | the program. In order to be recognized under the program, | the operator -- | | "(1) shall have implemented exemplary processes for the | protection of its systems and the information stored on | that system; | | "(2) shall have met any standard established under | subsection (a); | | "(3) shall have a process in place for updating the | system security procedures; and | | "(4) shall meet such other criteria as the Institute ma | require.". | | | | Sec. 207. DEVELOPMENT OF AUTOMATED PRIVACY CONTROLS. | | | Section 20 of The National Institute of Standards and Technology Act | (15 U.S.C. 278g-3), as amended by section 206, is further amended -- | | (1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and | | (2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following: | | "(f) DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNET PRIVACY PROGRAM. -- The | Institute shall encourage and support the development of one | or more computer programs, protocols, or other software, | such as the World Wide Web Consortium's P3P program, capable | of being installed on computers, or computer networks, with | Internet access that would reflect the user's preferences | for protecting personally-identifiable or other sensitive, | privacy-related information, and automatically executes the | program, once activated, without requiring user | intervention.". -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010909/92854484/attachment.pgp From tom at lemuria.org Mon Sep 10 00:49:26 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:25:16PM -0700 References: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010910094926.B30650@lemuria.org> On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:25:16PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > I'd be interested to hear other's reads of this, I think I'm on > relatively firm ground for most of the analysis here, but it's pretty > breathtaking. let's get real here, shall we? of course, the bill will never pass, or if it does will be killed by the SC in record time. after all, it makes everything the SC judges do illegal, too. however, someone already mentioned where the real battlefield will be: the 2nd attempt, the "compromise" bill. which will read very sensible once you've been shocked by the first (which is its only purpose) but will still be a "go to jail" wildcard for everyone. From jeme at brelin.net Mon Sep 10 02:33:37 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010910094926.B30650@lemuria.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Tom wrote: > however, someone already mentioned where the real battlefield will be: > the 2nd attempt, the "compromise" bill. which will read very sensible > once you've been shocked by the first (which is its only purpose) but > will still be a "go to jail" wildcard for everyone. The DMCA is the "compromise bill". They escalate every two or three years and we can't fight back fast enough. So we'll spend our energy blocking this and the public will be too burned out to go on and reverse the DMCA. They know we have momentum NOW so they're diverting our energies to this monster. I say we tackle the DMCA and STICK TO IT. We win that battle and this one will fall as well. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From tom at lemuria.org Mon Sep 10 04:09:30 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: ; from jeme@brelin.net on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:33:37AM -0700 References: <20010910094926.B30650@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010910130930.C32521@lemuria.org> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:33:37AM -0700, Jeme A Brelin wrote: > They know we have momentum NOW so they're diverting our energies to this > monster. > > I say we tackle the DMCA and STICK TO IT. We win that battle and this one > will fall as well. that was the point of my post. let's just ignore this obvious-nonsense bill and concentrate on the REAL fight. on the bill that has already thrown someone in jail for doing no wrong. From tom at lemuria.org Mon Sep 10 04:13:22 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] more PDF arrests ? Message-ID: <20010910131322.A32561@lemuria.org> this just in on a german newssite: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jes-10.09.01-000/ for those not speaking german, a short summary: someone in munich was raided by 5 cops, PC and peripherals taken, because he allegedly posted a "cracked" (reference to elcomsoft) copyrighted .pdf file on his webpage. the search order explicitly mentions "hacker software for pdf cracking". From david.haworth at altavista.net Mon Sep 10 05:08:43 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article Message-ID: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de> Hi All, a little anachronistic, perhaps, but here's a message I sent to Gene Gable following his article on Seybold Reports. Since I quoted just about his entire article in the email, I gave him the chance to veto my fair use of his article (see end of message). As of 9:00 CET today, I have received no reply. Dave PS: To Jon.O You can put this on your "letters" page if you like. ----- Forwarded message from David Haworth ----- Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:22:48 +0200 From: David Haworth To: gene.gable@key3media.com Subject: Your article Dear Mr. Gable, I'm writing to you about your article in Seybold E-Book Zone (http://www.seyboldreports.com/ebooks/010816-gene.html). I like to think that I'm an intelligent and informed person, and as such I find your article insulting because of the many misleading statements and downright falsehoods it portrays. I'm not accusing you of deliberately lying - perhaps you're just misinformed. So I'd like to point out a few of your errors in the hope that you might retract your article and replace it with an apology to Mr. Sklyarov for the false accusations that you make. The lines prefixed with "> " below are quotations from your article. > In all the recent debate around the Digital Millennium Copyright > Act and specifically the case of Adobe vs. Sklyarov [...] I think you'll find that the case is "US vs Sklyarov", since it's a criminal case. > [...] I think a fundamental point is being overlooked. You're right, but it isn't the point you're making ... > The effectiveness of copy-protection or copyright schemes is not > the issue here. There is nothing noble about a programmer proving > that they can work around protection schemes, no matter how easy. > Since when is it okay to steal something just because it wasn't > very hard to do? I'm sorry, this is exactly the issue. It can quite easily be demonstrated that so-called copy protection schemes can never be effective as long as the workings are open to anyone who cares to take a look. And that applies to any scheme intended for a personal computer. Furthermore, it is a fundamental trait of human nature to be inquisitive, to want to understand how things work, and perhaps to want to build a better one. Without that inquisitiveness. there would have been no technological progress to the point where it's possible for publishers to exist, let alone publish their wares electronically. And that's the point. We're dealing here with a law that attempts to legislate against basic human nature. And who (apart from you) ever accused Mr. Sklyarov from stealing. Certainly not the US DoJ. > I remember being burglarized one time and being made to feel > like I somehow contributed to the theft by leaving a window > open. Well, perhaps "contributed" is the wrong word, but doesn't it occur to you that perhaps the burglary wouldn't have happened if you hadn't made that mistake? However, this isn't the point. No-one but you is accusing Mr. Sklyarov of burglary. > Does it really make it less of an offense to steal a car just > because someone left the keys in it? No, but are rope manufacturers held responsible if someone tows away your unlocked car? Are driving schools held responsible for teaching people to drive so that they can drive away your unlocked car? > In an ideal world, Adobe and other software purveyors wouldn't > have to build in security features at all - people would follow > legal and moral guidelines. Correct - in an ideal world you could expect to return to your car (locked or unlocked) every time, wherever you park it. Sadly that isn't that case. Also, in an ideal world, I wouldn't have to spend time correcting the falsehoods put about by misinformed writers. Sadly that isn't the case either. > I hate it that we've become a society where people feel that if > they are given greater opportunity to be dishonest it's somehow > okay. Whoever (apart from you) accused Mr. Sklyarov of being dishonest? In a world of commercial misinformation through advertising, so-called press releases and so on, I find Mr. Sklyarov's publication to be refreshingly honest. Not only that, but where he comes from his actions are also lawful. His only crime, if indeed it is a crime, is to assume that in the USA ("the land of the free"), the laws are at least reasonable. Sadly, that appears not to be the case. > So I'm having a hard time feeling any sympathy toward Mr. > Sklyarov, even if he claims his efforts were humanitarian in > nature or were designed somehow to help Adobe see the flaws > in their system. I hope I'm never robbed, cheated or otherwise > taken advantage of by someone trying to prove to me I should > be more careful, discreet or protective of my property. Again, who (apart from you) has ever accused Mr. Sklyarov of robbing or cheating anyone. Perhaps, at a stretch, you could accuse his employer of taking advantage of E-Book purchasers by charging $99 for their product - purchasers who might feel that they themselves have been cheated by the publishers of those E-Books. > And let's throw out the baloney about how these noble hackers > are simply trying to give legitimate users the fair-usage rights > they deserve. While we're throwing out the baloney, let's add all the demonstrably false claims of the vendors of e-book readers about the security of their products. "100% burglar proof" is such a claim that I have seen quoted. Perhaps "0%" would be a closer estimate. > If legitimate Adobe or other customers feel the copy-protection > schemes are too limiting, they'll reject the product and the > seller will go back to the drawing board. Assuming that their attention is drawn to these schemes before they buy the book, because it seems that the returns policy for e-books seems to be, in general, "sorry, no returns accepted". In any case, it seems that this already happening - I don't see too much interest in E-books in the surveys. > I can guarantee that book publishers are not hell-bent on getting > multiple fees from buyers of e-books who may choose to > legitimately use them on more than one device. So why is it that E-books seem to be locked to a particular computer? > In fact, the flexibility of electronic copyright protection > products should result in more equitable pricing that scales > to the specific usage. So' you're saying I should pay more for a book if I intend to read it more than once, or to lend it to my friends, or to keep it and care for it until long after it enters the public domain. That certainly sounds like "multiple fees" to me. > Right now, the costs of intellectual property theft are simply > factored into the price legitimate customers pay. I'd be happier to pay > for the use I need, and not for the dishonesty of others. Perhaps that's exactly why some people don't see what's wrong with copying. I'd certainly have a hard time finding sympathy for publishers who charge me for extra copies and then complain when I make them. But that's an aside. Mr. Sklyarov isn't accused of any unlawful copying, except perhaps by you. > Our entire industry is built on the idea that intellectual > property has value. My industry too (software) - perhaps more so than yours, because at the end of the day, the product of my labours is just patterns in some electronic storage medium. At least you have the option of a solid manufacturing base. > Some of that value is in the manufacturing process, some in the > design, some in the editing, some in distribution, etc. I'd challenge your assertion that your manufacturing and distribution processes somehow hold part of the "intellectual property" that you claim to be valueable to your customers, and I'd be interested to know exactly how you come to arrive at that conclusion. > If there is no respect for those value steps, we might as well > pack up and go home. Well, if you can't find a way to make an honest living from publishing electronically, with all the advantages it brings with manufacturing and distribution costs reduced to almost zero, perhaps you should seriously consider "packing up and going home". Perhaps the publishing industry would be a better place without you - whatever a "value step" is. > We're never going to build walls high enough or obstacles secure > enough to protect everything [...] At last! An honest admission from a publisher that copy protection technology can't ever work. That's refreshing in today's barrage of misinformation put about by the publishing and entertainment industries. > from cowards who choose to take what isn't rightfully theirs. I'll say it again. Mr. Sklyarov hasn't taken anything that isn't rightfully his, despite your continued insinuations. And far from being cowardly, he has presented his findings publicly so that everyone can see the truth about so-called copy protection - that the emperor has no clothes. I fervently hope that the industry will see the light and get on with the business of making an honst buck instead of a dishonest one, but I fear that it will take many more Sklyarovs before the US comes to its corporate and legislative senses. Yours David Haworth P.S. I intend to publish this message on my web site and perhaps in other places. Since it quotes substantial portions of your article, I give you the opportunity to veto the inclusion of your writing in the published text. If you do not reply by 9am (Central European Time) Monday September 10th 2001, I shall take that as implicit permission to publish. If you veto my publication, I shall publish my comments in any case, along with sufficient pointers to your article so that readers can understand what I'm commenting on. I shall also mention that you have vetoed the quotation of your article. -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net ----- End forwarded message ----- From debug at centras.lt Mon Sep 10 05:51:10 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] fare use question Message-ID: <8418506422.20010910145110@centras.lt> I want to raise a question on how far the notion of *fare use* can extend. A small company (4-5 persons) buys a developement tool for one user only (single user license). Can it install this tool for 5 persons ? Can it install both at office and at home. Many developers work both at office and at home. Is it within fare use right ? If the company was forced to buy 5 users license it simply would not use the tool at all. Don't you feel that fare use term is slippery one. In fact fare use is not about how many people use it but is about mutual involvement into the business. It does not really matter how many copies you create or how intensively you use it, what matters is how much you compete with original copyright holder Should we treat eating of someone's market pie as illegal action? If your answer is yes then explain me why ? Is is because you gonna lose your business ? What is wrong with dumping ? Is not the problem in the lack of mutual responsibility ? -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Mon Sep 10 06:30:40 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article In-Reply-To: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de> Message-ID: This person is so ignorant of the facts that it's possible to "kill him with kindness" if you tone down the meanness and inform him of the facts in a helpful way. He's just a Joe trying to make a Buck with his Heavenly Intellectual Property. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of David Haworth Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 8:09 AM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article Hi All, a little anachronistic, perhaps, but here's a message I sent to Gene Gable following his article on Seybold Reports. Since I quoted just about his entire article in the email, I gave him the chance to veto my fair use of his article (see end of message). As of 9:00 CET today, I have received no reply. Dave PS: To Jon.O You can put this on your "letters" page if you like. ----- Forwarded message from David Haworth ----- Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:22:48 +0200 From: David Haworth To: gene.gable@key3media.com Subject: Your article Dear Mr. Gable, I'm writing to you about your article in Seybold E-Book Zone (http://www.seyboldreports.com/ebooks/010816-gene.html). I like to think that I'm an intelligent and informed person, and as such I find your article insulting because of the many misleading statements and downright falsehoods it portrays. I'm not accusing you of deliberately lying - perhaps you're just misinformed. So I'd like to point out a few of your errors in the hope that you might retract your article and replace it with an apology to Mr. Sklyarov for the false accusations that you make. The lines prefixed with "> " below are quotations from your article. > In all the recent debate around the Digital Millennium Copyright > Act and specifically the case of Adobe vs. Sklyarov [...] I think you'll find that the case is "US vs Sklyarov", since it's a criminal case. > [...] I think a fundamental point is being overlooked. You're right, but it isn't the point you're making ... > The effectiveness of copy-protection or copyright schemes is not > the issue here. There is nothing noble about a programmer proving > that they can work around protection schemes, no matter how easy. > Since when is it okay to steal something just because it wasn't > very hard to do? I'm sorry, this is exactly the issue. It can quite easily be demonstrated that so-called copy protection schemes can never be effective as long as the workings are open to anyone who cares to take a look. And that applies to any scheme intended for a personal computer. Furthermore, it is a fundamental trait of human nature to be inquisitive, to want to understand how things work, and perhaps to want to build a better one. Without that inquisitiveness. there would have been no technological progress to the point where it's possible for publishers to exist, let alone publish their wares electronically. And that's the point. We're dealing here with a law that attempts to legislate against basic human nature. And who (apart from you) ever accused Mr. Sklyarov from stealing. Certainly not the US DoJ. > I remember being burglarized one time and being made to feel > like I somehow contributed to the theft by leaving a window > open. Well, perhaps "contributed" is the wrong word, but doesn't it occur to you that perhaps the burglary wouldn't have happened if you hadn't made that mistake? However, this isn't the point. No-one but you is accusing Mr. Sklyarov of burglary. > Does it really make it less of an offense to steal a car just > because someone left the keys in it? No, but are rope manufacturers held responsible if someone tows away your unlocked car? Are driving schools held responsible for teaching people to drive so that they can drive away your unlocked car? > In an ideal world, Adobe and other software purveyors wouldn't > have to build in security features at all - people would follow > legal and moral guidelines. Correct - in an ideal world you could expect to return to your car (locked or unlocked) every time, wherever you park it. Sadly that isn't that case. Also, in an ideal world, I wouldn't have to spend time correcting the falsehoods put about by misinformed writers. Sadly that isn't the case either. > I hate it that we've become a society where people feel that if > they are given greater opportunity to be dishonest it's somehow > okay. Whoever (apart from you) accused Mr. Sklyarov of being dishonest? In a world of commercial misinformation through advertising, so-called press releases and so on, I find Mr. Sklyarov's publication to be refreshingly honest. Not only that, but where he comes from his actions are also lawful. His only crime, if indeed it is a crime, is to assume that in the USA ("the land of the free"), the laws are at least reasonable. Sadly, that appears not to be the case. > So I'm having a hard time feeling any sympathy toward Mr. > Sklyarov, even if he claims his efforts were humanitarian in > nature or were designed somehow to help Adobe see the flaws > in their system. I hope I'm never robbed, cheated or otherwise > taken advantage of by someone trying to prove to me I should > be more careful, discreet or protective of my property. Again, who (apart from you) has ever accused Mr. Sklyarov of robbing or cheating anyone. Perhaps, at a stretch, you could accuse his employer of taking advantage of E-Book purchasers by charging $99 for their product - purchasers who might feel that they themselves have been cheated by the publishers of those E-Books. > And let's throw out the baloney about how these noble hackers > are simply trying to give legitimate users the fair-usage rights > they deserve. While we're throwing out the baloney, let's add all the demonstrably false claims of the vendors of e-book readers about the security of their products. "100% burglar proof" is such a claim that I have seen quoted. Perhaps "0%" would be a closer estimate. > If legitimate Adobe or other customers feel the copy-protection > schemes are too limiting, they'll reject the product and the > seller will go back to the drawing board. Assuming that their attention is drawn to these schemes before they buy the book, because it seems that the returns policy for e-books seems to be, in general, "sorry, no returns accepted". In any case, it seems that this already happening - I don't see too much interest in E-books in the surveys. > I can guarantee that book publishers are not hell-bent on getting > multiple fees from buyers of e-books who may choose to > legitimately use them on more than one device. So why is it that E-books seem to be locked to a particular computer? > In fact, the flexibility of electronic copyright protection > products should result in more equitable pricing that scales > to the specific usage. So' you're saying I should pay more for a book if I intend to read it more than once, or to lend it to my friends, or to keep it and care for it until long after it enters the public domain. That certainly sounds like "multiple fees" to me. > Right now, the costs of intellectual property theft are simply > factored into the price legitimate customers pay. I'd be happier to pay > for the use I need, and not for the dishonesty of others. Perhaps that's exactly why some people don't see what's wrong with copying. I'd certainly have a hard time finding sympathy for publishers who charge me for extra copies and then complain when I make them. But that's an aside. Mr. Sklyarov isn't accused of any unlawful copying, except perhaps by you. > Our entire industry is built on the idea that intellectual > property has value. My industry too (software) - perhaps more so than yours, because at the end of the day, the product of my labours is just patterns in some electronic storage medium. At least you have the option of a solid manufacturing base. > Some of that value is in the manufacturing process, some in the > design, some in the editing, some in distribution, etc. I'd challenge your assertion that your manufacturing and distribution processes somehow hold part of the "intellectual property" that you claim to be valueable to your customers, and I'd be interested to know exactly how you come to arrive at that conclusion. > If there is no respect for those value steps, we might as well > pack up and go home. Well, if you can't find a way to make an honest living from publishing electronically, with all the advantages it brings with manufacturing and distribution costs reduced to almost zero, perhaps you should seriously consider "packing up and going home". Perhaps the publishing industry would be a better place without you - whatever a "value step" is. > We're never going to build walls high enough or obstacles secure > enough to protect everything [...] At last! An honest admission from a publisher that copy protection technology can't ever work. That's refreshing in today's barrage of misinformation put about by the publishing and entertainment industries. > from cowards who choose to take what isn't rightfully theirs. I'll say it again. Mr. Sklyarov hasn't taken anything that isn't rightfully his, despite your continued insinuations. And far from being cowardly, he has presented his findings publicly so that everyone can see the truth about so-called copy protection - that the emperor has no clothes. I fervently hope that the industry will see the light and get on with the business of making an honst buck instead of a dishonest one, but I fear that it will take many more Sklyarovs before the US comes to its corporate and legislative senses. Yours David Haworth P.S. I intend to publish this message on my web site and perhaps in other places. Since it quotes substantial portions of your article, I give you the opportunity to veto the inclusion of your writing in the published text. If you do not reply by 9am (Central European Time) Monday September 10th 2001, I shall take that as implicit permission to publish. If you veto my publication, I shall publish my comments in any case, along with sufficient pointers to your article so that readers can understand what I'm commenting on. I shall also mention that you have vetoed the quotation of your article. -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Mon Sep 10 06:31:22 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] fare use question In-Reply-To: <8418506422.20010910145110@centras.lt>; from debug@centras.lt on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 08:51:10 -0400 References: <8418506422.20010910145110@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010910093122.A4328@www2> <> Copyright is the EXPECTION to fair use. Copyright is an option of Congress. Fair Use at it's widest is what we have without copyright. Copyright is a limited exemption of some Fair Use rights of the use. Ruben _____________________ A small company (4-5 persons) buys a developement tool for one user only (single user license). Can it install this tool for 5 persons ? Can it install both at office and at home. Many developers work both at office and at home. Is it within fare use right ? If the company was forced to buy 5 users license it simply would not use the tool at all. Don't you feel that fare use term is slippery one. In fact fare use is not about how many people use it but is about mutual involvement into the business. It does not really matter how many copies you create or how intensively you use it, what matters is how much you compete with original copyright holder Should we treat eating of someone's market pie as illegal action? If your answer is yes then explain me why ? Is is because you gonna lose your business ? What is wrong with dumping ? Is not the problem in the lack of mutual responsibility ? -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From david.haworth at altavista.net Mon Sep 10 06:53:28 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article In-Reply-To: ; from john.dempsey7@verizon.net on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:30:40AM -0400 References: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010910155328.A11788@3soft.de> Hi John On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:30:40AM -0400, John Dempsey wrote: > This person is so ignorant of the facts that it's possible to "kill him with > kindness" if you tone down the meanness and inform him of the facts in a > helpful way. He's just a Joe trying to make a Buck with his Heavenly > Intellectual Property. Call it "British Understatement" if you like ;-) The aim is to try to provoke a response, to get into a meaningful discussion. The lack of reply merely demonstrates that the guy's statements are so much hot air, with no basis in fact. The problem is that the web is full of this bullshit, and no-one is speaking out against it. We need to get articles in the mainstream press about why the DMCA is bad, why the publishers' dream of "protected content" is a pipedream. All the letters, emails, etc that I've written since Dmitry's arrest are collected on my homepage (http://home.graffiti.net/pogue/writings/). Including this one, as of a few minutes ago. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From kfoss at planetpdf.com Mon Sep 10 08:17:39 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:12 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Computer seized in alleged PDF eBook crack In-Reply-To: <20010910131322.A32561@lemuria.org> References: <20010910131322.A32561@lemuria.org> Message-ID: Based on accusations of copyright infringement involving an allegedly cracked PDF version of a recently released book, police in Munich, Germany have reportedly seized the computer and peripheral equipment of a Web site owner. Purchase of the book apparently included a CD-ROM of the contents; according to reports, the protected PDF's security permissions were removed using software from ElcomSoft Co. Ltd -- but not the same controversial application which led to recent indictments for ElcomSoft and employee Dmitry Sklyarov on violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=231 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From proclus at iname.com Mon Sep 10 08:14:40 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] MacSlash story In-Reply-To: <20010804110604.C84824@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109101514.f8AFEed05355@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Here is the text of message that I posted to MacSlash. RE: http://www.macslash.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/09/2216254 IP Cartels (Score:1) by proclus on Monday September 10, @09:09AM EST ([88]#6) Hey globetrotters, come back to coach for a change, and you will find that the tyranny of the IP cartels will no longer be tolerated. Go ahead and pass your damned SSSCA. You've got those DC toolies in your pocket anyway. Go ahead! Go ahead and throw away the key on Dmitry, and you will see some REAL DEMOCRACY in action. Sincerely, proclus Am I over the top? Just tell me why, and I will try to stifle a little ;-}. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From jono at microshaft.org Mon Sep 10 08:50:22 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Toronto Star -- Copyright: What's right? Message-ID: <20010910085021.N99475@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded Message ------ Also in the print version, huge "Free Dmitry" image front page of the business section. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1000073417176&call_page=TS_@Biz&call_pageid=971794782442&call_pagepath=Business/@Biz The Dmitry Sklyarov case has focused attention on a vexing issue of the digital age Rachel Ross TECHNOLOGY REPORTER What if this article could not be read aloud? Or lent to a friend? What if you could read it either at work or at home, but not at both places? BEN MARGOT/AP ANALOG ANGER: Protesters in San Franscisco in a recent show of dissent over the arrest of a computer programmer. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1000073417176&call_page=TS_@Biz&call_pageid=971794782442&call_pagepath=Business/@Biz _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 jono at microshaft.org Mon Sep 10 09:01:50 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article In-Reply-To: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:08:43PM +0200 References: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010910090149.Q99475@networkcommand.com> Thanks David. Also, there is a chat server right here: http://www.anti-dmca.org/cgi-bin/forum2/ikonboard.cgi I think it would be great if we got two opposing views responding to each other through the message board. So, if Mr. Gable is game, maybe he would be willing to engage in a public debate on a message board. E-Book Zone did it with Niels, maybe they can once again. Thanks, Jon On 10-Sep-2001, David Haworth wrote: > Hi All, > > a little anachronistic, perhaps, but here's a message I sent to > Gene Gable following his article on Seybold Reports. Since I > quoted just about his entire article in the email, I gave him > the chance to veto my fair use of his article (see end of message). > As of 9:00 CET today, I have received no reply. > > Dave > > PS: To Jon.O You can put this on your "letters" page if you like. > > > ----- Forwarded message from David Haworth ----- > > Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:22:48 +0200 > From: David Haworth > To: gene.gable@key3media.com > Subject: Your article > > Dear Mr. Gable, > > I'm writing to you about your article in Seybold E-Book Zone > (http://www.seyboldreports.com/ebooks/010816-gene.html). I > like to think that I'm an intelligent and informed person, > and as such I find your article insulting because of the > many misleading statements and downright falsehoods it > portrays. I'm not accusing you of deliberately lying - perhaps > you're just misinformed. So I'd like to point out a few of > your errors in the hope that you might retract your article > and replace it with an apology to Mr. Sklyarov for the > false accusations that you make. > > The lines prefixed with "> " below are quotations from your > article. > > > In all the recent debate around the Digital Millennium Copyright > > Act and specifically the case of Adobe vs. Sklyarov [...] > > I think you'll find that the case is "US vs Sklyarov", since it's > a criminal case. > > > [...] I think a fundamental point is being overlooked. > > You're right, but it isn't the point you're making ... > > > The effectiveness of copy-protection or copyright schemes is not > > the issue here. There is nothing noble about a programmer proving > > that they can work around protection schemes, no matter how easy. > > Since when is it okay to steal something just because it wasn't > > very hard to do? > > I'm sorry, this is exactly the issue. It can quite easily be > demonstrated that so-called copy protection schemes can never > be effective as long as the workings are open to anyone who > cares to take a look. And that applies to any scheme intended > for a personal computer. > Furthermore, it is a fundamental trait of human nature to be inquisitive, > to want to understand how things work, and perhaps to want to build > a better one. Without that inquisitiveness. there would have been > no technological progress to the point where it's possible for > publishers to exist, let alone publish their wares electronically. > And that's the point. We're dealing here with a law that attempts > to legislate against basic human nature. > And who (apart from you) ever accused Mr. Sklyarov from stealing. > Certainly not the US DoJ. > > > I remember being burglarized one time and being made to feel > > like I somehow contributed to the theft by leaving a window > > open. > > Well, perhaps "contributed" is the wrong word, but doesn't it > occur to you that perhaps the burglary wouldn't have happened if you > hadn't made that mistake? However, this isn't the point. No-one but > you is accusing Mr. Sklyarov of burglary. > > > Does it really make it less of an offense to steal a car just > > because someone left the keys in it? > > No, but are rope manufacturers held responsible if someone tows > away your unlocked car? Are driving schools held responsible for > teaching people to drive so that they can drive away your unlocked > car? > > > In an ideal world, Adobe and other software purveyors wouldn't > > have to build in security features at all - people would follow > > legal and moral guidelines. > > Correct - in an ideal world you could expect to return to your > car (locked or unlocked) every time, wherever you park it. Sadly > that isn't that case. > Also, in an ideal world, I wouldn't have to spend time correcting > the falsehoods put about by misinformed writers. Sadly that isn't > the case either. > > > I hate it that we've become a society where people feel that if > > they are given greater opportunity to be dishonest it's somehow > > okay. > > Whoever (apart from you) accused Mr. Sklyarov of being dishonest? > In a world of commercial misinformation through advertising, so-called > press releases and so on, I find Mr. Sklyarov's publication to be > refreshingly honest. Not only that, but where he comes from his > actions are also lawful. His only crime, if indeed it is a crime, > is to assume that in the USA ("the land of the free"), the laws > are at least reasonable. Sadly, that appears not to be the case. > > > So I'm having a hard time feeling any sympathy toward Mr. > > Sklyarov, even if he claims his efforts were humanitarian in > > nature or were designed somehow to help Adobe see the flaws > > in their system. I hope I'm never robbed, cheated or otherwise > > taken advantage of by someone trying to prove to me I should > > be more careful, discreet or protective of my property. > > Again, who (apart from you) has ever accused Mr. Sklyarov of > robbing or cheating anyone. Perhaps, at a stretch, you could > accuse his employer of taking advantage of E-Book purchasers > by charging $99 for their product - purchasers who might feel > that they themselves have been cheated by the publishers of > those E-Books. > > > And let's throw out the baloney about how these noble hackers > > are simply trying to give legitimate users the fair-usage rights > > they deserve. > > While we're throwing out the baloney, let's add all the demonstrably > false claims of the vendors of e-book readers about the security > of their products. "100% burglar proof" is such a claim that I have > seen quoted. Perhaps "0%" would be a closer estimate. > > > > If legitimate Adobe or other customers feel the copy-protection > > schemes are too limiting, they'll reject the product and the > > seller will go back to the drawing board. > > Assuming that their attention is drawn to these schemes before they > buy the book, because it seems that the returns policy for e-books > seems to be, in general, "sorry, no returns accepted". In any case, > it seems that this already happening - I don't see too much interest > in E-books in the surveys. > > > I can guarantee that book publishers are not hell-bent on getting > > multiple fees from buyers of e-books who may choose to > > legitimately use them on more than one device. > > So why is it that E-books seem to be locked to a particular computer? > > > In fact, the flexibility of electronic copyright protection > > products should result in more equitable pricing that scales > > to the specific usage. > > So' you're saying I should pay more for a book if I intend to read > it more than once, or to lend it to my friends, or to keep it and > care for it until long after it enters the public domain. That certainly > sounds like "multiple fees" to me. > > > Right now, the costs of intellectual property theft are simply > > factored into the price legitimate customers pay. I'd be happier to pay > > for the use I need, and not for the dishonesty of others. > > Perhaps that's exactly why some people don't see what's wrong with > copying. I'd certainly have a hard time finding sympathy for publishers > who charge me for extra copies and then complain when I make them. > But that's an aside. Mr. Sklyarov isn't accused of any unlawful > copying, except perhaps by you. > > > Our entire industry is built on the idea that intellectual > > property has value. > > My industry too (software) - perhaps more so than yours, because > at the end of the day, the product of my labours is just patterns > in some electronic storage medium. At least you have the option > of a solid manufacturing base. > > > Some of that value is in the manufacturing process, some in the > > design, some in the editing, some in distribution, etc. > > I'd challenge your assertion that your manufacturing and distribution > processes somehow hold part of the "intellectual property" that > you claim to be valueable to your customers, and I'd be interested to > know exactly how you come to arrive at that conclusion. > > > If there is no respect for those value steps, we might as well > > pack up and go home. > > Well, if you can't find a way to make an honest living from > publishing electronically, with all the advantages it brings with > manufacturing and distribution costs reduced to almost zero, perhaps > you should seriously consider "packing up and going home". Perhaps > the publishing industry would be a better place without you - > whatever a "value step" is. > > > We're never going to build walls high enough or obstacles secure > > enough to protect everything [...] > > At last! An honest admission from a publisher that copy protection > technology can't ever work. That's refreshing in today's > barrage of misinformation put about by the publishing and > entertainment industries. > > > from cowards who choose to take what isn't rightfully theirs. > > I'll say it again. Mr. Sklyarov hasn't taken anything that isn't > rightfully his, despite your continued insinuations. And far from > being cowardly, he has presented his findings publicly so that > everyone can see the truth about so-called copy protection - that > the emperor has no clothes. I fervently hope that the industry > will see the light and get on with the business of making an > honst buck instead of a dishonest one, but I fear that it will > take many more Sklyarovs before the US comes to its corporate > and legislative senses. > > Yours > > David Haworth > > P.S. I intend to publish this message on my web site and perhaps > in other places. Since it quotes substantial portions of your > article, I give you the opportunity to veto the inclusion > of your writing in the published text. If you do not reply by > 9am (Central European Time) Monday September 10th 2001, I shall > take that as implicit permission to publish. If you veto my > publication, I shall publish my comments in any case, along with > sufficient pointers to your article so that readers can understand > what I'm commenting on. I shall also mention that you have vetoed > the quotation of your article. > > -- > David Haworth > Baiersdorf, Germany > david.haworth@altavista.net > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From sean at thefreevoice.org Sun Sep 9 09:21:24 2001 From: sean at thefreevoice.org (Sean DuVally) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Would I have to pay for the Privilege Message-ID: Under the SSSCA, If I were to manufacture a interactive digital device, would I have to pay for a license for a certified security technology? Who would certify the this technology? Would it be something similar licensing from the DVD-CCA? Would this technology be proprietary? How would this effect Free Software? There are alot of things to think about. "Beware of he who would restrict you from information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" -- Alpha Centauri ---------------------------------------------------- Please check out The Free Voice at http://thefreevoice.org From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 10:32:54 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Would I have to pay for the Privilege In-Reply-To: ; from sean@thefreevoice.org on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 12:21:24PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010910103254.A27869@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 12:21:24PM -0400, Sean DuVally (sean@thefreevoice.org) wrote: > Under the SSSCA, If I were to manufacture a interactive digital device, > would I have to pay for a license for a certified security technology? > Who would certify the this technology? Would it be something similar > licensing from the DVD-CCA? Would this technology be proprietary? > How would this effect Free Software? There are alot of things to > think about. Under "reasonable and nondiscriminatory" licensing practices, very likely there would be patent fees involved. Certification is by the Secretary of Commerce, as is detailed repeatedly in the proposed bill. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/c643c99d/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 10:49:02 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] fare use question In-Reply-To: <8418506422.20010910145110@centras.lt>; from debug@centras.lt on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:51:10PM +0200 References: <8418506422.20010910145110@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010910104902.B27869@navel.introspect> on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:51:10PM +0200, DeBug (debug@centras.lt) wrote: > I want to raise a question on how far the notion of *fare use* can > extend. Is that "fare" (for a fee) use or "fair" (reasonable expectations) use? > (single user license). Can it install this tool for 5 persons ? > Can it install both at office and at home. Many developers work > both at office and at home. Is it within fare use right ? This question is more appropriate for a list on general IP issues such as CNI-Copyright. I don't believe your hypo falls under the scope of fair use as it's defined in 17 USC 107: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.text.html ...the fair use of a copyrighted work, [...] for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include - (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/fbf482c2/attachment.pgp From cce at clarkevans.com Mon Sep 10 12:39:13 2001 From: cce at clarkevans.com (Clark C . Evans) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:13 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] getting physical Message-ID: <20010910153913.A30503@doublegemini.com> Is there a way to make this case into something "physical" which the judge can easily grok? Construct a device (physical) which somehow encrypts via enclosure, so that if you remove the enclosuer you break the encryption. Put a lock on the enclosure. Now every locksmith could be used to violate the DMCA. ... Also, I was wondering if this isn't an issue which the NRA wouldn't be interested in. As programmers we *manufacture* devices (or instructions for devices... whatever) that can be used for wrong doing. The DMCA is punishing the manufacturer, not the user who actually violates copyright. Under this logic, we should charge the gun manufactures for all of the killings that happen daily.... Best, Clark From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Mon Sep 10 12:45:28 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article In-Reply-To: <20010910155328.A11788@3soft.de> Message-ID: >> He's just a Joe trying to make a Buck with his Heavenly Intellectual Property. > The problem is that the web is full of this bullshit, and no-one is speaking out against it. I always speak against it, and have attached my reply to Mr. Gable. I find it worthy of note that I've seen two (count 'em, two) pro-arrest essays, and they both came from people positioning themselves as "premium content providers". Though apparently, they like to give the political rants away, free of charge! John ============ From: John Dempsey To: gene.gable@key3media.com Subject: Response to article 16Aug01 Hello. I hope to offer a thoughtful reply to your article, which I find to be ignorant of key facts. "Since when is it okay to steal something just because it wasn't very hard to do?" No one has accused anyone of stealing anything. Are you aware that the Adobe eBook is illegal in Russia, because it doesn't allow for the making of a backup copy? With Mr. Sklyarov's tool, it could be sold there. Without, it is illegal. So the devil in these details is somewhat about the contradiction in different country laws, and this will be a hard component of the trial. It's certainly more complicated than your article makes it out to be. "So I'm having a hard time feeling any sympathy toward Mr. Sklyarov, even if he claims his efforts were humanitarian in nature or were designed somehow to help Adobe see the flaws in their system." He has made no such claims. He wrote a commercial application legal in his own country, for certified customers of the eBook, to exercise legally protected rights. I acknowledge that you own these words. But historically I have been able to cite you in, say, a classroom. Under the DMCA, I have no means to do so. Do you notice that I'm quoting you, as part of an illectual interchange, and that this interchange would be illegal, if you put even the most modest copy prevention on your text? Do you think it is a reasonable trade-off to sell intellectual freedoms for commercial gain? "If legitimate Adobe or other customers feel the copy-protection schemes are too limiting, they'll reject the product and the seller will go back to the drawing board." Should we let intellectual freedoms be defined by what people buy? Or worse, what companies are willing to sell? "I can guarantee that book publishers are not hell-bent on getting multiple fees from buyers of e-books who may choose to legitimately use them on more than one device." Why not? Currently they usually require it. For example, under Copyright until now, I could reproduce your article for my classroom, no fee. Under DMCA, I have to submit to whatever cost scheme you have in mind. This does not promote the interchange of ideas. Prior to the DMCA, a publisher had no right to even assert additional fees for educational use. Now they have carte blanche. "... I think there is culpability for a programmer who sets out to aid efforts that are primarily designed to steal." It might interest you to learn that Mr. Sklyarov's employer mostly sells products to law enforcement agencies, including American ones. And I've already explained that the eBook itself is illegal under Russian law, without this additional tool. "And I think we all know that the majority of people downloading and using the program Mr. Sklyarov designed are expecting to get something for nothing." Mr Sklyarov's application only works on legitimate eBooks. So the person downloading and using it has paid-for content. They could then use the two tools in a variety of completely legal and legally protected ways. It's quite akin to the VCR. Would you prefer that be illegal, too? I accept your concerns about the business of publishing. My business, of system security, gives me a different perspective. In this case, a big American company has taken out a little, foreign company. That sort of thing happens every day, but generally nobody goes to jail for it. The DMCA, RIAA, and DVD-CCA are a threat to people of all nations, doing security-oriented work. This doesn't mean they are involved in copyright violation. The broadness of the law means that to simply identify and describe a security flaw can put you in prison. That is not how one achieves system security. You achieve system security through knowledge and the interchange of knowledge. Yet this is what DMCA tries to suppress. It's fundamentally a bad law. http://www.anti-dmca.org << this site is in its infancy but crystalizes a lot of criticisms I share with the webmaster there. This quote has made me take notice: "They talk about a Digital Pearl Harbour, yet essentially dump Intellectual Napalm on the Security Industry." Regards, John Dempsey New York, New York From moeller at scireview.de Mon Sep 10 13:07:37 2001 From: moeller at scireview.de (Erik Moeller) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] getting physical In-Reply-To: <20010910153913.A30503@doublegemini.com> Message-ID: <3B9D39A9.14676.BBA69B@localhost> On 10 Sep 2001, at 15:39, Clark C . Evans wrote: > Construct a device (physical) which somehow > encrypts via enclosure You don't need to circumvent encryption to violate the DMCA. Use a box, with an eyeslit, that contains a book, but also has a lock. Breaking the lock, even if you own the box, is illegal. If you want to enhance the effect, give the box a coinslot which opens the eyeslit for 10 seconds only. And make the book Alice in Wonderland. Regards, Erik -- Scientific Reviewer, Freelancer, Humanist -- Berlin/Germany Phone: +49-30-45491008 - Web: The Origins of Peace and Violence: "If we don't improve our ability to deal collectively with complex things, as the problems grow more urgent, we're in trouble." - Douglas Engelbart From sisgeek at yahoo.com Mon Sep 10 13:15:06 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010910201506.40258.qmail@web13903.mail.yahoo.com> today our government would preach to the chinese for such a barbaric proposal while passing legislation requiring the manufacturers of paper and pens to tag and trace both. (or dictate how to manufacture the paper and ink so both functioned as desired by the government.) ... while alleging "they" were protecting "us" from "them" or some secret evil which "they" cannot disclose to "us" for fear of "them"! --- Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:12:09 -0700 > From: jamesd@echeque.com > To: Carsten Kuckuk , Jay Sulzberger > > Cc: Declan McCullagh , > cryptography@wasabisystems.com, > Jay Sulzberger > Subject: Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA > sequel: The SSSCA > > -- > On 10 Sep 2001, at 0:26, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > All "interactive digital" systems that directly > connect to the > > net will have to licensed. Most that do not > connect directly > > will also have to be licensed. License costs will > be high > > enough so that only a few large companies can > afford them. > > Individuals will not be allowed to assemble > components to make > > a computer for themselves, unless they spend > millions on a > > license, and wait some months for the paperwork to > go through. > > When the chinese invented paper, the government > eventually > decided that this led to dangerous communication of > dangerous > thoughts, and prohibited private production of > paper. It made > paper making a state secret, and castrated all paper > makers so > that the secret would not be passed from father to > son, but only > transmitted in government approved channels. > Thereafter paper > was used only to transmit government approved > thoughts through > government channels, and to the populace. > > Computers are similarly dangerous. > > --digsig > James A. Donald > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > pEyJYvluyMSWgNZ7GAkKeNzQ3mshy+SsKVJ/wMhs > 4sKLUftGKcn9X/CXUOs7SZPnTiZHI8M0IpiNhuyx6 > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From MLarma at eFuel.com Mon Sep 10 13:50:05 2001 From: MLarma at eFuel.com (Larma, Mark) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA seq uel: The SSSCA (fwd) Message-ID: <1E50F10694062B4D922862B413D01C9E05F8@efuelmail.efuel.com> I saw a lot of mails flying around today--now I know why (finally had a chance to read them). What are they trying to pull? That is my question. Scandinavia is looking better everyday... -----Original Message----- From: alfee cube [mailto:sisgeek@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 4:15 PM To: Jay Sulzberger; free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA sequel: The SSSCA (fwd) today our government would preach to the chinese for such a barbaric proposal while passing legislation requiring the manufacturers of paper and pens to tag and trace both. (or dictate how to manufacture the paper and ink so both functioned as desired by the government.) ... while alleging "they" were protecting "us" from "them" or some secret evil which "they" cannot disclose to "us" for fear of "them"! --- Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:12:09 -0700 > From: jamesd@echeque.com > To: Carsten Kuckuk , Jay Sulzberger > > Cc: Declan McCullagh , > cryptography@wasabisystems.com, > Jay Sulzberger > Subject: Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA > sequel: The SSSCA > > -- > On 10 Sep 2001, at 0:26, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > All "interactive digital" systems that directly > connect to the > > net will have to licensed. Most that do not > connect directly > > will also have to be licensed. License costs will > be high > > enough so that only a few large companies can > afford them. > > Individuals will not be allowed to assemble > components to make > > a computer for themselves, unless they spend > millions on a > > license, and wait some months for the paperwork to > go through. > > When the chinese invented paper, the government > eventually > decided that this led to dangerous communication of > dangerous > thoughts, and prohibited private production of > paper. It made > paper making a state secret, and castrated all paper > makers so > that the secret would not be passed from father to > son, but only > transmitted in government approved channels. > Thereafter paper > was used only to transmit government approved > thoughts through > government channels, and to the populace. > > Computers are similarly dangerous. > > --digsig > James A. Donald > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > pEyJYvluyMSWgNZ7GAkKeNzQ3mshy+SsKVJ/wMhs > 4sKLUftGKcn9X/CXUOs7SZPnTiZHI8M0IpiNhuyx6 > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov ___________________________________________________________________________ eFuel E-Mail Confidentiality Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) indicated above. Use or disclosure of information e-mailed in error is respectfully prohibited. If have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and immediately delete the original message. Thank you. From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Mon Sep 10 15:33:22 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OT: Paying For Content In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Many newspapers offer current content for free, but charge for archive. Science Magazine is bucking the trend. It is now charging for online access to current content, but after 1 year, articles are available for free, with registration. http://www.ScienceMag.org James S. Huggins From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Mon Sep 10 16:14:30 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Article: Manage Digital Rights, Don't Enforce Them Message-ID: http://ecommerce.internet.com/news/insights/ectech/article/0,3371,10378_8797 11,00.html I read the article. I'm not sure I understand the distinction it is attempting to make. James S. Huggins From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 16:15:23 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:25:16PM -0700 References: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010910161523.A3257@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:25:16PM -0700, Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) wrote: Some additional information: http://www.computeruser.com/news/01/08/28/news2.html Daily News Senator plans anti-piracy copyright legislation By Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes. August 28, 2001 Consumer electronics hardware makers, including computer manufacturers, would be required to develop anti-piracy technology to be included in their products under proposed legislation from Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, D-S.C. "It's something that he's been floating around," said Hollings spokesman Andrew Davis. <...> Under the terms of the proposed legislation, which is in staff discussions during the congressional August recess, consumer electronics and computer makers, along with content providers, would be required to develop technology that would prevent people from making illegal copies of music, films and other content available via the Internet, DVDs, etc. <...> The Consumer Electronics Association, which represents companies such as Toshiba, Gateway and Thomson Consumer Electronics, has not taken a stance in any way on the proposed legislation, but its members traditionally have opposed similar efforts. "The CEA supports home recording rights ... and we don't want legislators to confuse home recording with piracy," said CEA official Jenny Miller. <...> Miller said that many consumer electronics companies instead support legislation sponsored by Reps. Rick Boucher, D-Va., and Chris Cannon, R-Utah, that extends copyright exemptions enjoyed by radio, cable and satellite broadcasters to subscription-based online music distributors. <...> Content trade associations such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) oppose the legislation. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/0da32c3b/attachment.pgp From tack at gaffle.com Mon Sep 10 16:12:39 2001 From: tack at gaffle.com (tack) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action Message-ID: Hey all, I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. So I was thinking of some other forms of action and some interesting applications of the ones we've been using. I would like to put them out there for discussion, should others think they're good ideas. More in the food for thought category. 1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. They pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so inclined and are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend doing so. I'm sure we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount of effort put into the Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources for a fair shot. At least it will get the word out. Imagine this issue going on every ballot in your district. Perhaps, if not in his district, we could ask for advice from Rep. Boucher? 2. Lets target the persons in question (Hatch, Feinstein, Hollings) and start a fundraiser...maybe a-la linuxfund credit cards to act as a war-chest to fund opposing candidates who are more sympathetic to civil liberties. Maybe "Fair Use Fund" cards. At the very least, campaign ads are a great way to get our message accross, even if not in support for a candidate but to point out flaws of another. 3. A lot of us are content creators/copyright holders. If a judge, law enforcement person or lawyer uses our content in the discharge of their duties, and such use violates DMCA/SSSCA, we should be filing criminal and/or civil complaints where applicable. I think that should get the point across rather nicely...we should especially be doing this to members of the senate and congress. We can use their law against them. 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the senate floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on the tech sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. More cost is NOT something he wants right now. 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up and having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of the entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or even care, but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be a prime venue to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". In any case, I'm putting these up as food for thought. Broad spectrum petitions, letter writing and protests are definitely a good idea. My idea is to supplement those initiatives with direct political opposition to congresspersons who attempt this nature of law by opposing them in election with both political and media campaigns coupled with giving Disney the treatment we gave Adobe. Both at their stores, and large scale protests at their parks (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. That ought to hit them squarely in the pocketbook). I don't know about everybodies ability or inclination to take part in these actions, but I thought I'd pit them out in the open for discussion to see if we can add a bit of bite to our bark. tack ------------------------------------------ 1st Amendment: Void where prohibited http://freesklyarov.org http://www.anti-dmca.org From jono at microshaft.org Mon Sep 10 16:22:59 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OT: Paying For Content In-Reply-To: ; from FreeSklyarov@ZName.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 05:33:22PM -0500 References: Message-ID: <20010910162259.C5422@networkcommand.com> There is currently a boycott going on about this very issue: http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org/ Declaring Independence: http://www.arl.org/sparc/DI/ They are asking that the corporate science journals release the articles free to the public after 6 months. They have created a structure for Scientists to release their works in an organized and public fashion: http://www.openarchives.org Check them out ;). On 10-Sep-2001, James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov) wrote: > > Many newspapers offer current content for free, but charge for archive. > > Science Magazine is bucking the trend. > > It is now charging for online access to current content, but after 1 year, > articles are available for free, with registration. > > > http://www.ScienceMag.org > > > James S. Huggins > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 10 16:25:56 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010910162556.X10111@zork.net> tack writes: > Hey all, > > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't > passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. > > So I was thinking of some other forms of action and some interesting > applications of the ones we've been using. I would like to put them out > there for discussion, should others think they're good ideas. More in the > food for thought category. I think some of these don't work -- for example, > 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA > should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the senate > floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on the tech > sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. More cost is > NOT something he wants right now. I imagine Bush might be interested in a veto, but he doesn't have the opportunity until the bill is passed by both houses of Congress. -- 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 crism at maden.org Mon Sep 10 16:26:06 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010910162432.00a91a60@mail.maden.org> At 16:12 10-09-2001, tack wrote: >1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many >congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. They >pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so inclined and >are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend doing so. I'm sure >we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount of effort put into the >Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources for a fair shot. At least >it will get the word out. Imagine this issue going on every ballot in >your district. Perhaps, if not in his district, we could ask for advice >from Rep. Boucher? Someone (one of two people, but it's not completely settled yet) will be running in the 8th CA district who definitely opposes the DMCA. The first choice is someone who's been at Free Dmitry rallies, but may be moving out of the district. I will be running for 13th district CA State Assembly, but that has little influence over the DMCA, unfortunately. -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From krburger at burger-family.org Mon Sep 10 16:36:24 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action References: Message-ID: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> I dunno, but if this one gets passed, I'm leaving the US for another country. Probably one of the Scandanavian countries. I'll come back when the people are getting ready to start a civil war and join in that movement, but in the mean time I'm not going to live under that kind of tyranny. Once that step is taken there is NO limit to what the government can or can't do and any and all of our freedoms will likely be gone within 10-15 years of that. I will not live in a country with such oppressive laws. Laws which prohibit innovation by individuals and small businesses. I find it rather scary that America is supposed to be the beacon of freedom in the world yet we have the second most restrictive laws regarding Internet use in the world for first and second world countries. The first of course is China. I will not live in a country controlled by businesses. The constitution was NOT written for that. It was meant to create a government of the people for the people and by the people. What it is creating now is an aristocracy and I will NOT stand for it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "tack" To: Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:12 PM Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action > Hey all, > > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't > passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. > > So I was thinking of some other forms of action and some interesting > applications of the ones we've been using. I would like to put them out > there for discussion, should others think they're good ideas. More in the > food for thought category. > > 1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many > congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. They > pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so inclined and > are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend doing so. I'm sure > we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount of effort put into the > Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources for a fair shot. At least > it will get the word out. Imagine this issue going on every ballot in > your district. Perhaps, if not in his district, we could ask for advice > from Rep. Boucher? > > 2. Lets target the persons in question (Hatch, Feinstein, Hollings) and > start a fundraiser...maybe a-la linuxfund credit cards to act as a > war-chest to fund opposing candidates who are more sympathetic to civil > liberties. Maybe "Fair Use Fund" cards. At the very least, campaign ads > are a great way to get our message accross, even if not in support for a > candidate but to point out flaws of another. > > 3. A lot of us are content creators/copyright holders. If a judge, law > enforcement person or lawyer uses our content in the discharge of their > duties, and such use violates DMCA/SSSCA, we should be filing criminal > and/or civil complaints where applicable. I think that should get the > point across rather nicely...we should especially be doing this to > members of the senate and congress. We can use their law against them. > > 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA > should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the senate > floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on the tech > sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. More cost is > NOT something he wants right now. > > 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those > people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up and > having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of the > entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or even care, > but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be a prime venue > to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". > > In any case, I'm putting these up as food for thought. Broad spectrum > petitions, letter writing and protests are definitely a good idea. My > idea is to supplement those initiatives with direct political opposition > to congresspersons who attempt this nature of law by opposing them in > election with both political and media campaigns coupled with giving > Disney the treatment we gave Adobe. Both at their stores, and large scale > protests at their parks (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. > That ought to hit them squarely in the pocketbook). > > I don't know about everybodies ability or inclination to take part in > these actions, but I thought I'd pit them out in the open for discussion > to see if we can add a bit of bite to our bark. > > tack > > ------------------------------------------ > 1st Amendment: Void where prohibited > http://freesklyarov.org > http://www.anti-dmca.org > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 16:38:05 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Article: Manage Digital Rights, Don't Enforce Them In-Reply-To: ; from FreeSklyarov@ZName.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:14:30PM -0500 References: Message-ID: <20010910163805.B3257@navel.introspect> on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:14:30PM -0500, James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov) (FreeSklyarov@ZName.com) wrote: > > http://ecommerce.internet.com/news/insights/ectech/article/0,3371,10378_879711,00.html > > > I read the article. I'm not sure I understand the distinction it is > attempting to make. The article is pitching a weak watermarking technology, bundled with a "guilt 'em into compliance" scheme. It's aimed at opposing the current no-holds-barred attitude toward unauthorized content duplication. The social engineering attitude is a marginal improvement. The technology itself is likely flawed, for reasons already covered by Bruce Schneier and others WRT copy protection in general. Unfortunately, the DMCA gives criminal strength to enforcement against those who attempt circumvention: corporate strategy doesn't lessen criminal liabilities. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/75f92751/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Mon Sep 10 16:49:52 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, tack wrote: > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. You're right. The Congresspeople don't care at all. But the protests and petitions are there to educate the public at large. > 1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many > congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. > They pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so > inclined and are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend > doing so. I'm sure we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount > of effort put into the Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources > for a fair shot. At least it will get the word out. Imagine this > issue going on every ballot in your district. Perhaps, if not in his > district, we could ask for advice from Rep. Boucher? This is always a good idea. Unfortunately, in most districts there is at least one (and usually two... a Democrat and a Republican... sometimes a Libertarian) who is propped up by corporate money that you cannot match. It has been proven time and again that the one who spends the most money wins. > 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA > should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the > senate floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on > the tech sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. > More cost is NOT something he wants right now. Bush doesn't care about costs, the federal budget, or any of that stuff. Bush is there to provide for corporate interests overseas through the military and to eliminate as much public interest regulation as possible. Rich folks and corporations barely pay taxes anyway. The people will pick up the tab for any additional expenditures... and most of that money will go into the pockets of the media companies anyway. So if they can't get you at the movie theater, they'll get you at tax time. Either way, same people get the money. > 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those > people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up > and having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of > the entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or > even care, but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be > a prime venue to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". This would be a really good idea if Disney fans weren't so rabid. There's no way you're going to convince a forty year old woman in a Tigger T-shirt that Disney is evil... regardless of evidence. > (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. That ought to hit them > squarely in the pocketbook). I don't think you have the sense of proportion required here. You can't do anything to impact Disney's bottom line. They're profits are HUGE... and shutting down ALL of the theme parks for a WEEK won't make a difference to them. > I don't know about everybodies ability or inclination to take part in > these actions, but I thought I'd pit them out in the open for > discussion to see if we can add a bit of bite to our bark. Well, it's getting down to the wire. Our actions will become more desperate until we must truly rise up against our oppressors. I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From admin at seattle-chat.com Mon Sep 10 16:55:37 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:14 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: Message-ID: One problem at least in my area with picketing disney, is that they're inside a mall, and well that's trespassing on private propertie, it would have to be outside the mall. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of tack Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 4:13 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action Hey all, I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. So I was thinking of some other forms of action and some interesting applications of the ones we've been using. I would like to put them out there for discussion, should others think they're good ideas. More in the food for thought category. 1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. They pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so inclined and are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend doing so. I'm sure we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount of effort put into the Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources for a fair shot. At least it will get the word out. Imagine this issue going on every ballot in your district. Perhaps, if not in his district, we could ask for advice from Rep. Boucher? 2. Lets target the persons in question (Hatch, Feinstein, Hollings) and start a fundraiser...maybe a-la linuxfund credit cards to act as a war-chest to fund opposing candidates who are more sympathetic to civil liberties. Maybe "Fair Use Fund" cards. At the very least, campaign ads are a great way to get our message accross, even if not in support for a candidate but to point out flaws of another. 3. A lot of us are content creators/copyright holders. If a judge, law enforcement person or lawyer uses our content in the discharge of their duties, and such use violates DMCA/SSSCA, we should be filing criminal and/or civil complaints where applicable. I think that should get the point across rather nicely...we should especially be doing this to members of the senate and congress. We can use their law against them. 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the senate floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on the tech sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. More cost is NOT something he wants right now. 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up and having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of the entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or even care, but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be a prime venue to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". In any case, I'm putting these up as food for thought. Broad spectrum petitions, letter writing and protests are definitely a good idea. My idea is to supplement those initiatives with direct political opposition to congresspersons who attempt this nature of law by opposing them in election with both political and media campaigns coupled with giving Disney the treatment we gave Adobe. Both at their stores, and large scale protests at their parks (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. That ought to hit them squarely in the pocketbook). I don't know about everybodies ability or inclination to take part in these actions, but I thought I'd pit them out in the open for discussion to see if we can add a bit of bite to our bark. tack ------------------------------------------ 1st Amendment: Void where prohibited http://freesklyarov.org http://www.anti-dmca.org _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From dmarti at zgp.org Mon Sep 10 17:00:13 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> Message-ID: <20010910170013.A29186@zgp.org> begin Kenneth Burger quotation of Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 07:36:24PM -0400: > I dunno, but if this one gets passed, I'm leaving the US for another > country. Probably one of the Scandanavian countries. I'll come back when > the people are getting ready to start a civil war and join in that movement, > but in the mean time I'm not going to live under that kind of tyranny. That's one choice, but you can do a lot as a Federal prisoner. You can get visitors and send and receive postal mail. The US does not recognize "political prisoner" status but you may be able to get human rights organizations in other countries to designate you as one. Unfortunately you may not be able to pass along your genes as a prisoner, so it might be a good idea for a hacker, even one not in a relationship, to archive his/her ova or sperm. That way when you go to prison you and your spouse or lover on the outside can still decide to have a child if you want. Spending a few years in the relatively dorm-like surroundings of a Federal prison for nonviolent offenders is a hell of a lot less than many people have suffered for freedom. Would I go? I don't have the skills of a Dmitry Sklyarov or a Jon Johansen, but if somebody gave me useful new fair-use-enabling code to run in the magazine I work for, I would risk Federal time. (And the media loves journalist-in-prison stories.) -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti Free Dmitry: http://eff.org/ dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs: http://burnallgifs.org/ From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 10 17:04:18 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010910170418.B10111@zork.net> Charles Eakins writes: > One problem at least in my area with picketing disney, is that they're > inside a mall, and well that's trespassing on private propertie, it would > have to be outside the mall. The Disney store in San Francisco is wide-open, and I think the one in Boston is also surrounded by public property. -- 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 rabbi at quickie.net Mon Sep 10 17:08:27 2001 From: rabbi at quickie.net (Len Sassaman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] www.bookshare.org In-Reply-To: <20010910170418.B10111@zork.net> Message-ID: Hi folks. Quick question: Does anyone on this list have any cotacts with the people at Benetech, Arkenstone, or Bookshare.org? Thanks, Len -- Len Sassaman Security Architect | "I must play their game, of Technology Consultant | not seeing I see the game." | http://sion.quickie.net | --R .D. Laing From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 17:19:01 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Is Rep. Boucher's online-music licensing bill constitutional?] Message-ID: <20010910171901.D3957@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/cba352ed/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 18:01:59 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: ; from jeme@brelin.net on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:49:52PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010910180159.H3957@navel.introspect> on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:49:52PM -0700, Jeme A Brelin (jeme@brelin.net) wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, tack wrote: > > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. > > You're right. The Congresspeople don't care at all. > > But the protests and petitions are there to educate the public at large. > > 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those > > people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up > > and having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of > > the entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or > > even care, but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be > > a prime venue to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". > > This would be a really good idea if Disney fans weren't so rabid. There's > no way you're going to convince a forty year old woman in a Tigger T-shirt > that Disney is evil... regardless of evidence. Sure, let's just roll over and die. The Adobe protests weren't going to do anything either. So...why was it that I found myself walking backwards leading a group of some sixty protesters back to their HQ in San Jose this July, after we got a phone call from inside "Hey, psst, bring 'em back here, that's really helping". Companies are highly risk averse. Disney customers are also likely to be averse to walking through or past a crowd of people who are telling them that their rights to make and replay videos is in jeopardy. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/00f89456/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 18:03:50 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:55:37PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010910180349.A5357@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/948d8bd8/attachment.pgp From declan at well.com Mon Sep 10 17:54:19 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Would I have to pay for the Privilege In-Reply-To: <20010910103254.A27869@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 10:32:54AM -0700 References: <20010910103254.A27869@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010910205419.A6565@cluebot.com> Short answer, seems to me, to be "maybe." But only reasonable fees, whatever that means. -Declan On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 10:32:54AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 12:21:24PM -0400, Sean DuVally (sean@thefreevoice.org) wrote: > > Under the SSSCA, If I were to manufacture a interactive digital device, > > would I have to pay for a license for a certified security technology? > > Who would certify the this technology? Would it be something similar > > licensing from the DVD-CCA? Would this technology be proprietary? > > How would this effect Free Software? There are alot of things to > > think about. > > Under "reasonable and nondiscriminatory" licensing practices, very > likely there would be patent fees involved. > > Certification is by the Secretary of Commerce, as is detailed repeatedly > in the proposed bill. > > Cheers. > > -- > Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ > What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal > http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org > Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org > Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html From declan at well.com Mon Sep 10 18:05:06 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010910094926.B30650@lemuria.org>; from tom@lemuria.org on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:49:26AM +0200 References: <20010909232516.C17535@navel.introspect> <20010910094926.B30650@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010910210506.B6565@cluebot.com> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:49:26AM +0200, Tom wrote: > of course, the bill will never pass "Never" is a pretty strong word. See my Wired articles tomorrow and probably Wednesday for the DC view. -Declan From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Mon Sep 10 19:06:20 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 19:55:37 -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010910220620.E10388@www2> <> Oh That's good thinking. We were lazy and didn't pay attention as our rights were stripped away before, so now we should further ignor our democratics rights to petition congress, organize, and run canidates, and just just what? See that's were it falls apart. If the DMCA is passed against your interest, it's time to look in the mirror and discover why. Keep protesting everyone but the people who actually VOTE on the issue. That's the fastest way to political action. Do you know the great reformer Al Smith in NY, was a member in good standing of the Boss Tween, Tamny Hall political machine. Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From sisgeek at yahoo.com Mon Sep 10 19:24:06 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010910210506.B6565@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010911022406.38567.qmail@web13908.mail.yahoo.com> i have seen them blithesomely pass legislation far more repressive to individual rights than the s3ca!! i chalk most of it up to the politicians whoring for their patrons. fortunately, most courts strike the legislation down before it causes to much harm. (but not always:( the political whores with any conscientious left usually hope the legislation is struck down, thereby getting their money for the trick and still able to live with themselves. --- Declan McCullagh wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:49:26AM +0200, Tom wrote: > > of course, the bill will never pass > > "Never" is a pretty strong word. > > See my Wired articles tomorrow and probably > Wednesday for the DC view. > > -Declan > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From sisgeek at yahoo.com Mon Sep 10 19:32:29 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <20010910170418.B10111@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010911023229.61633.qmail@web13902.mail.yahoo.com> the store in sf would be a great target (not sundays the fur protesters:) because it has such international traffic! the street cars go by every 15 min full of tourists so messages are viewed and read by many around the world:) it is a tourist's shopping mecca, also. --- Seth David Schoen wrote: > Charles Eakins writes: > > > One problem at least in my area with picketing > disney, is that they're > > inside a mall, and well that's trespassing on > private propertie, it would > > have to be outside the mall. > > The Disney store in San Francisco is wide-open, and > I think the one in > Boston is also surrounded by public property. > > -- > 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) > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From spector at zeitgeist.com Mon Sep 10 19:46:49 2001 From: spector at zeitgeist.com (David HM Spector) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:24:06 PDT." <20010911022406.38567.qmail@web13908.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200109110246.f8B2kns20357@thx1138.ny.zeitgeist.com> alfee cube writes... >i have seen them blithesomely pass legislation far >more repressive to individual rights than the s3ca!! > >i chalk most of it up to the politicians whoring for >their patrons. fortunately, most courts strike the >legislation down before it causes to much harm. (but >not always:( > >the political whores with any conscientious left >usually hope the legislation is struck down, thereby >getting their money for the trick and still able to >live with themselves. Uh-huh...And look how quickly the DMCA has been struck down! This is a bad way to look at these things, laws are rarely struck down, and if parts of them are, the remainder of the law remains in effect. The only way to stop this is to get on the phone and write letters en-mass to your congress people. Buy some stock in the companies pushing this crap and start complaining to the shareholder hotlines. Start writing articles and editorials for your local paper. If you're just too busy/lazy/bored to do any of that, then give money to the EFF. Do SOMETHING!!!!! Laws like the DMCA and the SSSCA are the "Nuremberg Laws" for programmers, scientists and intellectuals. If you want them to come to pass, just keep quiet... ``... In Germany they first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me-and by that time no one was left to speak up...'' Pastor Martin Niemoller There never was a more appropriate quote for our age if you really look at what's going on here. Perhaps we should add: "Then they came for the programmers...." _DHMS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David HM Spector spector@zeitgeist.com/spector@dropzonenetworks.com President & Co-founder voice: +1 631.261.5013 DropZone Networks,LLc From sisgeek at yahoo.com Mon Sep 10 20:01:10 2001 From: sisgeek at yahoo.com (alfee cube) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA seq uel: The SSSCA (fwd) In-Reply-To: <1E50F10694062B4D922862B413D01C9E05F8@efuelmail.efuel.com> Message-ID: <20010911030110.67285.qmail@web13902.mail.yahoo.com> no dont go:) individuals are just now in a position to hold our whores (i mean politicians) accountable! i have been so encouraged by the number of individuals who are intent on doing just that! the politicians (i mean whores) are still staggering around trying to deal with how to remain whores in a period of instantaneous communications where their tricks are known by all, instantaneously! hell the best hollings spokesman can do is: he's been kicking it around? you know he's thinking: hell they already know im gettin ready to do another trick! --- "Larma, Mark" wrote: > I saw a lot of mails flying around today--now I know > why (finally had a > chance to read them). > > What are they trying to pull? That is my question. > Scandinavia is looking > better everyday... > > -----Original Message----- > From: alfee cube [mailto:sisgeek@yahoo.com] > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 4:15 PM > To: Jay Sulzberger; free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Sen. Hollings plans > to introduce DMCA > sequel: The SSSCA (fwd) > > today our government would preach to the chinese for > such a barbaric proposal while passing legislation > requiring the manufacturers of paper and pens to tag > and trace both. (or dictate how to manufacture the > paper and ink so both functioned as desired by the > government.) > > ... while alleging "they" were protecting "us" from > "them" or some secret evil which "they" cannot > disclose to "us" for fear of "them"! > > > > --- Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:12:09 -0700 > > From: jamesd@echeque.com > > To: Carsten Kuckuk , Jay Sulzberger > > > > Cc: Declan McCullagh , > > cryptography@wasabisystems.com, > > Jay Sulzberger > > Subject: Re: Sen. Hollings plans to introduce DMCA > > sequel: The SSSCA > > > > -- > > On 10 Sep 2001, at 0:26, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > > All "interactive digital" systems that directly > > connect to the > > > net will have to licensed. Most that do not > > connect directly > > > will also have to be licensed. License costs > will > > be high > > > enough so that only a few large companies can > > afford them. > > > Individuals will not be allowed to assemble > > components to make > > > a computer for themselves, unless they spend > > millions on a > > > license, and wait some months for the paperwork > to > > go through. > > > > When the chinese invented paper, the government > > eventually > > decided that this led to dangerous communication > of > > dangerous > > thoughts, and prohibited private production of > > paper. It made > > paper making a state secret, and castrated all > paper > > makers so > > that the secret would not be passed from father to > > son, but only > > transmitted in government approved channels. > > Thereafter paper > > was used only to transmit government approved > > thoughts through > > government channels, and to the populace. > > > > Computers are similarly dangerous. > > > > --digsig > > James A. Donald > > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > > pEyJYvluyMSWgNZ7GAkKeNzQ3mshy+SsKVJ/wMhs > > 4sKLUftGKcn9X/CXUOs7SZPnTiZHI8M0IpiNhuyx6 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant > messaging with Yahoo! Messenger > http://im.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > eFuel E-Mail Confidentiality Disclaimer: > The information contained in this e-mail is > privileged and confidential and > is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) > indicated above. Use or > disclosure of information e-mailed in error is > respectfully prohibited. If > have received this e-mail in error, please contact > the sender and > immediately delete the original message. Thank you. > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com From mlc67 at columbia.edu Mon Sep 10 20:04:39 2001 From: mlc67 at columbia.edu (mike castleman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org>; from krburger@burger-family.org on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 07:36:24PM -0400 References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> Message-ID: <20010910230439.D10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 07:36:24PM -0400, Kenneth Burger wrote: > I dunno, but if this one gets passed, I'm leaving the US for another > country. Probably one of the Scandanavian countries. I'll come > back when the people are getting ready to start a civil war and join > in that movement, but in the mean time I'm not going to live under > that kind of tyranny. What'll that accomplish? This is flawed reasoning; there are two arguments I can make -- pick the one you feel is more convincing: - We should work to change the laws of the place where we are. Surely we can learn from other countries and what they do well, but in the end, running away from our problems is not the best way to solve them. In any event, not everyone can afford (monetarily or in other ways) to just pick emself up and move to another country. - No place on Earth is going to be much better in terms of DMCA/SSSCA. In Sweden, for example, a video store was prosecuted because it sold Region 1 DVDs. Not pirated or anything like that; merely meant for the "wrong" part of the world. With WIPO, WTO, and similar organizations, these problems are becoming global. Running to Scandinavia is no escape. -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/4f4b2adb/attachment.pgp From jono at microshaft.org Mon Sep 10 20:10:48 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <20010910230439.D10357@pinetree.columbia.edu>; from mlc67@columbia.edu on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 11:04:39PM -0400 References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <20010910230439.D10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: <20010910201048.I6566@networkcommand.com> Furthermore, it seems like we all understand these laws are being bought by the politicians. Therefore, besides voting the best way to control them is to control their money. We need to reform how they run for office so their alligence is with US no the Corporations. You want a hand delivered letter to the President? You want someone to carry that DiBona letter signed by everyone to the person who MUST read it? Give it to Jeanette, send her a couple bucks too: http://www.thewalkfordemocracy.org/ On 10-Sep-2001, mike castleman wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 07:36:24PM -0400, Kenneth Burger wrote: > > I dunno, but if this one gets passed, I'm leaving the US for another > > country. Probably one of the Scandanavian countries. I'll come > > back when the people are getting ready to start a civil war and join > > in that movement, but in the mean time I'm not going to live under > > that kind of tyranny. > > What'll that accomplish? This is flawed reasoning; there are two > arguments I can make -- pick the one you feel is more convincing: > > - We should work to change the laws of the place where we are. Surely > we can learn from other countries and what they do well, but in the > end, running away from our problems is not the best way to solve > them. In any event, not everyone can afford (monetarily or in other > ways) to just pick emself up and move to another country. > > - No place on Earth is going to be much better in terms of > DMCA/SSSCA. In Sweden, for example, a video store was prosecuted > because it sold Region 1 DVDs. Not pirated or anything like that; > merely meant for the "wrong" part of the world. With WIPO, WTO, and > similar organizations, these problems are becoming global. Running > to Scandinavia is no escape. > > -- > // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu > // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us > // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 > // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ From spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com Mon Sep 10 20:11:59 2001 From: spiderwoman at spiderwomanwebdesign.com (Spiderwoman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> Message-ID: <00cc01c13a6f$8616b320$657ba8c0@Home> I hear you loud and clear BUT....what did people do in 1776? They went home, got their guns and "bought" their freedom. We might have to go some other country to muster our forces tho.....let me know where you go and perhaps, we can at least build a community of like minded "expatriates". Later, Mary E. Dixon P.S. I almost feel that someone will be knocking on my door to haul me off after saying what I just said. ....:-( ________________________________________________________________________ Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant | Spiderwoman Web Design, Graphics, IT Services http://www.marykay.com/mdixon9 | http://www.spiderwomanwebdesign.com 770-955-0882 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth Burger" To: Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:36 PM Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] courses of action > I dunno, but if this one gets passed, I'm leaving the US for another > country. Probably one of the Scandanavian countries. I'll come back when > the people are getting ready to start a civil war and join in that movement, > but in the mean time I'm not going to live under that kind of tyranny. Once > that step is taken there is NO limit to what the government can or can't do > and any and all of our freedoms will likely be gone within 10-15 years of > that. I will not live in a country with such oppressive laws. Laws which > prohibit innovation by individuals and small businesses. I find it rather > scary that America is supposed to be the beacon of freedom in the world yet > we have the second most restrictive laws regarding Internet use in the world > for first and second world countries. The first of course is China. I will > not live in a country controlled by businesses. The constitution was NOT > written for that. It was meant to create a government of the people for > the people and by the people. What it is creating now is an aristocracy and > I will NOT stand for it. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "tack" > To: > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:12 PM > Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action > > > > Hey all, > > > > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't > > passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. > > > > So I was thinking of some other forms of action and some interesting > > applications of the ones we've been using. I would like to put them out > > there for discussion, should others think they're good ideas. More in the > > food for thought category. > > > > 1. If the man will not listen to us, we should become the man. Many > > congresspersons run for reelection unopposed in their districts. They > > pretty much get reelected by default. If you happen to be so inclined and > > are in a position to run for US Congress, I reccomend doing so. I'm sure > > we can all help each other out. Seeing the amount of effort put into the > > Free Dmitry movement, we may have the resources for a fair shot. At least > > it will get the word out. Imagine this issue going on every ballot in > > your district. Perhaps, if not in his district, we could ask for advice > > from Rep. Boucher? > > > > 2. Lets target the persons in question (Hatch, Feinstein, Hollings) and > > start a fundraiser...maybe a-la linuxfund credit cards to act as a > > war-chest to fund opposing candidates who are more sympathetic to civil > > liberties. Maybe "Fair Use Fund" cards. At the very least, campaign ads > > are a great way to get our message accross, even if not in support for a > > candidate but to point out flaws of another. > > > > 3. A lot of us are content creators/copyright holders. If a judge, law > > enforcement person or lawyer uses our content in the discharge of their > > duties, and such use violates DMCA/SSSCA, we should be filing criminal > > and/or civil complaints where applicable. I think that should get the > > point across rather nicely...we should especially be doing this to > > members of the senate and congress. We can use their law against them. > > > > 4. A letter writing campaign urging President Bush to veto the SSSCA > > should it come to him for approval, before the bill even hits the senate > > floor. This should also emphasize the impact it will have on the tech > > sector, and how much extra it would take out of the budget. More cost is > > NOT something he wants right now. > > > > 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those > > people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up and > > having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of the > > entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or even care, > > but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be a prime venue > > to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". > > > > In any case, I'm putting these up as food for thought. Broad spectrum > > petitions, letter writing and protests are definitely a good idea. My > > idea is to supplement those initiatives with direct political opposition > > to congresspersons who attempt this nature of law by opposing them in > > election with both political and media campaigns coupled with giving > > Disney the treatment we gave Adobe. Both at their stores, and large scale > > protests at their parks (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. > > That ought to hit them squarely in the pocketbook). > > > > I don't know about everybodies ability or inclination to take part in > > these actions, but I thought I'd pit them out in the open for discussion > > to see if we can add a bit of bite to our bark. > > > > tack > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > 1st Amendment: Void where prohibited > > http://freesklyarov.org > > http://www.anti-dmca.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 mlc67 at columbia.edu Mon Sep 10 20:18:13 2001 From: mlc67 at columbia.edu (mike castleman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: ; from jeme@brelin.net on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:49:52PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010910231813.E10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:49:52PM -0700, Jeme A Brelin wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, tack wrote: > > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. > > You're right. The Congresspeople don't care at all. > > But the protests and petitions are there to educate the public at large. Congresscritters can sometimes be made to care, if enough of their constituents do. My congressperson always responds to almost every letter I write him, because e thinks that if eir responses will make me happy, and that I will therefore vote for em in the next election. When your job is up for reelection every two years, this is important. Now, I myself cannot make my congressperson do anything e wouldn't normally do, but enough constituents actually can. Educating the public at large can, of course, be even more important. > > This is always a good idea. Unfortunately, in most districts there is at > least one (and usually two... a Democrat and a Republican... sometimes a > Libertarian) who is propped up by corporate money that you cannot match. > > It has been proven time and again that the one who spends the most money > wins. Not always, but often enough. A candidate with a little less money can sometimes win, but a candidate with way less money usually cannot (though there are exceptions). > > 5. Protests at Disney stores to counter SSSCA. "Mommy, why are those > > people shouting"? I think it's a grave enough law to mandate just up > > and having a sit in, sans permits if that's the only way, in front of > > the entry to the store. Most peole don't even know who Adobe is or > > even care, but they sure know what Disney is, and care. This would be > > a prime venue to distribute Stallman's "Right to read". > > This would be a really good idea if Disney fans weren't so rabid. There's > no way you're going to convince a forty year old woman in a Tigger T-shirt > that Disney is evil... regardless of evidence. Then why does Reverend Billy, of the Church of Stop Shopping, spend so much time preaching in Disney Stores and Starbucks? Because they are the logical places to begin the revolution against Disney Stores and Starbucks. See also my comment below. > > (IE...sit in at their gates to DOS the park. That ought to hit them > > squarely in the pocketbook). > > I don't think you have the sense of proportion required here. > > You can't do anything to impact Disney's bottom line. They're profits are > HUGE... and shutting down ALL of the theme parks for a WEEK won't make a > difference to them. Shutting down all Disney theme parks for a week would certainly make a difference to Disney and their profits. (You don't believe me? Try it!) But, even more importantly, it would attract tremendous media attention. It would embarrass Disney thoroughly, especially if the protestors were allowed to present their case. (Not always likely, especially since Disney owns the media.) Although, I think it would be quite difficult to close down Disney World. If we have the grassroots power to accomplish that, there are probably more effective things that we should do first. It would be tremendous fun, though... mike -- // mike castleman, mlc67@columbia.edu // current location: columbia university, new york, ny, us // ph: +1 (646) 382-7220 // FREE DMITRY! See http://freesklyarov.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/869bf76d/attachment.pgp From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Mon Sep 10 20:49:20 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <00cc01c13a6f$8616b320$657ba8c0@Home>; from spiderwoman@spiderwomanwebdesign.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 23:11:59 -0400 References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <00cc01c13a6f$8616b320$657ba8c0@Home> Message-ID: <20010910234920.A11443@www2> << They went home, got their guns and "bought" their freedom. >> Actually This is a poor comparison. ie: The American Revolution A- the Brittish were a fpriegn occupation force B- American Representation in the Government was limited C- Most people didn't fight and there were a HUGE number of loyalists -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From krburger at burger-family.org Mon Sep 10 20:49:31 2001 From: krburger at burger-family.org (Kenneth Burger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <20010910230253.C10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> Message-ID: <008f01c13a74$c36862a0$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> I can tell you the only way that's going to settle our first gradual, now rapid loss of rights and freedoms is when a civil war breaks out and someone with some sense puts the country back the way it ought to be. Politicians don't care about us anymore, nor do they care about what we think. Some could care less if they get reelected because they already have golden parachutes made for them by the large businesses they've been helping. Don't get me wrong. I don't advocate violence as a way to solve problems, but historically that's been the only way that's actually solved problems at least for a time. Every country starts getting corrupted officials and then it escalates and gets worse, till finally people get fed up and say "ENOUGH". I hope this does magically turn around from our efforts, but you've got to face reality. If this measure passes then our government has just slapped us in the face with a gauntlet and said that they don't give a damn what we want because we can't give them millions of dollars to fill their wallets like the MPAA and the RIAA can. That point is pretty much the point of no return. From there it's open season on the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. I can just see it now. Former employees prohibited from speaking ill of their old companies because they might accidentally give away a trade secret. Never mind that they probably won't because they COULD and that's all that matters. Our rights have been spiraling down the drain ever since I can remember and I doubt it's going to stop any time soon. I'll keep writing letters and protesting and telling everyone I can, but eventually it's not going to work anymore and I don't know what I'll do then, but I'm sure as hell not going to stand around and be oppressed. I'll go live on some secluded island somewhere if I have to, but I aint going to stay somewhere with a government like that. From jono at microshaft.org Mon Sep 10 21:04:45 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <008f01c13a74$c36862a0$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org>; from krburger@burger-family.org on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 11:49:31PM -0400 References: <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <20010910230253.C10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> <008f01c13a74$c36862a0$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> Message-ID: <20010910210445.M6566@networkcommand.com> FYI: Bring Down DMCA/SSSCA? Simple... http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2001/9/8/126/20924/75#75 IT Workers General Walkout http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2001/9/8/126/20924/113#113 Looks like a couple hours ought to be effective. I wonder how many machines will experience bit rot during that time? Do you guys think this type of thing would work. Could it be organized? On 10-Sep-2001, Kenneth Burger wrote: > I can tell you the only way that's going to settle our first gradual, now > rapid loss of rights and freedoms is when a civil war breaks out and someone > with some sense puts the country back the way it ought to be. Politicians > don't care about us anymore, nor do they care about what we think. Some > could care less if they get reelected because they already have golden > parachutes made for them by the large businesses they've been helping. > Don't get me wrong. I don't advocate violence as a way to solve problems, > but historically that's been the only way that's actually solved problems at > least for a time. Every country starts getting corrupted officials and then > it escalates and gets worse, till finally people get fed up and say > "ENOUGH". I hope this does magically turn around from our efforts, but > you've got to face reality. If this measure passes then our government has > just slapped us in the face with a gauntlet and said that they don't give a > damn what we want because we can't give them millions of dollars to fill > their wallets like the MPAA and the RIAA can. That point is pretty much the > point of no return. From there it's open season on the Constitution, > including the Bill of Rights. I can just see it now. Former employees > prohibited from speaking ill of their old companies because they might > accidentally give away a trade secret. Never mind that they probably won't > because they COULD and that's all that matters. Our rights have been > spiraling down the drain ever since I can remember and I doubt it's going to > stop any time soon. I'll keep writing letters and protesting and telling > everyone I can, but eventually it's not going to work anymore and I don't > know what I'll do then, but I'm sure as hell not going to stand around and > be oppressed. I'll go live on some secluded island somewhere if I have to, > but I aint going to stay somewhere with a government like that. > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From declan at well.com Mon Sep 10 21:04:58 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] SSSCA - Analysis (Q&D) In-Reply-To: <20010911022406.38567.qmail@web13908.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20010910210506.B6565@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010911000438.021045e0@mail.well.com> At 07:24 PM 9/10/01 -0700, alfee cube wrote: >i chalk most of it up to the politicians whoring for >their patrons. fortunately, most courts strike the >legislation down before it causes to much harm. This is, unfortunately, almost entirely incorrect. -Declan From declan at well.com Mon Sep 10 21:59:59 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:15 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <20010910180159.H3957@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:01:59PM -0700 References: <20010910180159.H3957@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010911005958.B20918@cluebot.com> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:01:59PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > The Adobe protests weren't going to do anything either. So...why was it > that I found myself walking backwards leading a group of some sixty > protesters back to their HQ in San Jose this July, after we got a phone > call from inside "Hey, psst, bring 'em back here, that's really > helping". Unfortunately 60 people marching on Capitol Hill won't even get you noticed. (Capitol Hill is actually a pretty big place, perhaps 10 blocks by 10 blocks for the portions we care about.) If you get 6,000 people, the Washington Post may run a story buried inside the Metro Section. Get 60,000, and it's the front page of the Metro section. 600,000 and it's on the front page of the A section. DC works by different rules than Silicon Valley. Since congresscritters do controversial things all the time (half are pro-life, the other are pro-choice), they're inured to protests. -Declan From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Mon Sep 10 22:02:06 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <20010911005958.B20918@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 00:59:59 -0400 References: <20010910180159.H3957@navel.introspect> <20010911005958.B20918@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010911010206.C12367@www2> Ditto NYC <>> -Declan _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From moeller at scireview.de Mon Sep 10 22:07:53 2001 From: moeller at scireview.de (Erik Moeller) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A new political party (IDP) Message-ID: <3B9DB849.9441.2AA456C@localhost> I have been tinkering with plans for a new political party for a while. I don't have any formal proposal yet, but I guess I could just throw a few ideas to you guys. 1) Why? It should be apparent that the current political system is fundamentally corrupt, externally and internally. This is mainly a problem of imperfect information channels, a lack of bottom-up decision making and intransparency, combined with powerful corporate and financial bodies that do only act in their own interest. Recent experience has shown that even substantial media coverage alone is not enough to influence politics in a meaningful manner -- politicians go where the money is. Fixing the political system itself should therefore be a priority. 2) How? An "International Democratic Party" should be created that uses technology for the purpose of truly democratic decision-making processes. All decisions should be mediated through to-be-designed technological interfaces, where every registered party member (registration is free) can vote on a given issue, or contribute material on that issue that may be of interest to other voters. People can rate contributions, or rate other people, so that good ideas rise to the top and trusted contributors are recognized as such. People can change their vote on anything at any time. When new evidence is added to a proposal, party members should be able to notice that through the interfaces to the proposal and be able to immediately change their vote respectively (e.g. "New paper in Proposals-Copyright" or "Party member X accepted contributions from Y"). Core values There should be a set of core values that determine the general direction of the party and which are only changed with a strong majority (e.g. 75%) vote. In my vision, these values would be similar to those of the US Green Party, with a strong technological/scientific bent and more emphasis on individual liberty. (Specific issues like copyright should not be in the set of core values, but rather be voted upon by party members.) Internationality It would be a goal to set this party up in as many countries as possible, and to communicate internationally to exchange ideas and visions. (Language for international communications would be English.) Local action The party should support and coordinate local political grassroots movements and should report the results. It should assist activists and provide them with information. Party members should act as information mediators to people without access to the Internet. Marketing A wide range of activities should be targeted to make the party as widely known as possible. First of all, its own interfaces should be an active community and attractive starting point. Second, it should try to use viral marketing techniques to get its "brand" literally everywhere, offline and online, from signatures to link directories, from IRC channels to bumper stickers, leaflets and T-shirts. As its brand will be the direct starting point to start getting politically active, this is of essential importance. Third, party members who are also activists will try to use their activities as a grassroots marketing tool for the party itself. Fourth, party members will constantly try to get into the traditional media in order to get as much coverage of party activities as possible. Party name itself should potentially be a domain name, or other type of network address. Fifth, party should focus on getting as many long-term members as possible, as these will also determine its voter base. Party should target people from all political spectrums. Decentralization and security In order to avoid censorship and corruption and to maximize reliability and security, all tools and interfaces used by the IDP should be decentralized as much as possible. This means that, where possible, peer-to-peer networks should be used over client-server networks, that all technology must be open and changeable, and that administration itself must be spread over as many heads as possible. Security must be guaranteed through adequate technical measures. Legal recognition The party can operate before being legally recognized as a political party, but it should be a goal to reach this status as soon as possible. Contributions Basic party membership should be free to encourage wide participation, but various kinds of contribution should be encouraged, over various payment channels, mainly rewarded by additional status recognition within the interfaces, but although through many other reward mechanisms which are known to people familiar with "gift economy" ideas. 3) Be media and politics The IDP would try to be both media and politics at the same time. Through its various communication channels, it would try to represent, voice and influence public opinion, and through its growing political influence, it would directly try to attain its various goals. It would also have growing access to traditional media. 4) Implementation My current plans are to formulate a set of core values and then work on the interfaces (especially security aspects). But now that I have shared the very basic idea and reasonably hinted at the core values, perhaps interest is already there in cooperating. What do you think, should we create a mailing list and start working on it together? Depending on the input I get here, I might formulate a larger "starting document" and disperse it more widely. Too big a goal? It may be asked whether this is too big a goal, but I think eventually it, or something like it, must be started to restore (or create, depending on how you see it) democracy and bring and maintain peace. It seems only logical for it to start in the technical community, as it will be the tools developed by this community that are necessary to guarantee its functioning. "IDP" is not "yet another party" but a fundamentally new concept that has not yet been tried because the tools were not there. If success of other "new" parties is any measure, it should at least be possible to become a permanent and recognizable voice for freedom. Regards, Erik -- Scientific Reviewer, Freelancer, Humanist -- Berlin/Germany Phone: +49-30-45491008 - Web: The Origins of Peace and Violence: "If we don't improve our ability to deal collectively with complex things, as the problems grow more urgent, we're in trouble." - Douglas Engelbart From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 10 22:26:18 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] courses of action In-Reply-To: <20010911005958.B20918@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 12:59:59AM -0400 References: <20010910180159.H3957@navel.introspect> <20010911005958.B20918@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010910222617.A8922@navel.introspect> on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 12:59:59AM -0400, Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:01:59PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > The Adobe protests weren't going to do anything either. So...why was it > > that I found myself walking backwards leading a group of some sixty > > protesters back to their HQ in San Jose this July, after we got a phone > > call from inside "Hey, psst, bring 'em back here, that's really > > helping". > > Unfortunately 60 people marching on Capitol Hill won't even get you > noticed. (Capitol Hill is actually a pretty big place, perhaps 10 > blocks by 10 blocks for the portions we care about.) If you get 6,000 > people, the Washington Post may run a story buried inside the Metro > Section. Get 60,000, and it's the front page of the Metro > section. 600,000 and it's on the front page of the A section. Congress keeps its till well away from the front steps to boot. And yeah, I finally made it to DC this summer, I've got a feel for the lay of the land. But I really wasn't talking about political protests, I'm talking about corporate ones. Companies, and consumers, are far more risk averse than legislators (at least at the national level). A protest in front of Disney, timed in the last few weeks of November and December, will make headlines, and impact profits. Particularly in a dry year. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010910/2b01bcec/attachment.pgp From robertl1 at home.com Mon Sep 10 23:48:38 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] It won't happen In-Reply-To: <20010910210445.M6566@networkcommand.com> References: <008f01c13a74$c36862a0$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <004001c13a51$67788c40$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> <20010910230253.C10357@pinetree.columbia.edu> <008f01c13a74$c36862a0$0800a8c0@burgerfamily.org> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010910225115.025416e0@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 09:04 PM 9/10/01 -0700, you wrote: >FYI: > >Bring Down DMCA/SSSCA? Simple... >http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2001/9/8/126/20924/75#75 > >IT Workers General Walkout >http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2001/9/8/126/20924/113#113 > >Looks like a couple hours ought to be effective. I wonder how >many machines will experience bit rot during that time? Do you >guys think this type of thing would work. Could it be organized? NO. My own experience is that the vast majority of programmers and system admins are really very passive when it comes to expressing themselves politically. Especially if they would have to take any real personal risk. Doubly especially if their jobs were involved. It is a crew for the most part with very little in the way of balls. Do they have the power? Yes, of course, obviously the system admins could damn near turn the world off. Will they exercise that power, no way. Not in my lifetime. The message in the first url ends as follows: So the answer to all this mess is simple. You just gotta ask yourself how much your rights mean to you. Are you willing to practice a little civil disobedience at very little risk to yourselves to gain government's total attention? Are you willing to stay home from work for a day or a week and change the course of history? It may not be time for it just yet, but seems to me the time to put up or shut up is quite near... Programmers unfortunately will shut up. Certainly they will not act. A few letters, maybe the really radicalized will go to a march or two. That is about it. But shutdown the corporate webserver? No way Jose. You will be lucky to get 1% of the computer elite to participate. These folks, wonderful humans though they may be, are simply cogs in the machine, and cogs do not ask questions. Good cogs certainly do not stop the machine. The Open Source Convention in San Diego this year was a good example of the passivity I am referring to. In the early stages of the Free Dimitry movement the place was like watching zombies at work. Let the EFF do it was ESR's remark and could well have been a slogan that described the entire crew. So no matter how inEFFectual the EFF is, that is how, even the most radical of the programming community, will react. They are, after all, programmers and system admins, not politicians. The wars they are used to fighting are of a very different character and most geeks learned in early childhood to avoid these "political" wars they could not win. Thus even when they have power and could win they carry within themselves the mentality of a political loser and will not pick up the battle. The computer elite for the most part does not even begin to understand the true power they have as a group and will not even begin to think about collective exercise of that power anytime soon. Why? Because they are not truly willing to confront authority directly and assert themselves and their moral authority. In simpler terms, they just have neither the moral vision nor the balls it takes to fight this battle. I thank God that it was not programmers driving the civil rights movement or the anti-war movent of a previous generation. Had that been so we would still have Jim Crow and the war would have never ended. Does that mean the fight is lost? Not necessarily. I just would not count on the bulk of the computing community to perform a lot of heroics. Our path to winning this one depends upon allies from other fights for freedom who understand in a much more visceral way just what is involved. These are the people to whom we must turn our attention. Bob La Quey From jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 11 00:07:29 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] In pieces: No CDs for Brooks promo Message-ID: <20010911000729.Y6566@networkcommand.com> Boy, they move fast. ----- Forwarded message ----- To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: [DMCA_discuss] (no subject) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:56:00 -0700 ---- Yahoo Story ---- LOS ANGELES (The Hollywood Reporter) --- Garth Brooks recordings will be the testing ground for a new procedure that may result in the demise of radio, promotional and review copies of CDs. Authenticated users, as determined by EMI Recorded Music, will be sent digital files of the Capitol Records Nashville artist's forthcoming single "Beer Run (B Double E Double Are You In?)" over the Internet. Security and other technologies are from BayView Systems. For the full story, go to: http://rd.yahoo.com/alerts/email/news/*http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/bpihw/20010910/en/in_pieces_no_cds_for_brooks_promo_1.html ---- ------ _______________________________________________ ------------------------ 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 jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 11 00:11:40 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] In pieces: No CDs for Brooks promo In-Reply-To: <20010911000729.Y6566@networkcommand.com>; from jono@microshaft.org on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 12:07:29AM -0700 References: <20010911000729.Y6566@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010911001140.A6566@networkcommand.com> Oh boy: "Not only does this protect content from leaking out, but it also provides tracking," Samit said. "You can keep track of how it was used, when it was used, where it was used -- imagine, in the future you could find out when a track was played on the air even on college radio." He does not believe that there will be any backlash from the thousands of programmers, critics and other people deprived of receiving the actual CD. "I don't foresee any difficulty," Samit said. "In some ways, I think this will even be more convenient for them." On 11-Sep-2001, Jon O . wrote: > > Boy, they move fast. > > ----- Forwarded message ----- > > To: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org > Cc: it_union@lists.microshaft.org > Subject: [DMCA_discuss] (no subject) > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:56:00 -0700 > > > ---- Yahoo Story ---- > > LOS ANGELES (The Hollywood Reporter) --- Garth Brooks recordings will be the testing ground for a new procedure that may result in the demise of radio, promotional and review copies of CDs. > > Authenticated users, as determined by EMI Recorded Music, will be sent digital files of the Capitol Records Nashville artist's forthcoming single "Beer Run (B Double E Double Are You In?)" over the Internet. Security and other technologies are from BayView Systems. > > For the full story, go to: > http://rd.yahoo.com/alerts/email/news/*http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/bpihw/20010910/en/in_pieces_no_cds_for_brooks_promo_1.html > > ---- ------ > _______________________________________________ > > > ------------------------ > 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 ----- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Tue Sep 11 00:43:58 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] It won't happen In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010910225115.025416e0@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: > My own experience is that the vast majority of programmers > and system admins are really very passive when it comes to expressing > themselves politically. Nothing a little jail time couldn't cure. > Do they have the power? Yes, of course, obviously the system admins > could damn near turn the world off. Will they exercise that power, > no way. Not in my lifetime. Though a shared opinion of this group is a political force. > Are you willing to practice a little civil disobedience You were on it with "turn the world off". > Are you willing to stay home from work for a day or a > week and change the course of history? A Sys Admin strike! There'd be no presses to print the headline! > Programmers unfortunately will shut up. Certainly they will not act. You shut up! > You will be lucky to get 1% of the computer elite to participate. That's too bad cuz the tactic needs, like, 100%. I ain't out yet, though. > Good cogs certainly do not stop the machine. Quit yawning! > In the early stages of the Free Dimitry > movement the place was like watching zombies at work. Let the EFF do it > was ESR's remark and could well have been a slogan that described the > entire crew. There are whole other interpretations of his reply. It takes time to communicate outside the OS. I think our message is transforming, and that it takes leadership and heart for a movement. But the heart of man is there in sysadmins. And programmers, I think, have a particular kinship with this incredible man, Sklyarov. That he said "let the EFF handle it" says he's not a lawyer. But who can say if he himself contributes to this vital thrust of our defense. All we can ask, as we build our movement, is have we. They are the greatest hope of our shared political passions. > The wars they are used > to fighting are of a very different character and most geeks learned in > early childhood to avoid these "political" wars they could not win. We just agreed this force could stop the world. Where's your moxy? > even when they have power and could win they carry within themselves the > mentality of a political loser and will not pick up the battle. We can touch them with flashes of duty and sacrifice, for the Union and World. And innocent men like themselves--made heroes and martyrs by events--losing in fury at the line. > The computer elite for the most part does not even begin to understand > the true power they have as a group Well the rich ones get around. But never underestimate the power of shared destiny. > Because they > are not truly willing to confront authority directly and assert themselves > and their moral authority. That'd be a roll in the dirt. > In simpler terms, they just have neither > the moral vision nor the balls it takes to fight this battle. No way, Jose! We're in it either way, so I'm rooting for us. > I thank God that it was not programmers driving the civil rights movement > or the anti-war movent of a previous generation. Had that been so we would > still have Jim Crow and the war would have never ended. Why did we have a civil rights movement? Who led it, and who walked, sat, sang mile on mile into years, even hundreds, into generations; we're all made of this same thing. Programmers and etc. > I just would not > count on the bulk of the computing community to perform a lot > of heroics. Heroics are rare celebrations, crystalizations of psyches of millions reflected in a moment or event. > Our path to winning this one depends upon allies from > other fights for freedom who understand in a much more visceral way > just what is involved. These are the people to whom we must turn our > attention. I agree that it is a critical time to understand and communicate our rights as natural citizens to own and apply tools of all kinds 'for all debts public and private' to be shared and even published not only for their importantance but for mankind's very natural freedom of inquiry, the right to speak and inquire and even share, right there in the whole daily deal of life. I think we will win but it'll take some focus and static, Smackin' The Man on this one. DA MOVEMENT! From tom at lemuria.org Tue Sep 11 01:45:58 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Would I have to pay for the Privilege In-Reply-To: <20010910205419.A6565@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 08:54:19PM -0400 References: <20010910103254.A27869@navel.introspect> <20010910205419.A6565@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010911104558.B6127@lemuria.org> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 08:54:19PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Short answer, seems to me, to be "maybe." But only reasonable fees, > whatever that means. $10,000 for CSS license, for example. very reasonable if you're a multinational corporation, isn't it? From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 11 03:45:35 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Would I have to pay for the Privilege In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Sean DuVally wrote: > Under the SSSCA, If I were to manufacture a interactive digital device, > would I have to pay for a license for a certified security technology? > Who would certify the this technology? Well, no matter what happens you will have to pay for it, at least in time and resources to add the technology to your code (plus the cost of chips in the case of hardware.) This means, by the way, that we should reasonably expect a very angry computer industry to oppose this bill (at the very least because it mandates the inclusion of technology that has not been made to work yet, and which may never work.) =X ["Reasonably."] From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Tue Sep 11 04:23:22 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (Late) reply to Gene Gable's article In-Reply-To: <20010910140843.A11761@3soft.de> Message-ID: Gene Gable: > > Since when is it okay to steal something just because it wasn't > > very hard to do? This is a non-sequitur. People who crack encryption systems are not stealing anything. They are performing the computer software equivalent of automobile crash testing. If anything, you should be thanking them for alerting you to the fact that these companies were selling defective snake oil products. I feel sorry for the authors who believed the false blurbs about these security products being "100% hacker-proof," paying thousands of dollars for a program that doesn't really do anything, *and*, *and*, as if they aren't screwed enough already, distributing their works on the Internet under the false assurance that they are somehow protected against piracy by the fraudulent software. Who's stealing in this scenario? Surely piracy is the fault of pirates, but there is a very clear liability on the part of the security company who sold you a fake security system. I find it odd that these companies haven't been hit with some serious lawsuits yet; I guess they were generally successful in focussing the issue on whether _Sklyarov_ is the criminal. Now, we have amazingly silly articles by people who swallowed the whole blame-the-messenger angle, associating computer security researchers with criminals, with analogies to stealing wallets and robbing houses. Funny how all these evil code crackers are publishing articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals and giving presentations at conferences; you'd think that they wouldn't go to so much trouble to create that much evidence of their evil deeds. > > If legitimate Adobe or other customers feel the copy-protection > > schemes are too limiting, they'll reject the product and the > > seller will go back to the drawing board. One would hope. However, it is illegal to "reject" usage policy in certain ways. If the recording industry decided to unilaterally switch to highly limiting copy protection, the only legal option by consumers will be to not buy music at all. Xcott From Andrea.Foster at chronicle.com Tue Sep 11 07:31:45 2001 From: Andrea.Foster at chronicle.com (Andrea.Foster@chronicle.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boucher interview on DMCA Message-ID: <85256AC4.004FCFF6.00@chron-mail.chronicle.com> http://chronicle.com/free/2001/09/2001091101t.htm From jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 11 08:11:18 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [tm] Planes crash into world trade centre (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010911075946.I6566@networkcommand.com>; from jono@microshaft.org on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 07:59:46AM -0700 References: <20010911075946.I6566@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <20010911081117.J6566@networkcommand.com> All US flights have been suspended. All international flights have been diverted to Canada. Canada has closed its airspace. Israel has recalled all diplomats. On 11-Sep-2001, Jon O . wrote: > > Both towers have collapsed. The pentagon has been attacked. There are fighter > planes scambling on another hijacked plane. A plane is down in Pittsburg. > > > > On 11-Sep-2001, Atom 'Smasher' wrote: > > > im in woodbridge, in the cingular wireless building. > > > > > > i just watched the 2nd tower fall to the ground!!! i cant believe this is > > > happening. > > =========================================== > > > > the "2nd tower", as in tower #2, or as in the other one previously fell? > > > > > > ...atom > > > > ----------------Void-If-Detached---------------- > > http://smasher.suspicious.org/fs1r Yamaha FS1R > > > > "Love all. > > Trust few. > > Do wrong to none." > > -- William Shakespeare > > From jono at microshaft.org Tue Sep 11 08:25:18 2001 From: jono at microshaft.org (Jon O .) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FC: Hollywood lobbyists laud SSSCA as "exceedingly reasonable" bill Message-ID: <20010911082518.K6566@networkcommand.com> ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh ----- X-Sender: declan@mail.well.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:33:20 -0400 To: politech@politechbot.com From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Hollywood lobbyists laud SSSCA as "exceedingly reasonable" bill Precedence: bulk Reply-To: declan@well.com X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ X-Author: Declan McCullagh is at http://www.mccullagh.org/ X-News-Site: Cluebot is at http://www.cluebot.com/ http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46671,00.html Hollywood Loves Hollings' Bill By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 2:00 a.m. Sep. 11, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Entertainment industry lobbyists say programmers and open-source activists should not be alarmed by a controversial proposal to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all PCs and consumer electronic devices. In interviews Monday, representatives of the Walt Disney Company and News Corp. defended a draft of the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) as a reasonable compromise that will spur high-speed Internet access, boost hardware and thwart piracy. "This is an exceedingly moderate and reasonable approach," said Preston Padden, executive vice president of the Walt Disney Company, which helped to craft the legislation. Wired News has obtained a draft of the SSSCA, which Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-South Carolina), chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, plans to introduce this month. "We think it's likely to jumpstart the broadband revolution, because entertainment content will create consumer demand," Padden said. "If you're a computer company or if you make hubs and routers or if you're trying to build a broadband network, you want this bill." [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message ----- From kmself at ix.netcom.com Tue Sep 11 09:08:44 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Hollywood lobbyists laud SSSCA as "exceedingly reasonable" bill] Message-ID: <20010911090844.A19654@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010911/6405b9e7/attachment.pgp From wiljan at pobox.com Tue Sep 11 10:28:59 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Where is Dmitry Message-ID: <200109111634.LAA000.39@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Haven't heard anything about Dmitry on this list in a week. Is he OK? Did his family make it here? Why didn't Adobe pick up the tab for that trip? "Incredibly stupid robot!!" -will- From schoen at loyalty.org Tue Sep 11 09:41:50 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Where is Dmitry In-Reply-To: <200109111634.LAA000.39@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> References: <200109111634.LAA000.39@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010911094150.D13354@zork.net> Will Janoschka writes: > Haven't heard anything about Dmitry on this list in a week. > Is he OK? Did his family make it here? Why didn't Adobe > pick up the tab for that trip? "Incredibly stupid robot!!" I think we've had a lot of discussions recently which are getting more and more peripheral to freeing Dmitry Sklyarov. It's true that it's hard to maintain a focus on his case when there have been few announcements recently and when he's not physically in jail; on the other hand, this list is supposed to be about freeing him. How did letter-writing go? Do people have sample letters they'd like to share? -- 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 wiljan at pobox.com Tue Sep 11 10:49:55 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Where is Dmitry Message-ID: <200109111741.MAA000.40@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Seth David Schoen schoen@loyalty.org said: > on the other hand, this list is supposed to be about freeing him. > How did letter-writing go? Do people have sample letters they'd like > to share? Sorry Seth, I keep getting hung up trying to sound reasonable, keeping it a couple of days to make sure it stays reasonable, then starting all over again. Currently I believe the DMCA is not law but rather a piece of illegal legislation. I will get into that another time. It appears that even the adults at the DoJ are not backing down and this may be a l-o-n-g process. Sorry Dmitry! On a positive note: perhaps the adults at the DoJ don't like the DMCA either and believe that this is a good test because it is a criminal case and the media lawyers can't put their spin on it (much). Others have said that the Supreme Court generally only takes out pieces of bad law. I think this is true only because only pieces of the law are given the SC for consideration. Personally I hope the SC takes out all of Title 17 sometime soon. To keep this list on focus, I would suggest that the list members take the DMCA (as far as it applies to Dmitry) apart word for word and find ALL the things wrong. I am not trying to influence Mr. Burton's defense, but rather keep the list focused, and just perhaps give Mr. Burton some extra bullets should this have to go to the SC. Thanks, -will- From FreeSklyarov at ZName.com Tue Sep 11 11:52:03 2001 From: FreeSklyarov at ZName.com (James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor Message-ID: http://www.computerworld.com/storyba/0,4125,NAV47_STO63711,00.html This story, and others to follow, will work to corrupt the term "hacker" over the next few days. James S. Huggins From mickeym at mindspring.com Tue Sep 11 13:01:48 2001 From: mickeym at mindspring.com (mickey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor References: Message-ID: <3B9E6DAC.A4049ABD@mindspring.com> Towards that end, Disney ran an episode of "Smart Guy" a few days ago that featured a child molester in their neighborhood. What was he using to lure children? BOOTLEG GAME SOFTWARE mickeym "James S. Huggins (Free Sklyarov)" wrote: > http://www.computerworld.com/storyba/0,4125,NAV47_STO63711,00.html > > This story, and others to follow, will work to corrupt the term "hacker" > over the next few days. > > James S. Huggins > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From russotto at pond.com Tue Sep 11 13:28:59 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew T. Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: [DMCA_discuss] FC: Hollywood lobbyists laud SSSCA as "exceedingly reasonable" bill Message-ID: <200109112028.QAA11282@pond.com> } http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46671,00.html } } Hollywood Loves Hollings' Bill } By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) } } 2:00 a.m. Sep. 11, 2001 PDT } } WASHINGTON -- Entertainment industry lobbyists say programmers and } open-source activists should not be alarmed by a controversial } proposal to embed copy-protection controls in nearly all PCs and } consumer electronic devices. Uhh, yeah, and the FBI at Waco said "This is not an attack". } In interviews Monday, representatives of the Walt Disney Company and } News Corp. defended a draft of the Security Systems Standards and } Certification Act (SSSCA) as a reasonable compromise that will spur } high-speed Internet access, boost hardware and thwart piracy. If that's the compromise, what's their real desire, implanted anti-piracy microchips in the brain? } "We think it's likely to jumpstart the broadband revolution, because } entertainment content will create consumer demand," Padden said. "If } you're a computer company or if you make hubs and routers or if you're } trying to build a broadband network, you want this bill." If you're a computer company other than the really big ones (who might want it as a cost-of-entry barrier), you don't want it. If you're making hubs and routers, you surely don't want it. If you're trying to build a broadband network, you don't want it -- in all these cases it raises your costs without any corresponding benefit. The only benefit accrues to RIAA members, MPAA members, and Microsoft -- and the former two get little of the costs. From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 06:29:34 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <3B9E6DAC.A4049ABD@mindspring.com> Message-ID: After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of my beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this atrocity for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. Article I'm talking about: http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html From keith at indierecords.com Wed Sep 12 06:58:40 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor References: Message-ID: <3B9F6A10.3307@indierecords.com> free-sklyarov-request@zork.net wrote: > From: "James S. Huggins \(Free Sklyarov\)" > To: "Free Sklyarov List" > Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:52:03 -0500 > Subject: [free-sklyarov] FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor > > http://www.computerworld.com/storyba/0,4125,NAV47_STO63711,00.html > > This story, and others to follow, will work to corrupt the term "hacker" > over the next few days. > > James S. Huggins Why don't you all just let that one go? We don't *need* the term "hacker". I see the fight to control the public's perception of a term as a waste of energy. Start using another term. No one will ever write a story about the FBI cracking down on "hobbyists" or "enthusiasts", nor will any malicious cracker want to glorify himself with such an innocent sounding word. Ayn Rand made a big mistake in trying to teach the world to associate "selfish" with great achievers who take pride in their work. She couldn't stop the perpetually evolving English language -- which comes into being via a rocky course of widely accepted errors, not from a carefully laid-out plan -- from identifying "selfish" with short-sighted lust for material rewards and instant gratification. Subsequently, a lot of her pro-selfishness assertions sound ridiculous out of context. I'm not suggesting use of a euphemism here. Euphemisms are words that try to cover up or sanitize an actual Bad Thing. I'm only suggesting you give up the use of a word that is positioned to demonize you. It's like calling someone who walks for four hours a day a pedophile; there's no point to it. -Keith From proclus at iname.com Wed Sep 12 06:49:57 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor In-Reply-To: <3B9F6A10.3307@indierecords.com> Message-ID: <200109121349.f8CDnvj08022@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 12 Sep, Keith Handy wrote: > Why don't you all just let that one go? That is not going to happen. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Wed Sep 12 07:07:00 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [ruben@mrbrklyn.com: [fairuse] Fair Use Meeting NOT CANCLED] In-Reply-To: <20010912100232.A1873@www2>; from ruben@mrbrklyn.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 10:02:32 -0400 References: <20010912100232.A1873@www2> Message-ID: <20010912100700.G1873@www2> On 2001.09.12 10:02:32 -0400 Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: New Yorkers for Fair Use is NOT cancelling our weekly meeting. The meeting is moved to Junior's Cheese Cake Resturant on Flatbush Ave and Dekalb Avenue in Brooklyn until next week. The time is 7PM Transportation: Take the Q train on the Brighton Subway (Q Train) and the resturant is on that corner. Otherwise, take ANY train to Boro Hall and walk East on Fulton Mall a few blocks to Flatbush Ave. The Adgenda will include the results of our canvassing campain on Thursday and our plans for this Sunday. We will start our letter righting campain, draft our Press Release, and last... we will live FREE tomorrow. So plan to be there. Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 ____________________________ New Yorkers for Fair Use - because it's either fair use or useless.... -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From keith at indierecords.com Wed Sep 12 07:32:56 2001 From: keith at indierecords.com (Keith Handy) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor References: <200109121349.f8CDnvj08022@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Message-ID: <3B9F7218.48FB@indierecords.com> proclus@iname.com wrote: > > On 12 Sep, Keith Handy wrote: > > Why don't you all just let that one go? > > That is not going to happen. As in, that is not going to happen, that would be an admission of defeat? Or as in, that is not going to happen, we're all as pig-headed as a flag-waver who would gladly lose his *actual* freedom in the fight to preserve a mere *symbol* of freedom, which is only a symbol of freedom for *him*, and is not perceived as such by anyone outside of his minority camp? The language we speak is not the exact same language the government speaks, and it is not the exact same language the public speaks. I suggest the energy we expend in the mission to re-train everyone else be used to attempt communication with them in *their* language. You *do* know how to port, right? I also suggest replying to me in less vague terms so that I'm not triggered into an unnecessary rant, if that's the case. -Keith From drumz at best.com Wed Sep 12 08:38:07 2001 From: drumz at best.com (Ethan Straffin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: from Charles Eakins at "Sep 12, 1 06:29:34 am" Message-ID: <200109121538.IAA17943@shell3.ba.best.com> > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of my > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this atrocity > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article > wasn't constructive. And when we do know for sure, might it then become constructive? My understanding is that the intelligence community has narrowed down the list of suspects to three, all of whom have ample reason to hate the U.S. under the terms suggested by Browne. (And before you shoot the messenger again, I'm not speaking of right or wrong here, but of basic human nature.) Browne is not saying that we deserved to have innocent men, women, and children killed. He is saying that there are a lot of other parties out there that didn't deserve it either, and that the inevitable bloodshed still to come will very likely fuel a cycle of violence that will continue to hit us where we live. It may be viewed as a dispassionate, even cold analysis in a time when passion and moral outrage are much easier to come by, but I challenge anyone to demonstrate that it is not a more realistic view of the way things really work than that toward which we're being shoved by endless speeches about how our national resolve is being tested. Not our compassion, not our wisdom, not our love of freedom, mind you, but our resolve. You're free to infer the former from the latter if you like, but in my experience, a politician is most likely to speak of resolve just before he signs a bill authorizing a very large military operation that winds up killing a lot of innocent people. In the meantime, I want to know why the U.S. under the Bush administration is Afghanistan's number-one sponsor, to the tune of $43 million -- a figure we're not hearing much about on CNN, oddly enough. Oh, that's right: because they're going along with our drug policy by promising to shoot farmers caught growing opium. If it does turn out to be bin Laden, it will certainly look to a number of observers as though we were complicit in our victimization to a frightening degree. If not, it still doesn't explain how we have justified supporting one of the world's most brutal regimes in the name of our own failed attempts at social engineering. > I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. I'm sure some think that it is better to wait to raise these issues until heads and hearts are cooler, while others would prefer to strike while the iron is hot. I honestly don't know which is better, but I do think they need to be raised at some point, or else this will be just the beginning. It is impossible for the government of any free society to provide a level of security that the average American still thinks he has. Learning to be a better neighbor may well be our only salvation. Ethan -- "If only there were evil people somewhere, insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -- Alexandr Solzhenitsyn From declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 08:15:31 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700 References: <3B9E6DAC.A4049ABD@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20010912111531.A20788@cluebot.com> There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. -Declan On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of my > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this atrocity > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > Article I'm talking about: > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From proclus at iname.com Wed Sep 12 08:43:46 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Hackers Message-ID: <200109121543.f8CFhkM08204@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> from http://www.scripting.com See below what hackers did yesterday. Hackers should be thanked, and they are a national resource and treasure. If the computing infrastructure of the US is attacked tomorrow, hackers will be in the front line to protect it. Hackers really want Dmitry to go home, so please to try to undermine our efforts to protect our vital identity. Hackers will save you some day. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ "Of course it's great to get a link from the NY Times, but they missed what's going on. The Web has a lot more people to cover a story. For most of the day the Times home page had little or nothing about the crisis. We, collectively, got on it very quickly once it was clear that the the news sites were choked with flow and didn't have very much info. Hat-tip to Bill Seitz for remembering the Empire State Building webcam. And we got first-hand reports from people who were there. There were real-time human touches that are hard to capture in a print pub with a lead time. There's power in the new communication and development medium we're mastering. Far from being dead, the Web is just getting started." -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 09:11:56 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912111531.A20788@cluebot.com> Message-ID: For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there butts about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they want to deal with right now. -----Original Message----- From: declan@cluebot.com [mailto:declan@cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:16 AM To: Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. -Declan On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of my > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this atrocity > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > Article I'm talking about: > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From sethf at sethf.com Wed Sep 12 09:22:25 2001 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Is Rep. Boucher's online-music licensing bill constitutional?] In-Reply-To: <20010910171901.D3957@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 05:19:01PM -0700 References: <20010910171901.D3957@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010912122225.A1907@sethf.com> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 05:19:01PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > Read. Well, if we're also on the topic of the harmful effects of Libertarian proselytizing, the following message is good reading too. It's extensively researched, from someone who *is* a lawyer. I love the concluding paragraph: "You've really got to be more skeptical, Declan, about these Libertarian fringe groups and their penchant for calling for activist judicial intervention into the proper functioning of the Congressionally-created and regulated marketplace for works subject to copyright." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cyberia-l/message/37645 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:56:53 EDT To: CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM From: "Eric C. Grimm" Subject: Re: Is Rep. Boucher's online-music licensing bill constitutional? Comments: To: declan@well.com It is perhaps a helpful to understand some of the history behind compulsory licensing and copyright. Compulsory licensing has in fact been a feature of U.S. copyright law for quite some time now. Jessica Litman chronicles that history quite well in her recent book "Digital Copyright." Another place to look for some of that history is Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 441 U.S. 1 (1979). Even a cursory reading of the relevant Fifth Amendment caselaw would suggest that several aspects of the CFIF's proposed takings analysis are problematic. See Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992) (the "economically viable use of his land" case); MacDonald, Sommer & Frates v. Yolo County, 477 U.S. 340 (1986); Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986 (1984); Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980); PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980); Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978); Euclid v. Ambler Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926); Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393, 415 (1922); Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 239 U.S. 394 (1915). Of particular, interest, I think, are the Ruckleshaus (trade secrets), Pruneyard (free expression vs. private property), Penn Central, and Euclid v. Ambler Realty cases. The relevant questions include not only (1) whether -- as CFIF puts it -- compulsory licensing supplies "just compensation" (and certainly compulsory licensing of copyrights always has been understood to do so, perhaps even by definition), but also (2) whether there is "private property" in the first place, or merely copyrights recognized (optionally) by Congress under the Copyright Clause of Article I of the Constitution (The Ruckleshaus case suggests that there may be arguments to be made on both sides of this issue -- although the Ruckleshaus case is about a "property" right recognized as a matter of state law), and (3) whether there has been any "taking" of any such property for "public purpose" (arguably not, since the government is not becomming the holder, as opposed to the granter, of the copyright). You've really got to be more skeptical, Declan, about these Libertarian fringe groups and their penchant for calling for activist judicial intervention into the proper functioning of the Congressionally-created and regulated marketplace for works subject to copyright. Eric C. Grimm CyberBrief, PLC 320 South Main Street Ann Arbor, MI 48107-7341 734.332.4900 eric.grimm@CyberBrief.net -----Original Message----- [snipped] From declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 09:15:22 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: References: <20010912111531.A20788@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com> Maybe, but at least one (large) party chapter came out in favor of Sklyarov: http://www.politechbot.com/p-02377.html Like any organization, political parties have limited resources and lots of things to deal with. If you show them the SF LP statement and statements from libertarian groups opposing Sklyarov's arrest and work with them over time (instead of sniping at them on a mailing list), perhaps you'll win them over. I wonder what the Democratic and Republican parties think of the DMCA? Oh, that's right. They wrote it and unanimously approved it. :) -Declan At 09:11 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: >For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there butts >about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they want to deal >with right now. > >-----Original Message----- >From: declan@cluebot.com [mailto:declan@cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan >McCullagh >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:16 AM >To: Charles Eakins >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; >it_union@lists.microshaft.org >Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > >There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in >every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the >Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) >political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. > >-Declan > > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party > > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of >my > > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" > > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this >atrocity > > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article > > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, > > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > > > Article I'm talking about: > > > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Sep 12 09:28:29 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: FBI operation penetrates hacker underground Computerworld News & Features Stor In-Reply-To: <3B9F6A10.3307@indierecords.com> References: <3B9F6A10.3307@indierecords.com> Message-ID: <01091209282900.23991@aether> On Wednesday 12 September 2001 06:58, Keith Handy wrote: > free-sklyarov-request@zork.net wrote: > > From: "James S. Huggins \(Free Sklyarov\)" > > To: "Free Sklyarov List" > > Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:52:03 -0500 > > Subject: [free-sklyarov] FBI operation penetrates hacker underground > > Computerworld News & Features Stor > > > > http://www.computerworld.com/storyba/0,4125,NAV47_STO63711,00.html > > > > This story, and others to follow, will work to corrupt the term "hacker" > > over the next few days. > > > > James S. Huggins > > Why don't you all just let that one go? We don't *need* the term > "hacker". I see the fight to control the public's perception of a term > as a waste of energy. Start using another term. Hello: Good point on both accounts. How about: UP [Unpaid Programmers] LP [Linux Programmers] FP [Free Programmers] CP [Computer Programmers] RP [Real Programmers] CUO's [Computer Unpaid Officianados] BS [Bugtraq Subscribers] Now, that last one is interesting. If everyone that was interested in considering themselves part of the Open Source Movement, Linux-related OS workers, etc., were to take responsibility for joining the Bugtraq list, there would be a singular quasi-official listing made available for the leaders of each organization that is working to promote Open Source as an alternative to M$ and proprietary technology. The listing would provide subscribers a way to measure the countless numbers of individuals around the world that have common interests. The "opposition" would have more problems dealing with the sizable population statistics that now are just scattered, and few. The maintainers of the Bugtraq list would need to do nothing more than what they are doing now, but this list would provide a central, universally acceptable point of contact representing the global population of "hobbyists" and "enthusiasts", regardless of whether one works with BSD, Linux, other distributions, Open Source products and projects, etc. And, most importantly, it's a list everyone should be on anyway, if they want to keep abreast of what's happening. Just a thought. Tom From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 09:27:14 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: Hello McFly been tried! I forwarded many articles to them over the past 2 months. Any "sniping" I did was deserved, you weren't on the list, so your not very well informed now are you? Now who's sniping? -----Original Message----- From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan@well.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:15 AM To: Charles Eakins; Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. Maybe, but at least one (large) party chapter came out in favor of Sklyarov: http://www.politechbot.com/p-02377.html Like any organization, political parties have limited resources and lots of things to deal with. If you show them the SF LP statement and statements from libertarian groups opposing Sklyarov's arrest and work with them over time (instead of sniping at them on a mailing list), perhaps you'll win them over. I wonder what the Democratic and Republican parties think of the DMCA? Oh, that's right. They wrote it and unanimously approved it. :) -Declan At 09:11 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: >For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there butts >about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they want to deal >with right now. > >-----Original Message----- >From: declan@cluebot.com [mailto:declan@cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan >McCullagh >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:16 AM >To: Charles Eakins >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; >it_union@lists.microshaft.org >Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > >There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in >every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the >Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) >political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. > >-Declan > > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian party > > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of >my > > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of war" > > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this >atrocity > > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this article > > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian list, > > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > > > Article I'm talking about: > > > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 12 09:32:31 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality Message-ID: <20010912093231.O24298@zork.net> I know that the terrorist attacks yesterday are on everybody's minds -- I'm still waiting to hear whether a former co-worker boarded UAL 175, as he was planning to -- and that they affect politics in the U.S. in various ways. Someone may even call for a multilateral agreement between states committed to preventing suicide, mass murder, and decryption of pop music tracks on DVD Audio. However, can we free Dmitry Sklyarov, who is still stuck in this troubled country, now in the company of his family, who had already been afraid to travel to the U.S. before? -- 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 declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 09:32:10 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:16 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912123117.0214ee50@mail.well.com> If you'd stop frothing -- I know, an unlikely proposition -- you'd see that I was talking about the message you sent today to the free-sklyarov list (and others). Yawn. At 09:27 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: >Hello McFly been tried! I forwarded many articles to them over the past 2 >months. Any "sniping" I did was deserved, you weren't on the list, so your >not very well informed now are you? Now who's sniping? > >-----Original Message----- >From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan@well.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:15 AM >To: Charles Eakins; Charles Eakins >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; >it_union@lists.microshaft.org >Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > >Maybe, but at least one (large) party chapter came out in favor of Sklyarov: >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02377.html > >Like any organization, political parties have limited resources and lots of >things to deal with. If you show them the SF LP statement and statements >from libertarian groups opposing Sklyarov's arrest and work with them over >time (instead of sniping at them on a mailing list), perhaps you'll win >them over. > >I wonder what the Democratic and Republican parties think of the DMCA? Oh, >that's right. They wrote it and unanimously approved it. :) > >-Declan > > >At 09:11 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > >For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there butts > >about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they want to >deal > >with right now. > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: declan@cluebot.com [mailto:declan@cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan > >McCullagh > >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:16 AM > >To: Charles Eakins > >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; > >it_union@lists.microshaft.org > >Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they > >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > > > > >There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in > >every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the > >Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) > >political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. > > > >-Declan > > > > > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > > > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > > > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian >party > > > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > > > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of > >my > > > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of >war" > > > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > > > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > > > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and >Children > > > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this > >atrocity > > > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this >article > > > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian >list, > > > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > > > > > Article I'm talking about: > > > > > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > free-sklyarov mailing list > > > free-sklyarov@zork.net > > > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From jeme at brelin.net Wed Sep 12 09:38:44 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there > butts about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they > want to deal with right now. I'm getting a similar response from the Greens. But I've been told that if I can get a few pages put together, one man promised me to place it in a Very Prominent Figure's hands himself. And this fellow is a voracious reader and won't put it down without reading every word. I've made this request before and Real Life has intervened and I haven't been able to address it. So if anyone has a good idea of how to approach this in a three-page executive summary/outline of arguments way, please send them to me directly. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 10:00:18 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912123117.0214ee50@mail.well.com> Message-ID: Frothing? Hardly, I made a statement, all of which was true, instead of being constructive, your being destructive. But what is your point? I had already done what you suggested, because that was the obvious course of action, so that's why I fired off my e-mail in frustration. What do you expect, to keep focusing my efforts on knocking on a door, that's obviously at this point, not going to open? -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:32 AM To: Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. If you'd stop frothing -- I know, an unlikely proposition -- you'd see that I was talking about the message you sent today to the free-sklyarov list (and others). Yawn. At 09:27 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: >Hello McFly been tried! I forwarded many articles to them over the past 2 >months. Any "sniping" I did was deserved, you weren't on the list, so your >not very well informed now are you? Now who's sniping? > >-----Original Message----- >From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan@well.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:15 AM >To: Charles Eakins; Charles Eakins >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; >it_union@lists.microshaft.org >Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > >Maybe, but at least one (large) party chapter came out in favor of Sklyarov: >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02377.html > >Like any organization, political parties have limited resources and lots of >things to deal with. If you show them the SF LP statement and statements >from libertarian groups opposing Sklyarov's arrest and work with them over >time (instead of sniping at them on a mailing list), perhaps you'll win >them over. > >I wonder what the Democratic and Republican parties think of the DMCA? Oh, >that's right. They wrote it and unanimously approved it. :) > >-Declan > > >At 09:11 AM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > >For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there butts > >about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they want to >deal > >with right now. > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: declan@cluebot.com [mailto:declan@cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan > >McCullagh > >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:16 AM > >To: Charles Eakins > >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; > >it_union@lists.microshaft.org > >Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they > >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > > > > >There are loons in the Libertarian Party, true, but there are loons in > >every party. I've spent some time in the last few years writing about the > >Libertarians and the Greens, and I suspect they're the only (sizeable) > >political parties that would ever come out against the DMCA and SSSCA. > > > >-Declan > > > > > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:29:34AM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > > > After spending the last two months on an a local "official" libertarian > > > party mailing list, I've come to the conclusion that the Libertarian >party > > > are a bunch of idiots. They had no interest in DMCA issues, and Harry > > > Browne they're pick for president has just put the nail in the coffin of > >my > > > beliefs. First off we don't know who actually committed this "act of >war" > > > on the united states, until we know this for fact, I think Mr. Browns > > > article was embarrassing, and just plain moronic. What Mr. Browne is > > > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and >Children > > > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this > >atrocity > > > for a fact. We can conjecture, but until we know for a fact this >article > > > wasn't constructive. I saw allot of in fighting on the libertarian >list, > > > and I was caution us to distance ourselves from them. > > > > > > Article I'm talking about: > > > > > > http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 sethf at sethf.com Wed Sep 12 10:14:46 2001 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:15:22PM -0400 References: <20010912111531.A20788@cluebot.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20010912131446.A2030@sethf.com> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:15:22PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I wonder what the Democratic and Republican parties think of the DMCA? Oh, > that's right. They wrote it and unanimously approved it. :) Excuse me Declan, but didn't that unanimous approval include Rep. Ron Paul, who WAS THE LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE in 1988? That is, the closest thing the Libertarian Party has to having someone in Congress, the person who was so senior that he was once the nominee President on the Libertarian Party ticket, voted for the DMCA? Am I wrong? I'm sure if he was big opponent of the DMCA, we'd hear it from you. Perhaps you could convince him to say something against the DMCA. If not, why not? The above is what I call the Libertarian recruiting tactic of "Fantasy vs. Reality". As I said the last time this topic came around, it's contrasting what is less than a campaign promise, versus people who have to do the things necessary to get elected. And getting elected takes money. Lots of money. Money e.g. donated by MPAA and RIAA. I strongly agree with the earlier list-poster who had such a negative view of the Libertarian Party. While indeed, every groups has its lunatics, I have observed that Libertarianism is particularly neurotoxic. It is better thought of as a religious cult than a political party. And that reference to a religious cult is meant in all sincerity. If you have dedicated Libertarians in your cause, very often (not 100%, but very often), they will endlessly try to proselytize and recruit everyone for Libertarianism, and attempt to drive away people who oppose their evangelism. It is superficially appealing to be in alliance with them, but I argue that overall, it's generally much more tactically harmful than is usually realized. The true destruction come not from their "attitude", but from the fact that their ideology replaces and suffocates an ability to think about the real world. I've written an essay on this, it's at http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php And I believe we are seeing the themes I articulate being proven right now. -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf@sethf.com http://sethf.com http://archive.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/technology/circuits/19HACK.html BESS's Secret LOOPHOLE: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/loophole.php BESS vs Google: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/google.php From ed at hintz.org Wed Sep 12 10:33:43 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality Message-ID: <200109121733.f8CHXic20454@phil.hintz.org> On 9/12/01 9:32 AM, schoen@loyalty.org thus spake: >However, can we free Dmitry Sklyarov, who is still stuck in this >troubled country, now in the company of his family, who had already >been afraid to travel to the U.S. before? Hear hear! Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From russotto at pond.com Wed Sep 12 10:42:35 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew T. Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian Party, Ron Paul, and the DMCA Message-ID: <200109121742.NAA03452@pond.com> Seth, Rep. Ron Paul was not in the Senate at the time of the DMCA vote (nor any other time). The bill apparently passed the House on a voice vote, and Rep. Ron Paul did not make any remarks on it if I read the record properly. It does not appear he was on the appropriate committees (Ways&Means and Commerce). He does not have anything on the DMCA on his site. I suspect inquries from those in the 14th District of Texas are most likely to get a response -- his web page is http://www.house.gov/paul From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Sep 12 11:07:12 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01091211071200.24373@aether> On Wednesday 12 September 2001 09:38, you wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > > For me, the Seattle branch of the Libertarian party has sat on there > > butts about this, and basically voiced that this is not an issue they > > want to deal with right now. > > I'm getting a similar response from the Greens. > > But I've been told that if I can get a few pages put together, one man > promised me to place it in a Very Prominent Figure's hands himself. And > this fellow is a voracious reader and won't put it down without reading > every word. > > I've made this request before and Real Life has intervened and I haven't > been able to address it. So if anyone has a good idea of how to approach > this in a three-page executive summary/outline of arguments way, please > send them to me directly. > > J. Easy. Send the "hello, world" program of your choice on an "authorized", "certified", "secure", "government approved" CD, and make sure the label states that only "authorized", "certified", "secure", "government approved", "registered" equipment can be used. The total price will be $8,995.00 if you call within the next 15 mins. Delivery 4 to 8 weeks, depending on our government's mood. Thanks, Tom From wiljan at pobox.com Wed Sep 12 12:05:37 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality Message-ID: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:33:43 Edmund A. Hintz ed@hintz.org said: > On 9/12/01 9:32 AM, schoen@loyalty.org thus spake: >>However, can we free Dmitry Sklyarov, who is still stuck in this >>troubled country, now in the company of his family, who had already >>been afraid to travel to the U.S. before? >Hear hear! > Peace, Back to Dmitry. Would it help his case if we could get across that not only hackers, nerds, geeks, programmers, and cryptoweirdos are affected. I am especially concerned that people think they "understand" the buzzwords in the DMCA. Under 17 USC 1201 (b) Anything can be a technological measure. Shinkwrap a paperback book, that is a technological measure protecting the management rights listed on the inside front cover. You have permission to remove the shinkwrap, after purchase, only if you agree to the rights managements on the inside front cover. Inside front cover: 1. You may not sell or give this book to any individual or organization. 2. You may read this book only within 10 ft of the shinkwrap removal location, then only when no others are about. 3. You may not copy any portion for any use. 4. You may not read this book aloud. 5. You may not return this book for refund. 6. You may not make disparaging remarks about this book. 7. You may not mention these rights management to anyone. Furthermore, should you discourage any person from purchasing this or any shinkwraped book, you may be charged with circumventing this technological measure. -will- From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Wed Sep 12 12:16:06 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > What Mr. Browne is > basically saying is we deserved to have innocent Men, Women, and Children > killed, even though again we don't know for sure who committed this atrocity > for a fact. I didn't get that impression at all from this article. Either it was changed very recently or you posted the wrong URL. He's not saying anyone deserved to die, but that our foreign policy is likely to provoke acts of terrorism against us. That's very different from saying that anyone deserved anything. I don't wholly agree with his "mind our own business" stance (sometimes there are Holocausts, and we can not mind our own business) but I thought the rest of his article was fairly bang on. Murderers are made, not born, and sometimes *we* make them. As for the libertarian party, you have to remember that *no* major political party is completely aligned with a pro civil liberties stance. Even the libertarians. I've had baffling discussions with [self-proclaimed] libertarians, who believe the DMCA is good because it allows fair use disputes to be resolved by market forces, rather than by law. I.e., companies sell restrictive technologies and consumers "vote with their wallets." The anti- circumvention part prevents people from circumventing the market. Xcott From schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 12 13:11:39 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net> Xcott Craver writes: > I've had baffling discussions > with [self-proclaimed] libertarians, who believe the DMCA is good > because it allows fair use disputes to be resolved by market > forces, rather than by law. I.e., companies sell restrictive > technologies and consumers "vote with their wallets." The anti- > circumvention part prevents people from circumventing the market. Thus the article Declan told us about, http://www.cfif.org/5_8_2001/Free_line/current/free_line_copyright.htm and also something Fred von Lohmann found along similar lines: http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-23-01.html I was writing a reply in which I maintained that copyright was a government regulation which interfered with the free market in creative works. So there is an exactly parallel argument -- and it's unlikely that CFIC and Cato would maintain that copyright should exist because there is a market failure in the absence of regulation. This leads me to the (unsurprising) conclusion that the most important thing you can do to get libertarians and trade proponents to oppose things like the DMCA is to spread the word that copyright is a form of government regulation. In the trade world, this could be surprisingly difficult. I recently learned that the U.S. government adopted the position that inadequate intellectual property laws constitute an "unfair trade practice" way back in 1984, after an intense lobbying campaign by copyright industries. This policy decision came years before either copyright law or international trade law were on the public's radar; at that time, they were both very obscure and it was hard to imagine that there would be protests in the street over either. But there is a long legacy in U.S. trade policy of viewing countries which don't have U.S.-equivalent copyright laws as somehow deficient or criminal. This is strange. People in the U.S. don't think that a foreign country is doing something wrong if it doesn't have a Federal Reserve Bank, if it doesn't have a federal system with states and a central government, if it doesn't have ZIP codes... but if you don't follow us on copyright policy, you're a rogue nation! This policy is only really defensible if you view copyright law _not as a public policy choice but as a recognition of right and wrong_ -- which is certainly the way libertarians and many other people have viewed legislation about murder, and frequently about physical property. The distinction is more or less equivalent to the archaic distinction between the malum prohibitum and the malum per se, the infraction of the law as violation of government policy, or as inherently evil act. That's what I was getting at when I wrote that copyright infringement was like tax evasion rather than like theft. If infringing copyrights is seen as a malum per se, then almost everybody will agree that countries which tolerate it or don't crack down firmly as though they were havens of actual piracy, what the U.S. alleged of the Barbary States. If it's a malum prohibitum, then eventually many people will ask why the U.S. is imposing this legislation on the rest of the world. This, I think, is the real intellectual battle of the copyright wars. If copyright is not a form of property (and I pass over the question of whether anything is really a form of property), then copyright law, as all legal scholars seem to think, _was made by a legislature, and can be unmade if the public interest requires_. But if copyright is a real right of creators, everywhere and always wrong to infringe, legislatures are just doing their duty in approximating an ideal of perfect protection. That's why I complain about the two pieces mentioned above. I don't care whether MOCA passes; I don't care whether we have any particular scheme of compulsory licensing for on-line music. I care about refuting the suggestion that we shouldn't even _propose_ to reform copyright law, shouldn't even _consider_ reforming it, because to make any reform at all would violate the property rights of authors. That is a bad suggestion, but one which underlies huge expanses of debate in the world today, not to mention U.S. trade policy. -- 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 schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 12 13:15:57 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net> References: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010912131557.X24298@zork.net> Seth David Schoen writes: > malum per se Grumble, I know too much Latin for my own good. Even though this has the same meaning, the traditional version in legal discourse is "malum in se". -- 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 Wed Sep 12 13:33:16 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net>; from wiljan@pobox.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:05:37PM -0600 References: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:05:37PM -0600, Will Janoschka wrote: > 4. You may not read this book aloud. can we PLEASE remove that point from this and any future discussions? it is factually incorrect and will only harm us. for those who've lived in a box for the past year or so: "read aloud" is a text-to-speech feature, not a permission on bedtime storytelling. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From kmself at ix.netcom.com Wed Sep 12 13:46:19 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Is Rep. Boucher's online-music licensing bill constitutional?] In-Reply-To: <20010912122225.A1907@sethf.com>; from sethf@sethf.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:22:25PM -0400 References: <20010910171901.D3957@navel.introspect> <20010912122225.A1907@sethf.com> Message-ID: <20010912134619.B10921@navel.introspect> on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:22:25PM -0400, Seth Finkelstein (sethf@sethf.com) wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 05:19:01PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > Read. > > Well, if we're also on the topic of the harmful effects of > Libertarian proselytizing, the following message is good reading > too. It's extensively researched, from someone who *is* a lawyer. Thanks, Seth. I'm aware that the essay posted had a number of serious flaws to it. The response you post is a good one. My concern was floating the opposition's arguments such that they might be rebutted. > I love the concluding paragraph: > > "You've really got to be more skeptical, Declan, about these > Libertarian fringe groups and their penchant for calling for > activist judicial intervention into the proper functioning of the > Congressionally-created and regulated marketplace for works subject > to copyright." Touch?. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cyberia-l/message/37645 > > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:56:53 EDT > To: CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM > From: "Eric C. Grimm" > Subject: Re: Is Rep. Boucher's online-music licensing bill constitutional? > Comments: To: declan@well.com > > It is perhaps a helpful to understand some of the history behind > compulsory licensing and copyright. Compulsory licensing has in fact > been a feature of U.S. copyright law for quite some time now. Jessica > Litman chronicles that history quite well in her recent book "Digital > Copyright." Another place to look for some of that history is > Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 441 U.S. > 1 (1979). Actually, the 1909? copyright reform included compulsory licensing as part of the compromise allowing for music. > You've really got to be more skeptical, Declan, about these > Libertarian fringe groups and their penchant for calling for activist > judicial intervention into the proper functioning of the > Congressionally-created and regulated marketplace for works subject to > copyright. I suspect Declan is, like me, skeptical. Actually, I suspect he's incredulous at the audacity and general poor quality of the arguments. > Eric C. Grimm > CyberBrief, PLC > 320 South Main Street > Ann Arbor, MI 48107-7341 > 734.332.4900 > eric.grimm@CyberBrief.net Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010912/8bd90075/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Wed Sep 12 13:49:39 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Tom wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:05:37PM -0600, Will Janoschka wrote: > > 4. You may not read this book aloud. > > can we PLEASE remove that point from this and any future discussions? > it is factually incorrect and will only harm us. Well, is it any more absurd than other arbitrary restrictions placed by publishers on copyrighted works using their "effective access controls"? I understand that the whole Alice thing was misrepresented, but this isn't an Alice reference, I don't think. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Wed Sep 12 13:48:51 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:17 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> Message-ID: I still think the best example is CD shrinkwrap. Better because CDs *do* have shrinkwrap, and everyone hates it. I'd also avoid the contractual stuff (sounds more like UCITA,) and just ask people to imagine if removing the shrinkwrap for any reason became a federal crime. Some people argue that these crazy use restrictions are fair. Some people frame this whole thing as a crackdown on evil pirates. But virtually all Americans will agree a law is daft and wrong if it makes everyone a criminal, for reasons of legal convenience. =X From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 13:38:47 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Tribute to the US Message-ID: >> W: TRIBUTE TO THE UNITED STATES >> >> > > > >> >> > > > This, from a Canadian newspaper, is worth sharing. America: The Good Neighbor. Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions indebts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956,it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, war mongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon-not once, but several times-and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America! This is one of the best editorials that I have ever read regarding the United States. It is nice that one man realizes it. I only wish that the rest of the world would realize it. We are always blamed for everything, and never even get a thank you for the things we do. I would hope that each of you would send this to as many people as you can and emphasize that they should send it to as many of their friends until this letter is sent to every person on the web. I am just a single American that has read this, I SURE HOPE THAT ALOT MORE READ IT SOON. Perhaps you are diagonally parked in a parallel universe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010912/9ead0ae9/attachment.htm From lists at politechbot.com Wed Sep 12 15:21:28 2001 From: lists at politechbot.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912131446.A2030@sethf.com>; from sethf@sethf.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:14:46PM -0400 References: <20010912111531.A20788@cluebot.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010912121329.021376b0@mail.well.com> <20010912131446.A2030@sethf.com> Message-ID: <20010912182128.A2034@cluebot.com> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:14:46PM -0400, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > Excuse me Declan, but didn't that unanimous approval include > Rep. Ron Paul, who WAS THE LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE in 1988? > That is, the closest thing the Libertarian Party has to having someone > in Congress, the person who was so senior that he was once the nominee > President on the Libertarian Party ticket, voted for the DMCA? Last I checked, there were no Libertarians in Congress; Paul is a Republican. But anyway, I did check into this. I was wrong; it was a voice vote in the House: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR02281:@@@X I don't know how Paul voted, but I suspect he voted against the DMCA. Paul has said in the past that he opposes criminal laws of this sort, and I know some of his staffers have been critical of the DMCA. Note to self: Seth is a rabid, nutty flamer, and not worth the time it takes to reply. -Declan From declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 15:24:01 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net>; from schoen@loyalty.org on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:11:39PM -0700 References: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010912182401.B2034@cluebot.com> I'm actually writing an article on how conservative and libertarian groups view intellectual property, and I have not yet found one libertarian group that supports the DMCA. [Obviously Democrats and Republicans are a little more enthusiastic (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,45522,00.html). Then there's the SSSCA, which top Dems and Repubs in the Senate are supporting.] If there is one, please let me know. The article's on hold for obvious reasons, but I am fairly confident my statement above is accurate. -Declan On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:11:39PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > Xcott Craver writes: > > > I've had baffling discussions > > with [self-proclaimed] libertarians, who believe the DMCA is good > > because it allows fair use disputes to be resolved by market > > forces, rather than by law. I.e., companies sell restrictive > > technologies and consumers "vote with their wallets." The anti- > > circumvention part prevents people from circumventing the market. > > Thus the article Declan told us about, > > http://www.cfif.org/5_8_2001/Free_line/current/free_line_copyright.htm > > and also something Fred von Lohmann found along similar lines: > > http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-23-01.html > > I was writing a reply in which I maintained that copyright was a > government regulation which interfered with the free market in > creative works. So there is an exactly parallel argument -- and it's > unlikely that CFIC and Cato would maintain that copyright should > exist because there is a market failure in the absence of regulation. > > This leads me to the (unsurprising) conclusion that the most important > thing you can do to get libertarians and trade proponents to oppose > things like the DMCA is to spread the word that copyright is a form of > government regulation. > > In the trade world, this could be surprisingly difficult. I recently > learned that the U.S. government adopted the position that inadequate > intellectual property laws constitute an "unfair trade practice" way > back in 1984, after an intense lobbying campaign by copyright > industries. This policy decision came years before either copyright > law or international trade law were on the public's radar; at that > time, they were both very obscure and it was hard to imagine that > there would be protests in the street over either. > > But there is a long legacy in U.S. trade policy of viewing countries > which don't have U.S.-equivalent copyright laws as somehow deficient > or criminal. This is strange. People in the U.S. don't think that a > foreign country is doing something wrong if it doesn't have a Federal > Reserve Bank, if it doesn't have a federal system with states and a > central government, if it doesn't have ZIP codes... but if you don't > follow us on copyright policy, you're a rogue nation! > > This policy is only really defensible if you view copyright law _not > as a public policy choice but as a recognition of right and wrong_ -- > which is certainly the way libertarians and many other people have > viewed legislation about murder, and frequently about physical > property. The distinction is more or less equivalent to the archaic > distinction between the malum prohibitum and the malum per se, the > infraction of the law as violation of government policy, or as > inherently evil act. That's what I was getting at when I wrote that > copyright infringement was like tax evasion rather than like theft. > > If infringing copyrights is seen as a malum per se, then almost > everybody will agree that countries which tolerate it or don't crack > down firmly as though they were havens of actual piracy, what the > U.S. alleged of the Barbary States. > > If it's a malum prohibitum, then eventually many people will ask why > the U.S. is imposing this legislation on the rest of the world. > > This, I think, is the real intellectual battle of the copyright wars. > If copyright is not a form of property (and I pass over the question of > whether anything is really a form of property), then copyright law, as > all legal scholars seem to think, _was made by a legislature, and can > be unmade if the public interest requires_. But if copyright is a > real right of creators, everywhere and always wrong to infringe, > legislatures are just doing their duty in approximating an ideal of > perfect protection. > > That's why I complain about the two pieces mentioned above. I don't > care whether MOCA passes; I don't care whether we have any particular > scheme of compulsory licensing for on-line music. I care about > refuting the suggestion that we shouldn't even _propose_ to reform > copyright law, shouldn't even _consider_ reforming it, because to make > any reform at all would violate the property rights of authors. > > That is a bad suggestion, but one which underlies huge expanses of > debate in the world today, not to mention U.S. trade policy. > > -- > 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) > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 15:23:37 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912182128.A2034@cluebot.com> Message-ID: Note to self: Declan is an egotistical jerk, not worth the energy it takes to type short messages in reply. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:21 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net; Charles Eakins Cc: dmca_discuss@lists.microshaft.org; it_union@lists.microshaft.org Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:14:46PM -0400, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > Excuse me Declan, but didn't that unanimous approval include > Rep. Ron Paul, who WAS THE LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE in 1988? > That is, the closest thing the Libertarian Party has to having someone > in Congress, the person who was so senior that he was once the nominee > President on the Libertarian Party ticket, voted for the DMCA? Last I checked, there were no Libertarians in Congress; Paul is a Republican. But anyway, I did check into this. I was wrong; it was a voice vote in the House: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR02281:@@@X I don't know how Paul voted, but I suspect he voted against the DMCA. Paul has said in the past that he opposes criminal laws of this sort, and I know some of his staffers have been critical of the DMCA. Note to self: Seth is a rabid, nutty flamer, and not worth the time it takes to reply. -Declan _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From wiljan at pobox.com Wed Sep 12 15:56:33 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality Message-ID: <200109122225.RAA000.54@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net said: > I understand that the whole Alice thing was misrepresented, but this isn't > an Alice reference, I don't think. > J. -- No, I was not talking about Alice, I was not talking about e-books. The contributors to this list seem to believe that "technological" in (technological measures) means somthing like high tech, computers, or electronics. no way!!! technological : adj. pertaining to the industrial arts collectively. measure : n. 1. A unit or standard for determining extent, volume, etc., by comparison. 2. Any standard of comparison. 3. the instrument, act, or system of measurement. 4. any definite quantity measured. 5. A legislative bill. 6. A rhythmical unit or movement, in poetry, music, or dance. Buzzwords all--. Together no meaning at all, 'till a court decides what the phrase means. It will not mean what you thought it ment. "technological measures" means anything at all, if you have a good lawyer. -will- From admin at seattle-chat.com Wed Sep 12 15:25:19 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912182401.B2034@cluebot.com> Message-ID: If your silent about something, in my book by default your for it. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:24 PM To: Seth David Schoen Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. I'm actually writing an article on how conservative and libertarian groups view intellectual property, and I have not yet found one libertarian group that supports the DMCA. [Obviously Democrats and Republicans are a little more enthusiastic (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,45522,00.html). Then there's the SSSCA, which top Dems and Repubs in the Senate are supporting.] If there is one, please let me know. The article's on hold for obvious reasons, but I am fairly confident my statement above is accurate. -Declan On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:11:39PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > Xcott Craver writes: > > > I've had baffling discussions > > with [self-proclaimed] libertarians, who believe the DMCA is good > > because it allows fair use disputes to be resolved by market > > forces, rather than by law. I.e., companies sell restrictive > > technologies and consumers "vote with their wallets." The anti- > > circumvention part prevents people from circumventing the market. > > Thus the article Declan told us about, > > http://www.cfif.org/5_8_2001/Free_line/current/free_line_copyright.htm > > and also something Fred von Lohmann found along similar lines: > > http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-23-01.html > > I was writing a reply in which I maintained that copyright was a > government regulation which interfered with the free market in > creative works. So there is an exactly parallel argument -- and it's > unlikely that CFIC and Cato would maintain that copyright should > exist because there is a market failure in the absence of regulation. > > This leads me to the (unsurprising) conclusion that the most important > thing you can do to get libertarians and trade proponents to oppose > things like the DMCA is to spread the word that copyright is a form of > government regulation. > > In the trade world, this could be surprisingly difficult. I recently > learned that the U.S. government adopted the position that inadequate > intellectual property laws constitute an "unfair trade practice" way > back in 1984, after an intense lobbying campaign by copyright > industries. This policy decision came years before either copyright > law or international trade law were on the public's radar; at that > time, they were both very obscure and it was hard to imagine that > there would be protests in the street over either. > > But there is a long legacy in U.S. trade policy of viewing countries > which don't have U.S.-equivalent copyright laws as somehow deficient > or criminal. This is strange. People in the U.S. don't think that a > foreign country is doing something wrong if it doesn't have a Federal > Reserve Bank, if it doesn't have a federal system with states and a > central government, if it doesn't have ZIP codes... but if you don't > follow us on copyright policy, you're a rogue nation! > > This policy is only really defensible if you view copyright law _not > as a public policy choice but as a recognition of right and wrong_ -- > which is certainly the way libertarians and many other people have > viewed legislation about murder, and frequently about physical > property. The distinction is more or less equivalent to the archaic > distinction between the malum prohibitum and the malum per se, the > infraction of the law as violation of government policy, or as > inherently evil act. That's what I was getting at when I wrote that > copyright infringement was like tax evasion rather than like theft. > > If infringing copyrights is seen as a malum per se, then almost > everybody will agree that countries which tolerate it or don't crack > down firmly as though they were havens of actual piracy, what the > U.S. alleged of the Barbary States. > > If it's a malum prohibitum, then eventually many people will ask why > the U.S. is imposing this legislation on the rest of the world. > > This, I think, is the real intellectual battle of the copyright wars. > If copyright is not a form of property (and I pass over the question of > whether anything is really a form of property), then copyright law, as > all legal scholars seem to think, _was made by a legislature, and can > be unmade if the public interest requires_. But if copyright is a > real right of creators, everywhere and always wrong to infringe, > legislatures are just doing their duty in approximating an ideal of > perfect protection. > > That's why I complain about the two pieces mentioned above. I don't > care whether MOCA passes; I don't care whether we have any particular > scheme of compulsory licensing for on-line music. I care about > refuting the suggestion that we shouldn't even _propose_ to reform > copyright law, shouldn't even _consider_ reforming it, because to make > any reform at all would violate the property rights of authors. > > That is a bad suggestion, but one which underlies huge expanses of > debate in the world today, not to mention U.S. trade policy. > > -- > 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) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 15:32:27 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: References: <20010912182401.B2034@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912182906.021788e0@mail.well.com> Mr. Eakins is clearly someone who has the rare gift of not only a remarkably developed sense of eloqution, but also the political savviness born of many years in the area. Since EFF has not denounced Tuesday's terrorist attack -- their home page at eff.org is silent on the topic! -- I conclude that I must inform them "your [sic] for it." Also, I don't recall Mr. Eakins posting a denunciation. I wonder why? At 03:25 PM 9/12/01 -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: >If your silent about something, in my book by default your for it. > >-----Original Message----- >From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net >[mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:24 PM >To: Seth David Schoen >Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net >Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they >are no better then the democrats and republicans. > > >I'm actually writing an article on how conservative and libertarian >groups view intellectual property, and I have not yet found one >libertarian group that supports the DMCA. > >[Obviously Democrats and Republicans are a little more enthusiastic >(http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,45522,00.html). Then there's >the SSSCA, which top Dems and Repubs in the Senate are supporting.] > >If there is one, please let me know. The article's on hold for >obvious reasons, but I am fairly confident my statement above >is accurate. > >-Declan > > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:11:39PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > > Xcott Craver writes: > > > > > I've had baffling discussions > > > with [self-proclaimed] libertarians, who believe the DMCA is good > > > because it allows fair use disputes to be resolved by market > > > forces, rather than by law. I.e., companies sell restrictive > > > technologies and consumers "vote with their wallets." The anti- > > > circumvention part prevents people from circumventing the market. > > > > Thus the article Declan told us about, > > > > http://www.cfif.org/5_8_2001/Free_line/current/free_line_copyright.htm > > > > and also something Fred von Lohmann found along similar lines: > > > > http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-23-01.html > > > > I was writing a reply in which I maintained that copyright was a > > government regulation which interfered with the free market in > > creative works. So there is an exactly parallel argument -- and it's > > unlikely that CFIC and Cato would maintain that copyright should > > exist because there is a market failure in the absence of regulation. > > > > This leads me to the (unsurprising) conclusion that the most important > > thing you can do to get libertarians and trade proponents to oppose > > things like the DMCA is to spread the word that copyright is a form of > > government regulation. > > > > In the trade world, this could be surprisingly difficult. I recently > > learned that the U.S. government adopted the position that inadequate > > intellectual property laws constitute an "unfair trade practice" way > > back in 1984, after an intense lobbying campaign by copyright > > industries. This policy decision came years before either copyright > > law or international trade law were on the public's radar; at that > > time, they were both very obscure and it was hard to imagine that > > there would be protests in the street over either. > > > > But there is a long legacy in U.S. trade policy of viewing countries > > which don't have U.S.-equivalent copyright laws as somehow deficient > > or criminal. This is strange. People in the U.S. don't think that a > > foreign country is doing something wrong if it doesn't have a Federal > > Reserve Bank, if it doesn't have a federal system with states and a > > central government, if it doesn't have ZIP codes... but if you don't > > follow us on copyright policy, you're a rogue nation! > > > > This policy is only really defensible if you view copyright law _not > > as a public policy choice but as a recognition of right and wrong_ -- > > which is certainly the way libertarians and many other people have > > viewed legislation about murder, and frequently about physical > > property. The distinction is more or less equivalent to the archaic > > distinction between the malum prohibitum and the malum per se, the > > infraction of the law as violation of government policy, or as > > inherently evil act. That's what I was getting at when I wrote that > > copyright infringement was like tax evasion rather than like theft. > > > > If infringing copyrights is seen as a malum per se, then almost > > everybody will agree that countries which tolerate it or don't crack > > down firmly as though they were havens of actual piracy, what the > > U.S. alleged of the Barbary States. > > > > If it's a malum prohibitum, then eventually many people will ask why > > the U.S. is imposing this legislation on the rest of the world. > > > > This, I think, is the real intellectual battle of the copyright wars. > > If copyright is not a form of property (and I pass over the question of > > whether anything is really a form of property), then copyright law, as > > all legal scholars seem to think, _was made by a legislature, and can > > be unmade if the public interest requires_. But if copyright is a > > real right of creators, everywhere and always wrong to infringe, > > legislatures are just doing their duty in approximating an ideal of > > perfect protection. > > > > That's why I complain about the two pieces mentioned above. I don't > > care whether MOCA passes; I don't care whether we have any particular > > scheme of compulsory licensing for on-line music. I care about > > refuting the suggestion that we shouldn't even _propose_ to reform > > copyright law, shouldn't even _consider_ reforming it, because to make > > any reform at all would violate the property rights of authors. > > > > That is a bad suggestion, but one which underlies huge expanses of > > debate in the world today, not to mention U.S. trade policy. > > > > -- > > 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) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 ed at hintz.org Wed Sep 12 15:41:14 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. Message-ID: <200109122241.f8CMfDc24919@phil.hintz.org> On 9/12/01 3:32 PM, declan@well.com thus spake: >Mr. Eakins is clearly someone who has the rare gift of not only a >remarkably developed sense of eloqution, but also the political savviness >born of many years in the area. > >Since EFF has not denounced Tuesday's terrorist attack -- their home page >at eff.org is silent on the topic! -- I conclude that I must inform them >"your [sic] for it." > >Also, I don't recall Mr. Eakins posting a denunciation. I wonder why? Gentlemen: Would you be so kind as to relocate your juvinile pissing match to a forum where somebody gives a damn? Thank you. And now back to our scheduled list topic: freeing Dmitry. Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From declan at well.com Wed Sep 12 15:46:00 2001 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <200109122241.f8CMfDc24919@phil.hintz.org> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010912184510.0213e4d0@mail.well.com> You're right. I won't post any more in this thread. -Declan At 03:41 PM 9/12/01 -0700, Edmund A. Hintz wrote: >On 9/12/01 3:32 PM, declan@well.com thus spake: > > >Mr. Eakins is clearly someone who has the rare gift of not only a > >remarkably developed sense of eloqution, but also the political savviness > >born of many years in the area. > > > >Since EFF has not denounced Tuesday's terrorist attack -- their home page > >at eff.org is silent on the topic! -- I conclude that I must inform them > >"your [sic] for it." > > > >Also, I don't recall Mr. Eakins posting a denunciation. I wonder why? > >Gentlemen: > >Would you be so kind as to relocate your juvinile pissing match to a >forum where somebody gives a damn? > >Thank you. And now back to our scheduled list topic: freeing Dmitry. > > >Peace, > >Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, >Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... >Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, > */ | \* And the world will live as one. >'78 Westy ***** Imagine." > http://www.hintz.org From jeme at brelin.net Wed Sep 12 16:05:48 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Tribute to the US In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Jingoist nonsense. On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > >> W: TRIBUTE TO THE UNITED STATES > >> > > > This, from a Canadian newspaper, is worth sharing. > America: The Good Neighbor. > "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the > most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the > earth. Let's get this kicked off with outrageous hyperbole! (OK, I'm not going to sink into a line-by-line mocking of this tripe, but I'll point out some of the more absurd sections.) > Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted > out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of > dollars and forgave other billions indebts. The "debts" of Germany and Japan and Italy were IMPOSED BY THE US as restitution for the entire war effort. I hardly think that forgiving a fine you imposed yourself is generosity. However, the US DID utterly destroy the infrastructure of Germany and Japan and it was the VERY LEAST we could do to help them rebuild. > When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that > hurries in to help. We've got to get those markets up and running again. Every day of downtime is a missed opportunity for American corporations (who prefer to be called trans-national corporations even though they use the US government to enforce their will). > This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. > Nobody helped. Shocking. Small towns get hit by tornadoes... dozens wounded, maybe a small handful killed (MAYBE). We don't get massive foreign aide packages? Those ingrates! > The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars > into discouraged countries. Those plans were particularly designed to make the third world subservient to US will. > Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, war > mongering Americans. I don't blame any indentured servant for denigrating his master. > Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing > Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why > don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia > fly American Planes? Several reasons (including, but not limited to): They didn't have a war machine propelling aerospace research. Their infrastructure is geared entirely toward production of goods for the American market as part of the IMF "restructuring" to improve the rate at which the entire nation can pay back the debt incurred by US corporations fronted by "local" business. (It works like this: Business gets a loan from the World Bank. WB gives the loan and the business dissolves. The World Bank calls the loan a default and goes to the nation in which the loan was granted for restitution. The nation cannot pay because it is a third world country. The IMF is sent in to "restructure" the economy so that money can be raised that the WB can spend [i.e. US currency]. So the production in said nation is aimed at US goods that have no value in their country of origin. The IMF prevents the government from spending any precious resources on local improvements. The US gets cheap consumer goods at slave labor prices.] > Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman > on the moon? Um, because it's utterly fatuous? I mean, I believe in the positive side-benefits of space exploration and pure research, but honestly it's third or fourth tier when it comes to the needs of a nation. Hell, why haven't WE done it in thirty years? Could it be because it was a PR stunt? > You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. > You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. > > You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon-not once, > but several times-and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the > Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. No, our real scandals are hardly touched in the media. Campaign finance impropriety, the war in Colombia, the highest incarceration rate in the industrialized world, the wholesale giveaway of public resources for private interests... the list goes on and on. > Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on > our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, > are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. How old is this essay, really? I mean, all of the references are thirty years old. Why did we have to have draft-dodgers in the first place? Oh, it was because we were fighting an unjust war that a preponderance of the population simply would not fight. > When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down > through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. We had to improve the infrastructure for US consumer goods, of course. > When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, > nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. They went broke because of the shift in government support from railways to the automobile industry. Trucks replaced trains at many times the cost to consumers, life, and the environment. > They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when > they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are > gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." This is just plain ass-kissing. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From sethf at sethf.com Wed Sep 12 17:22:19 2001 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Libertarian party is not our friends, they are no better then the democrats and republicans. In-Reply-To: <20010912182401.B2034@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:24:01PM -0400 References: <20010912131139.V24298@zork.net> <20010912182401.B2034@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20010912202219.A3210@sethf.com> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:24:01PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I'm actually writing an article on how conservative and libertarian > groups view intellectual property, and I have not yet found one > libertarian group that supports the DMCA. > > [Obviously Democrats and Republicans are a little more enthusiastic ... It is an extraordinary dishonest and misleading set-up to compare anyone who does not have to raise a lot of money to get elected, to people who do. I pointed out, Rep. Ron Paul is the closest thing the Libertarian Party has to having someone in Congress. Earlier, he was as high in the Libertarian Party as one could be. Where is his thundering statement of denunciation of the DMCA, of the prosecution of Sklyarov, of the destruction of fair use? Instead of engaging this issue, there's an artfully reply to something I didn't say: "there were no Libertarians in Congress; Paul is a Republican.". But Ron Paul is the *closest*, per above, and he's not exactly the embodiment of political opposition versus the DMCA. One possible reason for this? He had to raise more than *two* *million* *dollars* for his Congressional seat. http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/dist_total/TX14.htm This is a worked-example for my argument that Libertarian ideology replaces and suffocates an ability to think about the real world. The comparison "conservative and libertarian groups" to "Democrats and Republicans" is a deliberate set-up to make the writer's pet ideological think-tanks come out sounding good, while heaping derision on the writer's whipping-boys. But it does a great disservice to the reader, because it's empty cult propagandizing. In a nutshell, it lets one side make less than campaign promises, and compares these to the actions of those who done what is necessary to get elected. That's a nonsensical comparison, and I believe quite mentally destructive to good analysis. -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf@sethf.com http://sethf.com http://archive.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/technology/circuits/19HACK.html BESS's Secret LOOPHOLE: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/loophole.php BESS vs Google: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/google.php From jays at panix.com Wed Sep 12 22:09:14 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:18 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] The tragedy in NYC (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 12 Sep 2001 19:11:23 -0400 From: Perry E. Metzger To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com Subject: The tragedy in NYC [I sent this originally yesterday, but the, er, problems our mail server in downtown New York suffered for a while caused some delay. Another copy was published on Dave Farber's interesting people. Several people wrote me afterwards vilifying me. Ah well. The list is now running on a new machine in Virginia, which should be safe even as more buildings collapse and burn. --Perry] In the wake of the tragedy in NYC today, I was asked by someone if I didn't now agree that crypto was a munition. At the time, I thought that a friend of mine was likely dead. (I've since learned he escaped in time.) My answer then, when I thought I'd lost a friend, was the same as my answer now and the answer I've always had. Cryptography must remain freely available to all. In coming months, politicians will flail about looking for freedoms to eliminate to "curb the terrorist threat". They will see an opportunity to grandstand and enhance their careers, an opportunity to show they are "tough on terrorists". We must remember throughout that you cannot preserve freedom by eliminating it. The problem is not a lack of laws banning things. I know the pressure on everyone in Washington will be to "do something". Speaking as a New Yorker who dearly loves this city, who has felt deep shock throughout most of the day, watching the smoke still rising from the fires to the south of me, listening to the ambulances and police cars continuing to wail about me, let me say this: I do not want more laws passed in the name of defending my home. I do not want more freedoms eliminated to "preserve freedom". I do not want to trade my freedom for safety. Franklin has said far more eloquently than me why that is worthless. If you must do something, send out more investigators to find those responsible for this and bring them to justice. Pass no new laws. Take away no freedoms. Do not destroy the reason I live here to give me "safety". I'd rather die in a terrorist attack. -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com -- "Ask not what your country can force other people to do for you..." --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From kmself at ix.netcom.com Wed Sep 12 23:07:06 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:19 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] The tragedy in NYC (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from jays@panix.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 01:09:14AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010912230706.A18539@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 01:09:14AM -0400, Jay Sulzberger (jays@panix.com) wrote: > > <...> > In the wake of the tragedy in NYC today, I was asked by someone if I > didn't now agree that crypto was a munition. At the time, I thought > that a friend of mine was likely dead. (I've since learned he escaped > in time.) > > My answer then, when I thought I'd lost a friend, was the same as my > answer now and the answer I've always had. > > Cryptography must remain freely available to all. > > In coming months, politicians will flail about looking for freedoms to > eliminate to "curb the terrorist threat". They will see an opportunity > to grandstand and enhance their careers, an opportunity to show they > are "tough on terrorists". More food for thought: possible impacts of a declaration of war. The following is speculation on what a US declaration of war would have meant for the 1999 Yugoslavian crisis. http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/apr1999/war-a15.shtml A declaration of war would create a very different legal framework within the United States than that which prevailed during the Vietnam War, when massive antiwar demonstrations took place regularly in the US capital and other cities. It would mean a sharp curtailment of democratic rights and civil liberties, the imposition of military censorship on the press, and political and physical repression of dissenting views. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010912/b5cbc4d6/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Wed Sep 12 23:36:50 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:19 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Eric Hughes sings... (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:52:00 -0400 From: R. A. Hettinga To: Digital Bearer Settlement List , dcsb@ai.mit.edu, cryptography@wasabisystems.com, mac-crypto@vmeng.com, e$@vmeng.com, coderpunks@toad.com, cyberia-l@listserv.aol.com, nettime-l@bbs.thing.net, irregulars@tb.tf, David Farber Subject: Eric Hughes sings... http://www.inet-one.com.my/cypherpunks/current/msg00406.html Computer Security Basics Deborah Russell Privacy Information ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index] CDR: An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity Click for Main Site ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * To: cypherpunks@lne.com * Subject: CDR: An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity * From: Eric Hughes * Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:37:11 -0700 * Reply-To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com * Sender: owner-cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2001 September 12 An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity Fellow Citizens of the United States of America: I am moved to write as a founder of a movement that, far beyond my own efforts, has eloquently expressed an ideal, the ideal of privacy in society. Privacy is not uniquely American, yet it is at the core of the American ideal, at the core of free speech that enables human connection, at the core of free association that builds society up from a savage state, at the core of liberty. I helped to start cypherpunks, a movement for privacy in the digital world. Cypherpunks is a diverse movement with no explicit doctrine, yet with a deep shared desire for human liberty. Let none who call me friend say that the events of September 11 are anything other than a dark day upon humanity. In the midst of the violence, I see a thirst for the taste of the blood of vengeance in the mouths of many of my fellow citizens. I see that destruction will ineluctably ride upon the opponents of the country of these my fellow citizens. So be it. I do not seek here to forestall or to avoid the violence directed toward the perpetrators of these deeds. I write as a citizen of the United States that our country may avoid a self-inflicted wound against liberty. The terrorists have struck a blow against liberty, it is said. The terrorists will strike again, it is said. I say to all, let us not strike the second blow against ourselves. Today we are seeking an enemy unknown, an enemy who is hiding, as well they ought to. The thirst that drives our country forward now cannot be slaked without the apprehension of those responsible, and we have yet to identify or find them. We now have a great temptation before us, to lash out at those amongst ourselves who may be thought to have given succor to our enemies, at those amongst ourselves who may be thought to still provide them solace and deception, and at those amongst ourselves whom some dislike for unrelated reasons. I wish to repeat again the words of Governor Davis of California, who spoke yesterday that "we are all Americans." We are all Americans, and we should not attack ourselves. We are all Americans, and we should not fight each other in the streets. We are all Americans, and we should not turn our law enforcement apparatus and our national security infrastructure against the very liberties that we all hold dear. The goal of these terrorists is to restrict freedoms in America, to steal its essence and to weaken it. I shall pray we do not cooperate with this their goal in a hot-headed rush to immediate results. Let the anger of this country be cold and calmly directed, that the accompaniment of wrath be precision. The terrorists are cowards, it is said. Shall America be a coward to itself? We have an excess of strength to expend upon our opponents, be they external or internal. We will find that there are internal champions of liberty that have without conspiracy or knowledge furthered the plans of our opponents, who have taken advantage of the liberties that America offers all who enter her shores. Many of these champions I know personally, because cypherpunks have enabled liberty on-line to all takers, without discrimination and without distinction. Let the prevailing wrath be directed not against those to promote liberty, but those who consciously seek to destroy it. We need not curtail our liberty in order to save it. The message is seductive that we may more effectively fight for liberty if we limit our freedoms for a time whose end has yet to be announced. Yet this is not the message of America, but of several of its vanquished enemies. For liberty is not fair-weather clothing that may only be worn when the weather is good. Liberty is rather the jewel in the locket, the most prized possession short of family and life itself. We diminish ourselves if we rationalize our freedom away in an evanescent fog of rhetoric about efficiency. Liberty is not efficient; it is expensive and tortuous, and as an American people we desire it before most everything else. As we enter a new century, let us demonstrate the true strength of an open society -- that it can withstand the threat of demagoguery even as it remains a powerful actor against an external threat. This is the ideal that our strength may manifest, that a democracy may express its power as a democracy itself, and not as a police state masquerading as one. I stand with the Federal Congress and sing "America, my home, sweet home." For I live upon this land and soil, with other people who have set their lives along the course of freedom. I pray that we may all pass through this dark time with the dignity of our own ideals intact, that we may pass through to the other side with renewed vigor to pursue the cause of freedom over all the earth. My heart grieves with those who have lost, yet it also rejoices that we might yet undergo this ordeal as a country and emerge stronger and more faithful to our own nature. May peace be with you all, with the fullness of your existence in tow. Eric Hughes [Please feel free to post this at will.] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * Prev by Date: CDR: for women onlyyyyyy * Next by Date: CDR: SPOT infrared satellite image of Manhattan * Prev by thread: CDR: for women onlyyyyyy * Next by thread: CDR: SPOT infrared satellite image of Manhattan * Index(es): * Date * Thread * Author * Subject ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jays at panix.com Wed Sep 12 23:59:37 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:19 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [nyc-geeks] Terror groups hide behind Web encryption (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:05:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Olivia Reply-To: nyc-geeks@yahoogroups.com To: nyc-geeks Subject: [nyc-geeks] Terror groups hide behind Web encryption http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001-02-05-binladen.htm tincup, olivia -- LAW SCHOOL CHEER (apocryphal) Wall Street, Law Review, Contingent fees, all right! To get an A from Levi, We'll study all the night. Rules of law and bar exams, They can go to h---; It's economic theory, For which we're goin' to yell. SO GO, GO, EFFICIENCY, GILBERT'S ALL THE WAY. Learned Hand and U of C Are going to win this day. GO, MAROONS! ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get VeriSign's FREE GUIDE: "Securing Your Web Site for Business." Learn about using SSL for serious online security. Click Here! http://us.click.yahoo.com/LgMkJD/I56CAA/yigFAA/B.EolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: nyc-geeks-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 13 00:14:59 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:19 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org>; from tom@lemuria.org on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 10:33:16PM +0200 References: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 10:33:16PM +0200, Tom wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:05:37PM -0600, Will Janoschka wrote: > > 4. You may not read this book aloud. > > can we PLEASE remove that point from this and any future discussions? > it is factually incorrect and will only harm us. > > > > for those who've lived in a box for the past year or so: "read aloud" > is a text-to-speech feature, not a permission on bedtime storytelling. I beg to disagree. The ability to have your book read aloud to you, whether by a human or by a computer, ought to be an automatic right and not a "permission" that a publisher must explicitly grant. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 13 01:22:54 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:19 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Tribute to the US In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1644268941.20010913102254@centras.lt> >> The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars >> into discouraged countries. JAB> Those plans were particularly designed to make the third world subservient JAB> to US will. Yes Jeme you're right. Nobody gives money for free. The country I live has a big foreign debt and it is growing. We can hope the debt will be written off one day but nobody knows if it ever happens. I would prefer not to have any debts at all and live on my own, but nobody asks me. The scheme is as follows - US gives money in credit , sends its goods and waits till these goods are consumed, after that US politics come and say you must do this and this or you will not get further credits ... -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 13 01:35:45 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FW: Tribute to the US In-Reply-To: <1644268941.20010913102254@centras.lt> References: <1644268941.20010913102254@centras.lt> Message-ID: <1295040258.20010913103545@centras.lt> JAB>> Those plans were particularly designed to make the third world subservient JAB>> to US will. D> Yes Jeme you're right. Nobody gives money for free. The country I live D> has a big foreign debt and it is growing. We can hope the debt will D> be written off one day but nobody knows if it ever happens. D> I would prefer not to have any debts at all and live on my own, but D> nobody asks me. The scheme is as follows - US gives money in credit D> , sends its goods and waits till these goods are consumed, after D> that US politics come and say you must do this and this or you D> will not get further credits ... Furthermore, those who decided to live on their own and keep their own industries ( countries like belorussia or yugoslavia ) are being blocaded politically and economically ... I am tired of propaganda being poured out every day The result is well known - yugoslavia example. Well one can continue to call it healthy competition, but not me -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 01:50:55 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: ; from jeme@brelin.net on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:49:39PM -0700 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:49:39PM -0700, Jeme A Brelin wrote: > > > 4. You may not read this book aloud. > > > > can we PLEASE remove that point from this and any future discussions? > > it is factually incorrect and will only harm us. > > Well, is it any more absurd than other arbitrary restrictions placed by > publishers on copyrighted works using their "effective access controls"? this is the disabling of a FEATURE. if you want to compare e-books to regular books, then you have to realize that regular books don't contain a "read aloud" feature. > I understand that the whole Alice thing was misrepresented, but this isn't > an Alice reference, I don't think. it doesn't matter. "read aloud" has nothing to do with what YOU can do with the e-book. make a proveable false statement and your enemy will tear your WHOLE argument apart. using "read aloud" in our argumentation is PR suicide. From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 02:01:14 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:14:59AM +0200 References: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913110114.E17266@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:14:59AM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > I beg to disagree. The ability to have your book read aloud to you, > whether by a human or by a computer, ought to be an automatic right > and not a "permission" that a publisher must explicitly grant. please advise on whom I should sue because my computer can not read the books from project gutenberg to me - AMD or Gutenberg? text-to-speech conversion is a right? have you read what you're writing? From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 13 02:08:56 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org>; from tom@lemuria.org on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:50:55AM +0200 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:50:55AM +0200, Tom wrote: > > this is the disabling of a FEATURE. if you want to compare e-books to > regular books, then you have to realize that regular books don't > contain a "read aloud" feature. If the eBook reader software has the feature, what gives the publisher the right to disable it? Or rather, to put it on a more certain legal footing, which particular right under copyright law are they claiming when they invoke the clause against "circumvention of technological measures that protect ..." part of the law. There's certainly nothing in the DMCA or any other copyright law, that I can see. And yet if I work around the restriction, I find myself liable to prosecution because in working around that one I necessarily work around them all. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 13 02:37:03 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913110114.E17266@lemuria.org>; from tom@lemuria.org on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:01:14AM +0200 References: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> <20010913110114.E17266@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010913113703.D12714@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:01:14AM +0200, Tom wrote: > > please advise on whom I should sue because my computer can not read the > books from project gutenberg to me - AMD or Gutenberg? Tom, you don't need to sue anyone. If you have a text-to-speech program, it will read the Gutenberg texts to you. If you don't have one, there's nothing (apart from shortage of cash, perhaps) to stop you going out & buying one. I got such a program, for Windows, bundled with my first sound card. It could read a text file directly. If the file was in another format, you could cut it to the clipboard and have the program read the contents of the clipboard. Admittedly I don't use Windows any more, and I have no idea if there's a T-to-S program for Unix. But if there isn't, there's nothing (apart from lack of ability, perhaps) to stop me writing one. Furthermore, I assume the eBook reader in question has a text-to-speech feature. What would be the point of disabling a non-existent feature? > text-to-speech conversion is a right? have you read what you're writing? Yes, I read it very carefully. I think the right to use something you own in any way you wish (within reason) is pretty fundamental. I say "with reason" because some of the things you could do with things that you own might not be socially acceptable. I don't think having your computer read to you would be considered socially unacceptable under most circumstances. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 03:03:20 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:08:56AM +0200 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:08:56AM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > > this is the disabling of a FEATURE. if you want to compare e-books to > > regular books, then you have to realize that regular books don't > > contain a "read aloud" feature. > > If the eBook reader software has the feature, what gives the publisher > the right to disable it? he doesn't need a right to do that, because you do NOT have a right to a text-to-speech feature. so he can do whatever he damn well pleases, and as much as I believe these people are moronic control freaks, I'm with them on this one. seriously, this is a PR suicide. trying to claim a RIGHT for a text-to-speech feature? get real. > Or rather, to put it on a more certain legal > footing, which particular right under copyright law are they claiming > when they invoke the clause against "circumvention of technological > measures that protect ..." part of the law. There's certainly nothing > in the DMCA or any other copyright law, that I can see. And yet if > I work around the restriction, I find myself liable to prosecution > because in working around that one I necessarily work around them > all. we don't have to discuss circumvention law. everyone who voted/s for the DMCA/EUCD deserves to be shot. From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 03:08:43 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913113703.D12714@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:37:03AM +0200 References: <200109121839.NAA000.50@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> <20010913110114.E17266@lemuria.org> <20010913113703.D12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913120842.B17613@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:37:03AM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > > text-to-speech conversion is a right? have you read what you're writing? > > Yes, I read it very carefully. I think the right to use something you > own in any way you wish (within reason) is pretty fundamental. sure it is. and nobody is stopping you from reading the e-book aloud to your kids. the text-to-speech feature is disabled for certain e-books. that may be moronic, stupid, short-sighted and customer-unfriendly, but it sure isn't ILLEGAL. notice that I'm absolutely with you on the CIRCUMVENTION question. yes, I should have a right to do with my e-book as I please, and if I find a way to make it output speech, that shouldn't be a crime. I'm absolutely NOT with you if you want a law that requires e-book makers to turn on all the features. or if you claim that text-to-speech capability is a RIGHT. it's not and claiming that it is will discredit your WHOLE argument about anti-circumvention and content control. From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Thu Sep 13 03:43:09 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] What is Copyright? Message-ID: It took me some time to come to the following conclusions: > the text-to-speech feature is disabled for certain e-books. that may be > moronic, stupid, short-sighted and customer-unfriendly, but it sure > isn't ILLEGAL. Not illegal in any case. But I think in the true spirit of Copyright Law, disabling "features" should reduce the governmental protection a work receives. But now the rules governing the nature of the delivery of digital content receiving federal protection are re-written, by the seller, in whatever flavor. > if I find a way to make it output speech, that shouldn't be a crime. Strenuously agreed. But it is plasuable that removing features from media eventually removes the copyright protection of the media. The rules of its ownership--quite possibly including the right to speech-to-text it--are for courts and governments to define, not content owners. I understand the motivation somewhat of putting the owners in charge of the new and dynamic digital media forms. But courts will eventually defend some rights of media owners for digital media, as they did for all other forms, because at some point of "feature reduction", ownership isn't ownership anymore. > I'm absolutely NOT with you if you want a law that requires e-book > makers to turn on all the features. or if you claim that text-to-speech > capability is a RIGHT. it's not and claiming that it is will discredit > your WHOLE argument about anti-circumvention and content control. Claiming that some rights do exist in the ownership of a piece of media, and must exist or it's not ownership, could include as a creative assertion that in the digital world, text-to-speech is a right. Perhaps it will ultimately be determined to be a 'feature', available, perhaps, for more pay. But I find the idea that it should be a right creatively tenable, and somewhat illustrative of our movement's values. Describing "text-to-speech" in legalese might be the part of a "just" DMCA, enumerating the rights of a media owner of copyrighted works. Cheers, JOhn From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 13 04:08:44 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] What is Copyright? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <19414219910.20010913130844@centras.lt> >> the text-to-speech feature is disabled for certain e-books. that may be >> moronic, stupid, short-sighted and customer-unfriendly, but it sure >> isn't ILLEGAL. that's right BUT >> if I find a way to make it output speech, that shouldn't be a crime. That's exactly what i was talking about all the time when i say copyright is bad law. JD> Strenuously agreed. But it is plasuable that removing features from media JD> eventually removes the copyright protection of the media. So what ? What is wrong with that ? There is no laws restricting developing protection of IP so there should be no laws restricting breaking such protections. If industry developes copy-protected CDs everything is ok with that If hackers develope methods breaking such protection everything is ok with that Both things are natural rights of each side of the conflict. -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 13 04:27:21 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <4915337786.20010913132721@centras.lt> >> > this is the disabling of a FEATURE. if you want to compare e-books to >> > regular books, then you have to realize that regular books don't >> > contain a "read aloud" feature. >> >> If the eBook reader software has the feature, what gives the publisher >> the right to disable it? the publisher has natural right to disable it, but NOONE has the right to prevent ANYONE from enableing the feature. and DMCA is prohibiting such enableing of the features. Not only enableing cannot be prohibited but also the use of the enabled feature can not be prohibited -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 13 05:41:16 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] What is Copyright? In-Reply-To: ; from john.dempsey7@verizon.net on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 06:43:09AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010913144116.B12835@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 06:43:09AM -0400, John Dempsey wrote: > Strenuously agreed. But it is plasuable that removing features from media > eventually removes the copyright protection of the media. The rules of its > ownership--quite possibly including the right to speech-to-text it--are for > courts and governments to define, not content owners. I understand the > motivation somewhat of putting the owners in charge of the new and dynamic > digital media forms. But courts will eventually defend some rights of media > owners for digital media, as they did for all other forms, because at some > point of "feature reduction", ownership isn't ownership anymore. The DMCA is quite simplistic (despite all its legal verbosity): 1. Certain activities are defined as infringement of copyright. 2. Publishers can try to prevent these activites using technological methods. 3. If you distribute mechanisms to overcome these protections, you're a criminal. And that's the problem. It's a simplistic solution to a very complex problem. Too simplistic. Because what we now have is 4. Publishers can use the technological methods in (2) to prevent activities that don't infringe copyright. Without (3), there wouldn't be a problem. If I find an eBook that doesn't work with the text-to-speech features of my eboook reader program, I can work around it using a little programming expertise. I can still do this even with the DMCA - as far as I can tell the act of circumvention is only illegal if you do it to infringe copyrights. But if I give you the program I wrote, I'm a criminal. Or at least, I face the prospect of spending a long time in court testing an ill-conceived law, against all the financial muscle of the publishing industry. That's what's wrong, and it's why the "read aloud" permission. Here's an interesting thought, though. Warning: I'm going to make a pretty heavy assumption that the "read aloud" permission is hidden behind the encryption that is supposed to prevent copying. If this turns out not to be the case, then this whole discussion falls down - because you could modify the permission bit without circumventing anything. Under the DMCA as it stands, if I wrote a program that merely modified the "read aloud" bit, it wouldn't be illegal to distribute a binary version of that program - at least not under any sane interpretation of the DMCA - because it doesn't circumvent the copy protection in any way. But that program must decrypt, modify and re-encrypt the ebook. So if I distributed the source you could easily modify it to dump the plaintext of the book. Does that make the source code illegal when the binary is legal? What, then, about the source code to the "official" ebook reader? -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From rsperberg at yahoo.com Thu Sep 13 06:20:29 2001 From: rsperberg at yahoo.com (Roger Sperberg) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: David Haworth wrote: > The ability to have your book read aloud to you, whether by a human or > by a computer, ought to be an automatic right and not a "permission" > that a publisher must explicitly grant. Long before there was the capability for computers to read a text aloud to you, the audio rights for books were separated out as a revenue source for publishers. For many books, the publisher of the printed book doesn't own the oral/audio rights and arguably would be violating its contract with the company that purchased those publishing rights if the "read-aloud" feature were turned on. For other books, the publisher still harbors the hope that those rights will be sold, and doesn't want to sacrifice the oppotunity for that subsidiary income. Rather than making the blanket claim that the author and publisher should forego revenue opportunities, it would further your interest if instead you worked to persuade publishers to turn this feature on for the majority of books that will never have the audio rights sold. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 13 07:31:03 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: ; from rsperberg@yahoo.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400 References: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913163103.C12835@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400, Roger Sperberg wrote: > > Long before there was the capability for computers to read a text aloud to > you, the audio rights for books were separated out as a revenue source for > publishers. The right to publish in any format is a matter for contract negotiation between publisher and author. That includes digital format. The existence of versions of the work in audio format should not and does not have any bearing on whether I can have the book read to me, either by a human from my own paper edition or by my computer from the electronic edition if it has that capability. The "read aloud" permission is a construct invented by the publishers (and ebook reader manufacturers) and has no legal standing in copyright law. Yet it is protected by laws intended to protect copyrights. > For many books, the publisher of the printed book doesn't own the oral/audio > rights and arguably would be violating its contract with the company that > purchased those publishing rights if the "read-aloud" feature were turned > on. The audio versions of books are usually read by actors who can use voice techniques to bring the book to life. I don't think it's unreasonable to sell that kind of product separately from the printed (or even electronic) edition. But I still argue that it doesn't give the publishers the legal right to deny me a capability that my electronic system has. Furthermore, if the publishers started charging a premium for ebooks with the "read aloud" permission turned on, I think there'd be outrage from blind people. > Rather than making the blanket claim that the author and publisher should > forego revenue opportunities, it would further your interest if instead you > worked to persuade publishers to turn this feature on for the majority of > books that will never have the audio rights sold. Like I said, it's nothing to do with audio rights. It's to do with them being able to disable a feature of my computer, for whatever reason, and then use the DMCA to prevent me from re-enabling it. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net From saint_sam at yahoo.com Thu Sep 13 07:35:49 2001 From: saint_sam at yahoo.com (Sam Gray) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [nyc-geeks] Terror groups hide behind Web encryption (fwd) Message-ID: <20010913143549.42384.qmail@web14003.mail.yahoo.com> This article deserves a second look. Here's my $0.02; I just got out of bed, so let's blame any errors on that, shall we? ;> The link again: http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2001-02-05-binladen.htm I posted the following mini-rant web journal (http://timestream.net/nonsequitur). It is intended for public consumption; use it as you see fit. -- begin cross-post -- Here's another essential public relations step in the progression to a complete surveillance state: linking a scary scary terrorist with good encryption technology. This article is hopelessly vague on actual technical details. For instance, it mentions steganography (here's a definition -- just read the "introduction" section) but doesn't use the proper name for it. If the author didn't bother learning what the technology is called, why should we trust his information on anything else? The other possibility is that the article was dumbed down (it is USA Today) because only terrorists (and, by the way, millions of computer geeks) would be so dangerous as to know what it is. The truth is, email is the equivalent of a postcard -- it can be read with very little effort by anyone with an interest in doing so. Right now, I doubt that anyone is more interested in reading everyone's email than the federal government. How much of your business would you entrust to the US Postal Service if you knew that every single letter and package would be opened and read by an FBI agent before being delivered? Real people use encryption every day for thousands of legitimate uses. Let's not make the mistake of banning a good tool just because it can be used to cause harm. My brother recently injured himself with a handheld rotary saw. It would be just as ridiculous to ban encryption as it would be to ban power tools -- but that's what this is leading up to. Learn how to use good encryption while you still can. That way you'll know what you're missing when it's legislated against. Start with PGP Freeware or, if you're a true geek, try GNU Privacy Guard. ===== "There is no energy crisis. There is only a crisis of ignorance." -- R. Buckminster Fuller Yahoo spam follows... __________________________________________________ Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/ From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 08:18:58 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] War: Dmitry and encryption Message-ID: <200109131519.f8DFJ4I16626@moerbeke> For the most part, what I am hearing from the digital rights, security, and privacy communities is very unproductive at this juncture. We should not alienate ourselves by letting our petty personal politics interfere with the war effort, or else we will recieve the same in kind and in double measure. We have to be careful about our discussion of the implications of the attack for encryption and privacy, so I have a few suggestion. Every website that is related to Free-Dmitry should post a message of sorrow and outrage to their websites regarding the terrorist attack. See GNU-Darwin for an example. Just scroll down to the flowers. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/ Emphasize in your communications that our nation security interests in encryption. Use concrete examples, such as those from WWII. For example, clear-signed email is good for our national security because the messages are open, but they can also be authenticated. Encryption is vital to web commerce, and it is used by almost everyone, even though they might not realize it. We definitely don't want terrorists to steal our credit card numbers. Think of your own examples, and discuss them at large. For example, GNU-Darwin posted some gnupg instructions about an hour before the attack, and we would not think of removing them. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/cvs.html We should not retreat at all with respect to Dmitry, DMCA, or any of the related issues, but we also need to tailor our presentation to the situation at hand. Make sure that you do not appear as symathetic to the terrorists in any way, and never put your interests above the lives of the people whe died Tuesday. I feel strongly that if we don't get in line, that it will spell disaster for our movement. America needs people like us at a time like this, and we have to make sure that America knows it. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/b59273e8/attachment.pgp From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 08:36:21 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:20 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913164445.D12835@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@3SOFT.de on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:44:45PM +0200 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> <20010913141043.A12835@3soft.de> <20010913142751.B18156@lemuria.org> <20010913160625.B12741@3soft.de> <20010913162400.D18334@lemuria.org> <20010913164445.D12835@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913173621.A18805@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:44:45PM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > However, I still believe I have the moral right to use my property > in any legal way I see fit, as long as I can find a way to do so. I agree on that. what I'm saying is that you don't have a moral right that the reader, software or e-book support a given feature. > Anyway, because of the complexity - and therefore the > lielihood of lawyers twisting the argument around - I'll > accept your argument. > > It's been an interesting discussion. > > Dave > > PS I Cc'd this to free-sklyarov. To readers there, > this is (probably) the outcome of our debate. From micheas at earthlink.net Thu Sep 13 08:38:18 2001 From: micheas at earthlink.net (Micheas Herman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? Message-ID: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone who is faceing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, only one member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. I have seen several posts saying that there are many legitimate reasons for using encryption on a daily basis. These arguments make sence up until you realise that >99% of the people on the mailing list are not only not using it but also making it difficult to use. If we don't use encryption on a daily basis then our defence of it is more hypothetical and not as easy for people to relate to. If every one one this mailing list starts to sign all their email the topics that we care about will be brought up by our correspondents. And people will start to relise, "I want people to know that I really sent that email." and make the whole discusion much more main stream. It isn't "some mafia figure doesn't want the government reading his mail" It's "I don't want the government reading MY mail." And when the inevitable question comes up " What does someone using encription have to hide?" The answer is "None of your buisiness." not "good question." I have just started to use gpg and yes it involved using the comand line to create my key pair and post my public key on the net. But it was very easy. (evolution had a bug in how it was fetching mail but that seems fixed) .one of my friends installed pgp just so that he could cheack my signiture.. If you use linux and use mutt or evolution. using gpg is seemless once it is setup. Micheas -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/89b059fa/attachment.pgp From csm at MoonGroup.com Thu Sep 13 08:39:19 2001 From: csm at MoonGroup.com (Chuck Mead) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 13 Sep 2001, Micheas Herman posted the following: MH>I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone who MH>is faceing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, only one MH>member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. I think there is more than one... just many people don't have as much to say as some of the other people do. - -- csm Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! Stop the SSSCA! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjug0ykACgkQv6Gjsf2pQ0q9iwCfdwkG3QjnYZXnxEdzxpVEEXvx 49AAoJ3ohSHzZm6/aBwKKxsrRatpAxOS =awTj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 09:02:48 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> Message-ID: I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Micheas Herman Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:38 AM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone who is faceing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, only one member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. I have seen several posts saying that there are many legitimate reasons for using encryption on a daily basis. These arguments make sence up until you realise that >99% of the people on the mailing list are not only not using it but also making it difficult to use. If we don't use encryption on a daily basis then our defence of it is more hypothetical and not as easy for people to relate to. If every one one this mailing list starts to sign all their email the topics that we care about will be brought up by our correspondents. And people will start to relise, "I want people to know that I really sent that email." and make the whole discusion much more main stream. It isn't "some mafia figure doesn't want the government reading his mail" It's "I don't want the government reading MY mail." And when the inevitable question comes up " What does someone using encription have to hide?" The answer is "None of your buisiness." not "good question." I have just started to use gpg and yes it involved using the comand line to create my key pair and post my public key on the net. But it was very easy. (evolution had a bug in how it was fetching mail but that seems fixed) .one of my friends installed pgp just so that he could cheack my signiture.. If you use linux and use mutt or evolution. using gpg is seemless once it is setup. Micheas From micheas at earthlink.net Thu Sep 13 09:28:50 2001 From: micheas at earthlink.net (Micheas Herman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1000398533.14236.284.camel@progeny> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 08:39, Chuck Mead wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 13 Sep 2001, Micheas Herman posted the following: > > MH>I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone who > MH>is faceing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, only one > MH>member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. > > I think there is more than one... just many people don't have as much to > say as some of the other people do. > > - -- > csm > Free Dmitry! > Boycott Adobe! > Repeal the DMCA! > Stop the SSSCA! > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAjug0ykACgkQv6Gjsf2pQ0q9iwCfdwkG3QjnYZXnxEdzxpVEEXvx > 49AAoJ3ohSHzZm6/aBwKKxsrRatpAxOS > =awTj > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital signatures.. . From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 09:34:42 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <20010804110604.C84824@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109131634.f8DGYmI16787@moerbeke> > OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at > your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were > signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital > signatures.. . My point is that we not only need to have more people using PGP for reasonable purposes, but also that we need to show that encryption is already used by almost everyone on the web. We need to show that encryption is vital to commerce and to our national security interests, otherwise it will be a casualty of war ( and rightly so ). Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/d28afe5d/attachment.pgp From micheas at earthlink.net Thu Sep 13 09:42:00 2001 From: micheas at earthlink.net (Micheas Herman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1000399322.14834.298.camel@progeny> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 09:02, Charles Eakins wrote: > I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted. > How do I know that you've said anything. It isn't signed and email headers are so easy to forge that many programs do it automaticaly. I have no real reason to even suspect that admin@seattle-chat.com sent the letter that I'm respoding to. And If I wanted to send something to Charles Eakins that was of importace to him but possably not something that he would want to find out via office gossip I might encrypt it if I had his public key but I dont so the discusion of this is academic. Micheas -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/3f930de7/attachment.pgp From rknop at pobox.com Thu Sep 13 10:03:45 2001 From: rknop at pobox.com (Robert A. Knop Jr.) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Writing Congress does help! (was Re: courses of action) In-Reply-To: ; from tack@gaffle.com on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 04:12:39PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010913100345.A9358@sonic.net> > I was thinking that convincing our congresspersons through letters, > protests and petitions may fall on deaf ears. After all, DMCA wasn't > passed in our best interests, who's to say that they care at all. This is WRONG! Yes, if just a few of us write letters, they won't make any difference. The digital copyright industry has overpaid lobbyists pushing their warped agenda. Individual letters from people like us get filed and ignored by congressional staffers. It will fall on deaf ears... UNLESS there are enough letters; then it will begin to make an impression. There will never be enough letters if each of us doesn't write our one! I read a recent interview with Rick Boucher in which he stated that part of the reason the DMCA passed as it was is because the people like us, people hurt by it and opposing it, simply weren't there. Hollywood and music industry lobbyists were all over, making themselves heard, but there was basically nobody speaking on the other side. He even made the assertion (which I personally doubt) that campaign contributions weren't even the issue; it was simply who Congress heard and thought had a stake in the issue. Deciding that it's hopeless is the worst thing to do. If enough people write letters, it will begin to raise awareness in Congress that the copyright industry is way the hell out on a limb on this one. If we don't try to be heard, we won't be heard, that much is sure! The things you suggest to do instead of writing letters are all good things to do. But EVERYBODY, WRITE THOSE LETTERS. Tell your representatives and senators what you think of the SSSCA. Write politely and intelligently, but WRITE. It's the least any of us can do, and if enough of us do it, it might really make a difference. -Rob Knop -=-=-= Rob Knop =-= rknop@pobox.com =-= http://www.pobox.com/~rknop =-=-=- Free Skylarov! Repeal the DMCA; preserve free speech in the USA http://www.freesklyarov.org From wiljan at pobox.com Thu Sep 13 10:57:45 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality Message-ID: <200109131709.MAA000.58@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> on Thu, 13 Sep 2001 David Haworth david.haworth@altavista.net said: >The "read aloud" permission is a construct invented by the >publishers (and ebook reader manufacturers) and has >no legal standing in copyright law. Yet it is protected >by laws intended to protect copyrights. That remains to be seen. It could be that e-books have no copyright. What is the tangible medium? The publisher appears to be using my computer to do "something", then his (claimed) rights persist on my computer. Case law prevents bundling, tying one product to another. -will- From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 10:16:58 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing listuse gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <1000399322.14834.298.camel@progeny> Message-ID: Happy now? -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org mQGiBDug55QRBACCPV3cPbmhlnVtzrLwt7bTaugrIrdEGmWYE5hebh7yGo4ivRH7 VpbVmV8v14Cb5LaHlHRWVxCd8M4HLdHgomk+ZtPwZ3USt/WiWXiF5uZdKwTQCr9T sV6mdcR9F2g+22R6h7onVdG4TlaNGKJiRdXJHdKj9QY1RefdOaEZV3SXdwCgzvS0 +JF9rGjkf16vpktmwWzObKED/jnIkZgfgTR++msnC1BUJ01QUDDbbQka8MAdrqRD KULU4Jz+5X3Ewfqii0EJmKtWpZz/+r0wXVLfjwjcMfnM7Ky3qQf6qI+XI4wPHWg0 qwFECjKDI1OObPqmpKAKKWx1B0YmzR8ITFjOaS+UGItutMuXd5X/bP7P8SL93/z/ 303DA/sEsg9KgK5EEEGbgD6cwiY5/b+M7nYdBGjfGxwVBLciNswvIVrIITXqqDAq I6vs4ccZ/Wf8SUn6JVJikEpAhtVLYejwnrjJ84YRTR0WksM9/k64H7WKGSXZW57+ 5C7vdG8xx3E9cXR1hcTRkVHlapPAxp76wMUGeITW0govAIWSmrRAQ2hhcmxlcyBF YWtpbnMgKHd3dy5jaGFybGVzLWVha2lucy5jb20pIDxhZG1pbkBzZWF0dGxlLWNo YXQuY29tPohdBBMRAgAdBQI7oOeUBQkA7U4ABQsHCgMEAxUDAgMWAgECF4AACgkQ DWp4eA7Vis2q6wCglaDc9edr18/Esmm3C06vxXUp6kcAn3rMU06hzU/113YKoyuR KnJx2vW5uQINBDug58cQCACq498a24kexhaUw3rxsJvDAUlfIfuvKrRchfPgK+nW xIGP5u37HbNNpa96/bAHHNgWuCw08Xx1kQClGIRzmT23Ls6wiTqCY4D4/38Akr2D UbMUVnqytVbbvc60WKBUDC0qbriAOCMuLz9NRxMhzpp5NTSefPziUuWa5XdCqvnh pQwNYfwiIAByw2PQ54ObrM6uaBLGORysgZePjBPCeHaRe0gsw0fLu294goaPBIXZ XuP9hycQ4M4h3iNV9KU5tJ9YCNmN1Rpr8qFgLHt3rvQCkOVKj53k3W+f/p7A3eQn SSDVj4HytT+3oCyeVWxtBXVRsUD0MLAunaJiQTWVLPnTAAMFB/9FD+TbW0PWjoGd dnNuDTucnoE7S4IqIq+lsNU6d0Ghq9IpMELXHjvbzRA5EH6H12PXnESh9VnhEYu4 ja1lkiPZ64lzyGVORwSk54O/nTnCYDmV6NmFF3f8fvH0MN0MYfFtoh/4XyQ9TuXD gTLMWrSthwXnBreFWovUBrlGuHgGduWMH5lIdbJPfXDat3VvRUD9uzOzq97caK79 H0edhgzuidP2OSgAsCnui1Xy35sE/umvjvWRSUtUjY3NspTYoe8N1auzF/0taBsG whoJoB/Gf5ai5dn77i4oLuJaw9yGFf+ZjSc6E1qgQ73nhNDb2dlZKPE/wJLEO9sZ fvt3O/VZiEwEGBECAAwFAjug58cFCQDtTgAACgkQDWp4eA7Vis1j4gCfShEPw9VH 2dXAU7msd7H/gAvVOggAoJ6oLpWY2VoFG9WYeJ7b65d/Gy7E =txd8 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----Original Message----- From: Micheas Herman [mailto:micheas@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 9:42 AM To: Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing listuse gpg og pgp? On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 09:02, Charles Eakins wrote: > I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted. > How do I know that you've said anything. It isn't signed and email headers are so easy to forge that many programs do it automaticaly. I have no real reason to even suspect that admin@seattle-chat.com sent the letter that I'm respoding to. And If I wanted to send something to Charles Eakins that was of importace to him but possably not something that he would want to find out via office gossip I might encrypt it if I had his public key but I dont so the discusion of this is academic. Micheas From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 10:44:20 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? Message-ID: <200109131744.f8DHiNd15162@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> > OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at > your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were > signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital > signatures.. . If you want more PGP/GPG users, then we should have a national campaign for open-signing. It should not be hard to argue that it is necessary in order to secure our countries email system, but it should be a voluntary, patriotic effort. In this way, PGP/GPG will be come a vital part of our national infrastructure Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/48c8e0b2/attachment.pgp From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 10:50:30 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <200109131744.f8DHiNd15162@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Message-ID: If we want everyone to do this, what we should do, is make a easy to use GUI program to do it, currently the average user wouldn't understand how to use gnupgp programs. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of proclus@iname.com Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:44 AM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? > OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at > your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were > signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital > signatures.. . If you want more PGP/GPG users, then we should have a national campaign for open-signing. It should not be hard to argue that it is necessary in order to secure our countries email system, but it should be a voluntary, patriotic effort. In this way, PGP/GPG will be come a vital part of our national infrastructure Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 10:57:18 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <200109131634.f8DGYmI16787@moerbeke>; from proclus@iname.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:34:42PM -0400 References: <20010804110604.C84824@networkcommand.com> <200109131634.f8DGYmI16787@moerbeke> Message-ID: <20010913105718.G28834@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:34:42PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > > OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at > > your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were > > signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital > > signatures.. . > > My point is that we not only need to have more people using PGP for > reasonable purposes, but also that we need to show that encryption is > already used by almost everyone on the web. We need to show that > encryption is vital to commerce and to our national security interests, > otherwise it will be a casualty of war ( and rightly so ). I've written a rant to this effect (following), and a rant generator containing this and other rants/FAQs. http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/rant-o-matic.tar.gz It's largely aimed at those who respond to me having problems reading my email, but it's aimed more broadly, and is intended to generate broader support for RFC 2015 compliant mailers and mail-handling software (I'm noting signatures broken by a number of list handlers). I try to identify other advantages of having a widely used and available authentication/encryption network. Note too that your own public key doesn't appear to be available from keyservers. Peace. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A (not so) Short Rant / FAQ on the Subject of Signed E-Mail and Public Key Infrastructure By Karsten M. Self You're probably reading this because you either stumbled across it at my website, or I sent it to you in response to an email you sent me saying you can't read my mail. In the latter case, the short answer is that: - Your mailer is broken. - This is your problem, not mine. - File a bug report with your vendor. - I'm going to continue signing my mail, and if you don't change your end of things, you're going to continue having problems reading it. In some cases (you're cute, my mom, or you're offering sufficient reasons per hour), I'll make exceptions, but this is on a case-by-case basis, and I'm intentionally leaving it as a PITA manual process so that each of us is reminded it's a bad idea: me, when I do it, you, when I forget and you're stuck with unreadable mail from me. GET A REAL MAILER. - No, this isn't a virus, a bomb, a bug, a worm, or any other executable code. And if it is, that's your problem, not mine. - If your IT or MIS department is brain-dead enough to actually strip off these attachments before you get your mail, I'm going to laugh at you in public. Sorry, this ain't the sympathy department. There's a nice rant below about why this is such a pathetic action, though, you might enjoy reading it. The long answer is the rest of this document. "Your Mail is Weird" I use a combination of tools in my email to create messages which are cryptographically signed in such a way that it is readily possible for the recipient to gain a good level of assurance that the message: - Originates from me. - Hasn't been modified in any way en route. This is sometimes called a digital signature (a technical term, not to be confused with the recently passed US legislation on "electronic signatures", regarding legal contractual powers associated with various, and largely very weak, methods of inserting corporate hands into your wallet). The system under which it operates is known as public key infrastructure, and is based on public key encryption. You're probably going to start hearing a whole lot about this over the next year or so. That's the long description. The short story is that there's a way for me to keep half a secret and spread the other half to the world in such a way that you can tell if a particular message came from my half of the secret. It's pretty cool. The other part: You're responsible for determining whether or not a communication that purports to come from me is in fact from me. And if I didn't sign it, it almost certainly didn't. If the message *is* signed, it's still your obligation to verify the signature itself. What is RFC 2015 and Why Can't I Read Your Mail? There's an Internet standard, called a "request for comments", or RFC, which covers MIME encoded encryption and signatures. This is RFC 2015, "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy", (more info below under "Resources"), and defines how to handle public key infrastructure (PKI) encryption and authentication via standard MIME protocols. While it is still a draft standard, it is widely supported on multiple platforms. There are some pieces of Internet mail plumbing which break the protocol -- multiple mail clients ("email applications" to you), as well as some server applications. LISTSERV and beromail are two I'm aware of -- but compatibility modes are frequently available for such software, and in many cases, support is planned in future upgrades. But that's another story. If you're interested in the gory technical details, read on. You should be able to save my email as a text file and open it in a simple editor (e.g.: Notepad or Write under Legacy MS Windows). You'll find that the message body content type of my messages is expressed as: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ...which should be handled properly as inline plain-text content. If your mailer doesn't present the message body in this format, you should report a bug to the program maintainer or vendor. The signature is presented as: Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline Again, this is plain text, non-executable, and in no way represents a threat or possible exploit on your system. For an intelligent mailer, this should be interpreted, rather than presented, and used to validate the message content itself. Otherwise, the content can be presented or concealed, at the user's preference. So, Why Do You Insist On Signing Your Mail Anyway? Fair question. Part of the reason is for your benefit, where you are the reader of my mail. It is your responsibility to ensure that what you are reading as attributed to me is in fact my own writing. While digital (or sometimes "electronic" signatures now carry some legal standing, I'm not vesting my GPG hash with this power. However, you can be pretty confident that words appearing over my signature, verified against my public key, were written by me, or by someone who has access to my computer, my private key, and the pass-key necessary to utilize it. Why is it your responsibility? Simple: you know you've received mail from me. I may or may not know I've sent it. As is well known, email is an insecure, unauthenticated medium. It's quite possible that someone is sending something claiming to be someone they aren't. In fact, this happens as a matter of course with spam. Since you (the recipient) have the evidence in front of your eyes, and I've no idea it's been sent, if it's not from me, the burden of authentication lies with the recipient. If it's not signed by me, your assumption should be that it isn't *from* me. A large reason though is to encourage and advocate use and adoption of tools that support public key infrastructure (PKI) methods, both the ability to create and properly process signed and encrypted mail. I've found myself at several times needing to send authenticated or encrypted mail to persons, only to find that the recipients did not have a public key, PKI support within their mailer, or even, at times, a mailer capable of supporting PKI. It's been suggested variously that I sign messages inline, or in some instances, that mailing lists drop all MIME-encoded attachments. I believe this is the wrong solution for two reasons: - It breaks useful behavior. MIME attachments *can* provide useful information, including support of non-ASCII charactersets, required for basic communications in much of the world. In the case of signed messages, a recent SANS alert of the BIND exploit of the day was copied to a mailing list I'm subscribed to as cleartext-signed message. The body of the message was modified in two generations of distribution and the signature rendered invalid. This is not immediately apparent as messages which are cleartext- signed must be verified as a separate, manual, step. In the case of security exploits and announcements, such verification and authentication is of some importance. - It's not the root problem. The root problem is mail clients which handle untrusted content in an insecure fashion. This is like dousing 75% of the population with gasoline, then placing match-confiscating personnel at the doors of all public arenas. The problem isn't the matches. It's the gasoline. Palliative measures to reduce the apparent risk without addressing the actual cause mask the problem without fixing it. If sufficient people feel the pain, we'll eventually see changes either to client behavior or choice. So Where Can I Find RFC 2015 Compliant Mailers For lists: http://rmarq.pair.com/pgp/mail-clients-pgp.html http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html MUA implementations of RFC 2015: GNU/Linux / UNIX (most also ported to other platforms via compatibility kits such as Cygwin, UWIN, MKS, MS Unix Services for NT, etc.) emacs (through various mail extensions), exmh, ishmail, mew (an emacs mail reader), mutt, premail (Netscape plugin), Gnus 5.6.45 with TM and Mailcrypt, KMail, Mixmaster 2.9 (internal mail reader), Sylpheed 0.4.63, TkRat, XCmail, XFMail 1.3. Legacy MS Windows, Macintosh, and other platforms. Claris Em@iler with PGP 5 (?), Datula (plugin), Edmax (plugin), MS Outlook Express (plugin), MS Outlook (plugin), Mulberry (plugin), PMMail (native), Qualcomm Eudora (full and light version for Windows and Mac) since version 3.02 with PGP 5.5.3i and 6.0.2i Plugin, Turnpike (native), Voodo on Amiga. Got Any Funny Clueless Luser Stories For Us? Funny you should ask. One particularly illuminating response I've receive runs more or less as follows: My company's MIS department has recently configured the email system so that if an email has suspected attachment, it will not be delivered. Instead, the recipient gets the following message: This message uses a character set that is not supported by the Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display the original character set. If you try to save it as instructed, you will see another message: <<< MIME ATTACHMENT STRIPPED >>> I keep getting empty emails as the result of this reconfiguration. Thanks Regards, This prompted the following response from me: So let me get this right. You use a mail client which allows, among other things, attachments. You use a mail client which, among other things, includes executable content to be sent as attachments. You use a mail client which, among other things, *automatically executes* this content, without verifying its source or asking for user intervention. As an added bonus, there is content which *does* require the user to launch it but: - Mail and/or OS features disguise the fact that the attachment is, in fact, an executable, by hiding such extensions as might actually reveal such a fact. - A file content coding scheme (file extensions) which is bypassed by the fact that a program can be coded to open content which should be safe (say, a text or RTF document) but then proceeds to allow execution of unsafe content within it (MS Word macro viruses). - There is no ready tool for looking at the raw (text/binary) form of the attachment to determine its true Buddha nature. I've got raw text and binary viewers at my fingertips, and use them. - OS features and security are such that unprivileged users can wreak havoc on their own systems, networked storage, and other users systems, without protections afforded by sane filesystem security, user permissions, and file organization. - OS and application features are such that users routinely send, and are expected to utilized, arbitrary content, much of which may be executable. Which might be translated as "the user is an idiot", but is conditioned by the fact that the user has been trained that acting like an idiot: running arbitrary software, or engaging arbitrary methods, which may or may not include executing code, on arbitrary content, is not only a perfectly acceptable standard of operation, but _is required to perform basic job functions_. - In order to compensate for all these "features", your system administrators have seen fit, in their divine wisdom, to extricate all attachments from email. Including such attachments as might actually serve to provide some level of authentication as to whether or not the source of a particular email is who it claims to be, and possibly even a trust level associated with this. And this is now a problem for third party sites to deal with on your behalf? I'm sorry. I don't follow the logic. This is your problem, not mine. If you're going to strip all such features from your email, why don't you just go back to a plain text mailer and stop asking the rest of the world to please stop passing bombs your way with fuses you insist on lighting. Resources: ---------- Some additional informational resources for your benefit: - RFC 2015, "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy", M. Elkins, October, 1996, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc2015.html , spells out the standards for encrypted and cryptographically signed email. Note that signature-as-attachment is required by RFC2015. Note also that munging the content of multipart/signed messages violates RFC2015. This addresses issues with several broken mailing list management software packages. - For a list of mailers supporting RFC2015, see: http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html - For information on GnuPG, the GNU Privacy Guard, see http://www.gnupg.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Copyright (c) 2001, Karsten M. Self This document may be freely distributed with attribution. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/9c52eb58/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 10:59:12 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org>; from tom@lemuria.org on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:03:20PM +0200 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010913105911.H28834@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Tom (tom@lemuria.org) wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:08:56AM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > > > this is the disabling of a FEATURE. if you want to compare e-books to > > > regular books, then you have to realize that regular books don't > > > contain a "read aloud" feature. > > > > If the eBook reader software has the feature, what gives the publisher > > the right to disable it? > > he doesn't need a right to do that, because you do NOT have a right to > a text-to-speech feature. so he can do whatever he damn well pleases, > and as much as I believe these people are moronic control freaks, I'm > with them on this one. > > seriously, this is a PR suicide. trying to claim a RIGHT for a > text-to-speech feature? get real. The issue isn't the feature's being enabled or disabled, it's the weight of law behind what is only a technical issue. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/c7869f03/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 11:18:33 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: ; from rsperberg@yahoo.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400 References: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913111833.I28834@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400, Roger Sperberg (rsperberg@yahoo.com) wrote: > David Haworth wrote: > > The ability to have your book read aloud to you, whether by a human or > > by a computer, ought to be an automatic right and not a "permission" > > that a publisher must explicitly grant. > > Long before there was the capability for computers to read a text > aloud to you, the audio rights for books were separated out as a > revenue source for publishers. Audio rights as expressed by phonocopies. Not audio rights as expressed by a different interpretation path of the same fundamental underlying copy of data. Any attempt to use copyright law to constrain use of a copy of a work -- use in such a form that does not produce a fixed copy in tangible medium, and text-to-speach is such non-fixed expression of a work -- is creating a fundamentally new interpretation of copyright law. Section 1201 has already done this, but barring 1201, I cannot see text-to-speech as an exclusive right. Copyright specifically addresses various works covered by copyright (sections 102 and 103): http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/102.html (a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories: (1) literary works; (2) musical works, including any accompanying words; (3) dramtic works, including any accompanying music; (4) pantomimes and chreographic works; (5) pictoral, graphic, and sculptural works; (6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works; (7) sound recordings; and (8) architectural works. (b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in a work. As I read that, securing copyright protections to prohibit a mode of extraction of expression is expressly excluded by 102(b), as a "process, system, [or] method of operation". IANAL, TINLA Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/cf6c3857/attachment.pgp From jnichols at pbp.net Thu Sep 13 20:06:39 2001 From: jnichols at pbp.net (Jonathan Nichols) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:21 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Writing Congress does help! (was Re: courses of action) In-Reply-To: <20010913100345.A9358@sonic.net> Message-ID: > > The things you suggest to do instead of writing letters are all good things > to do. But EVERYBODY, WRITE THOSE LETTERS. Tell your representatives and > senators what you think of the SSSCA. Write politely and intelligently, but > WRITE. It's the least any of us can do, and if enough of us do it, it might > really make a difference. > > -Rob Knop He's right... but when he says "write".. I hope he means "get a pen/pencil/crayon/charcoal and paper, and scrawl out thoughts in your own handwriting" instead of using a pre-printed letter you found on the Net somewhere. :) Am I right, Rob? From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 11:19:51 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing l ist use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109131819.f8DIJsP15202@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 13 Sep, Charles Eakins wrote: > If we want everyone to do this, what we should do, is make a easy to use GUI > program to do it, currently the average user wouldn't understand how to use > gnupgp programs. This capability is built into the GNU-Darwin default email browser, which has a nice GUI. (proclus looks at the other distributions) Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net > [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of proclus@iname.com > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:44 AM > To: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing > list use gpg og pgp? > > >> OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at >> your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were >> signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital >> signatures.. . > > If you want more PGP/GPG users, then we should have a national campaign > for open-signing. It should not be hard to argue that it is necessary > in order to secure our countries email system, but it should be a > voluntary, patriotic effort. In this way, PGP/GPG will be come a vital part > of > our national infrastructure > > Regards, > proclus > http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > -- > Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > Version: 3.1 > GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O > M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ > h--- r+++ y++++ > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/da787156/attachment.pgp From schoen at loyalty.org Thu Sep 13 11:24:50 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913163103.C12835@3soft.de> References: <20010913091459.B12714@3soft.de> <20010913163103.C12835@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010913112450.C26824@zork.net> David Haworth writes: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400, Roger Sperberg wrote: > > > > Long before there was the capability for computers to read a text aloud to > > you, the audio rights for books were separated out as a revenue source for > > publishers. > > The right to publish in any format is a matter for contract > negotiation between publisher and author. That includes digital > format. The existence of versions of the work in audio format > should not and does not have any bearing on whether I can have > the book read to me, either by a human from my own paper edition > or by my computer from the electronic edition if it has that > capability. > > The "read aloud" permission is a construct invented by the > publishers (and ebook reader manufacturers) and has > no legal standing in copyright law. Yet it is protected > by laws intended to protect copyrights. I agree: "audio rights" are found nowhere in copyright law, but are a feature of publishing contracts. In the computer world, we're now seeing a strange expectation that everyone is expected to abide by contracts to which they are strangers. Nowhere is this more evident than in the DVD Video technology's sad history: various interests formed elaborate contracts and then complained, in effect, that _other people_ were violating those contracts. First sale itself undermines to some extent publishers' ability to subdivide copyright privileges. For example, one press may have the right to sell a new book in the U.S., another press in Canada. These rights were obtained by contract, using the powers of the copyright holder under the Copyright Act. However, if I buy a copy from the first press, and then take it to Canada, I may sell it there, even though supposedly I don't have "Canadian" rights to sell the book. Actions like that can undermine publishers' intentions about who'll sell what where. That doesn't mean that those actions violate copyright law. If the point is just that publishers had a contractual obligation to _try_ to stop people from using text-to-speech software, I'm still not so sympathetic. I'd still expect the publishers not to ask for the DMCA to back up arbitrary provisions of their private contracts. (My father is a book dealer who sells used and rare books, from all over the world, to all over the world. He works with publishers and respects copyrights, but I think it's very fortunate that, when he gets something in stock, he doesn't have to ask anybody's permission to resell it, or worry about whether he's violating some marketing or distribution agreement signed by people he's never met.) -- 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 admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 11:24:58 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing l ist use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <200109131819.f8DIJsP15202@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Message-ID: Ok, "for the average user" the average user doesn't use GNU-Darwin, or linux for that matter, this is what I'm saying. -----Original Message----- From: proclus@iname.com [mailto:proclus@iname.com] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 11:20 AM To: Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing l ist use gpg og pgp? On 13 Sep, Charles Eakins wrote: > If we want everyone to do this, what we should do, is make a easy to use GUI > program to do it, currently the average user wouldn't understand how to use > gnupgp programs. This capability is built into the GNU-Darwin default email browser, which has a nice GUI. (proclus looks at the other distributions) Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net > [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of proclus@iname.com > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:44 AM > To: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing > list use gpg og pgp? > > >> OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at >> your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were >> signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital >> signatures.. . > > If you want more PGP/GPG users, then we should have a national campaign > for open-signing. It should not be hard to argue that it is necessary > in order to secure our countries email system, but it should be a > voluntary, patriotic effort. In this way, PGP/GPG will be come a vital part > of > our national infrastructure > > Regards, > proclus > http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > -- > Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > Version: 3.1 > GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O > M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ > h--- r+++ y++++ > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From jeme at brelin.net Thu Sep 13 12:06:24 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted. This is totally wrong-headed and I just want to take a moment to rebut. You're implying that the ONLY REASON YOU WOULD ENCRYPT is if you had something you wanted to HIDE. We absolutely have to fight this kind of thinking. When Ralph Nader was asked to disclose his personal finances for the Presidential election (it's a requirement), he did so, but ONLY released the information that is explicitly REQUIRED by law. There are several portions that are listed as optional or are somehow or other not strictly enforcable as mandatory disclosure. He refused with a statement like: I refuse to provide this personal information as it is a clear violation of my privacy and has no bearing on the position sought. (again, or words to that effect) I was VERY proud of him for that. Not just because he stood up for privacy, but because, of all people, he CLEARLY has nothing to hide (the man gives 50% of all of his personal income to charity every year [the maximum allowed without penalty] and uses most of the rest to found new charities, keeping about thirty thousand dollars for personal expenses) but still believes in our right to keep our private lives private. Honestly, I haven't been signing my messages to this group because I thought there was a demime filter. Huh. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From jeme at brelin.net Thu Sep 13 12:12:28 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <200109131634.f8DGYmI16787@moerbeke> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: > We need to show that encryption is vital to commerce and to our > national security interests, otherwise it will be a casualty of war ( > and rightly so ). We don't need to use their (crappy) reasoning. Encryption is vital to freedom of expression which is vital to democracy... everything else is secondary (at best). Commerce and national security are about ten-thousandth on my list of personal priorities, but personal freedom and expression are right up at the top. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 12:11:49 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:02:48AM -0700 References: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> Message-ID: <20010913121148.K28834@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:02:48AM -0700, Charles Eakins (admin@seattle-chat.com) wrote: > From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:38 AM > > I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone > > who is facing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, > > only one member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. Rather more than one, I note. > > I have seen several posts saying that there are many legitimate > > reasons for using encryption on a daily basis. These arguments make > > sence up until you realise that >99% of the people on the mailing > > list are not only not using it but also making it difficult to use. > > If we don't use encryption on a daily basis then our defence of it > > is more hypothetical and not as easy for people to relate to. > > > > If every one one this mailing list starts to sign all their email > > the topics that we care about will be brought up by our > > correspondents. And people will start to relise, "I want people to > > know that I really sent that email." and make the whole discusion > > much more main stream. It isn't "some mafia figure doesn't want the > > government reading his mail" It's "I don't want the government > > reading MY mail." And when the inevitable question comes up " What > > does someone using encription have to hide?" The answer is "None of > > your buisiness." not "good question." Strong agreement. <...> > > If you use linux and use mutt or evolution. using gpg is seamless > > once it is setup. > I'm not saying anything on this list that needs to be encrypted. The issue was signing, which provides authentication, not encryption, which is essentially worthless in open conversation. There is a utility to authenticating messages sent to a public list. There is an absolute positive public benefit to being able to distribute general-distribution messages during wartime, and authenticate that, to a high degree of assurance, issue from an authority, and not an imposter. You're right, insofar as you're not saying anything that has to be encrypted. If your comments were of substance (frankly, they're not IMVAO), signatures, associated with a PKI web of trust, would be of some use. Borrowing from my own rant on the subject: So, Why Do You Insist On Signing Your Mail Anyway? Fair question. Part of the reason is for your benefit, where you are the reader of my mail. It is your responsibility to ensure that what you are reading as attributed to me is in fact my own writing. While digital (or sometimes "electronic" signatures now carry some legal standing, I'm not vesting my GPG hash with this power. However, you can be pretty confident that words appearing over my signature, verified against my public key, were written by me, or by someone who has access to my computer, my private key, and the pass-key necessary to utilize it. Why is it your responsibility? Simple: you know you've received mail from me. I may or may not know I've sent it. As is well known, email is an insecure, unauthenticated medium. It's quite possible that someone is sending something claiming to be someone they aren't. In fact, this happens as a matter of course with spam. Since you (the recipient) have the evidence in front of your eyes, and I've no idea it's been sent, if it's not from me, the burden of authentication lies with the recipient. If it's not signed by me, your assumption should be that it isn't *from* me. A large reason though is to encourage and advocate use and adoption of tools that support public key infrastructure (PKI) methods, both the ability to create and properly process signed and encrypted mail. I've found myself at several times needing to send authenticated or encrypted mail to persons, only to find that the recipients did not have a public key, PKI support within their mailer, or even, at times, a mailer capable of supporting PKI. It's been suggested variously that I sign messages inline, or in some instances, that mailing lists drop all MIME-encoded attachments. I believe this is the wrong solution for two reasons: - It breaks useful behavior. MIME attachments *can* provide useful information. - It's not the root problem. The root problem is mail clients which handle untrusted content in an insecure fashion. Palliative measures to reduce the apparent risk without addressing the actual cause mask the problem without fixing it. If sufficient people feel the pain, we'll eventually see changes either to client behavior or choice. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/9223eada/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Thu Sep 13 12:15:54 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:22 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Roger Sperberg wrote: > Rather than making the blanket claim that the author and publisher > should forego revenue opportunities, it would further your interest if > instead you worked to persuade publishers to turn this feature on for > the majority of books that will never have the audio rights sold. I absolutely reject (boy, do I use that expression alot around here) the idea that our law should support some particular business model. It's simply true that the people and public knowledge (through our use and understanding of the personal computer, the greatest [most flexible] invention of all mankind) have made that business model slightly more difficult to pursue. I don't care about what kind of contracts they like to set for one another. Those contracts SHALL NOT impinge upon my rights. I am not a party of or beneficiary to those contracts. J. -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 12:14:48 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:50:30AM -0700 References: <200109131744.f8DHiNd15162@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Message-ID: <20010913121448.L28834@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:50:30AM -0700, Charles Eakins (admin@seattle-chat.com) wrote: > From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 > 10:44 AM > > > OK, I'm sorry, I was over stating my case a little. But people look at > > > your actions more than your words and if almost all the posts here were > > > signed I bet we would increace the use of encryption and digital > > > signatures.. . > > > > If you want more PGP/GPG users, then we should have a national > > campaign for open-signing. It should not be hard to argue that it > > is necessary in order to secure our countries email system, but it > > should be a voluntary, patriotic effort. In this way, PGP/GPG will > > be come a vital part of > > our national infrastructure Please use postfix quoting format: your reply goes below the material cited. Trim your quotes appropriately and ensure your attributions are accurate. Quoted lines should be prefixed with a standard delimiter, e.g.: '> '. Thank you. > If we want everyone to do this, what we should do, is make a easy to use GUI > program to do it, currently the average user wouldn't understand how to use > gnupgp programs. You mean, like: So Where Can I Find RFC 2015 Compliant Mailers For lists: http://rmarq.pair.com/pgp/mail-clients-pgp.html http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html MUA implementations of RFC 2015: GNU/Linux / UNIX (most also ported to other platforms via compatibility kits such as Cygwin, UWIN, MKS, MS Unix Services for NT, etc.) emacs (through various mail extensions), exmh, ishmail, mew (an emacs mail reader), mutt, premail (Netscape plugin), Gnus 5.6.45 with TM and Mailcrypt, KMail, Mixmaster 2.9 (internal mail reader), Sylpheed 0.4.63, TkRat, XCmail, XFMail 1.3. Legacy MS Windows, Macintosh, and other platforms. Claris Em@iler with PGP 5 (?), Datula (plugin), Edmax (plugin), MS Outlook Express (plugin), MS Outlook (plugin), Mulberry (plugin), PMMail (native), Qualcomm Eudora (full and light version for Windows and Mac) since version 3.02 with PGP 5.5.3i and 6.0.2i Plugin, Turnpike (native), Voodo on Amiga. <...> Resources: ---------- Some additional informational resources for your benefit: - RFC 2015, "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy", M. Elkins, October, 1996, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc2015.html , spells out the standards for encrypted and cryptographically signed email. Note that signature-as-attachment is required by RFC2015. Note also that munging the content of multipart/signed messages violates RFC2015. This addresses issues with several broken mailing list management software packages. - For a list of mailers supporting RFC2015, see: http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html - For information on GnuPG, the GNU Privacy Guard, see http://www.gnupg.org/ Thank you. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/fc7556a6/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Thu Sep 13 12:24:00 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:25:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jay D. Dyson To: President George W. Bush Cc: Cryptography List , InfoSec News Subject: OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Dear Mr. President, I am writing you to express my thanks for your sincere and thoughtful remarks on today's national tragedy. Like you, I offer my condolences to the families and friends of the victims of this horrific attack. I also write you on behalf of potential victims of a growing and unreasoned response to this travesty. Interspersed with the reports on today's national tragedy, I have been hearing other news that is as disconcerting as the senseless loss of life. Namely, that Federal Law Enforcement Agency spokespersons are talking of limiting not only civil liberties of free passage, but veiled references to endorsing the curtailing of privacy-enabling technologies, all of which are cryptography-based. It seems that those who truly care about freedom and all that it entails are being afforded no time to mourn this day's losses. I believe it no product of wild speculation to suggest that many policiticians and media pundits will once again renew their calls for limitations on public access to strong cryptography. These movements will be built on the graves of the dead in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. The claim will ultimately be made that if cryptography had not been so readily available, our intelligence agencies would have been able to detect and summarily thwart today's attack on the contintental United States. Suffice it to say that I can no sooner embrace such notions than I can embrace the terrorists who brought this tragedy to our nation's shores. And anyone suggesting such a course of action should be met with resistance equal to that which you call on us to muster against the forces of terrorism. The day we sacrifice our liberties in the name of "security" is the day that the terrorists' goals will have been achieved. To reiterate the wisdom of Benjamin Franklin, if we surrender our liberty in the name of security, we shall have neither. It is unfortunate that it seemed necessary to compose this note less than twelve hours after this day's attack, but it is every citizen's duty to take every possible action to avert national disaster; especially one in the making. Thank you for your valuable time. It is my hope that the perpetrators of this crime against the United States will be swiftly brought to justice. God bless America. Sincerely, Jay D. Dyson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: See http://www.treachery.net/~jdyson/ for current keys. iQCVAwUBO56rgLlDRyqRQ2a9AQEDJQP/brn6C5MEUIOrmGr8Mbkoz1yEFvfhPwAa qVmR5q2+udiRgKth474PyFArwr0zrDncSDNWT8FsUspAxqN0J8WzbBYWMbWQijr5 nh37hzwkHCHHVV64QgcPr5Cf6Xxz2tZDYw0dTHl0HvjuS0YpxCl/VergTkrIUxMz zVEt3df/7ak= =TqgQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 12:28:31 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <20010913121448.L28834@navel.introspect> Message-ID: Hmm very interesting just did a search on Download.com for RFC 2015, guess how many hit's I got? 0, you know you and Microsoft Developers have alot in common, why don't you step out of your box for a little bit, and get with the real world. This is about education, and getting this out to the average person, the average net user knows about download.com, and cnet.com, and zdnet.com etc. They don't know about the url's you presented, and this is exactly my point! ---- You mean, like: So Where Can I Find RFC 2015 Compliant Mailers For lists: http://rmarq.pair.com/pgp/mail-clients-pgp.html http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html MUA implementations of RFC 2015: GNU/Linux / UNIX (most also ported to other platforms via compatibility kits such as Cygwin, UWIN, MKS, MS Unix Services for NT, etc.) emacs (through various mail extensions), exmh, ishmail, mew (an emacs mail reader), mutt, premail (Netscape plugin), Gnus 5.6.45 with TM and Mailcrypt, KMail, Mixmaster 2.9 (internal mail reader), Sylpheed 0.4.63, TkRat, XCmail, XFMail 1.3. Legacy MS Windows, Macintosh, and other platforms. Claris Em@iler with PGP 5 (?), Datula (plugin), Edmax (plugin), MS Outlook Express (plugin), MS Outlook (plugin), Mulberry (plugin), PMMail (native), Qualcomm Eudora (full and light version for Windows and Mac) since version 3.02 with PGP 5.5.3i and 6.0.2i Plugin, Turnpike (native), Voodo on Amiga. <...> Resources: ---------- Some additional informational resources for your benefit: - RFC 2015, "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy", M. Elkins, October, 1996, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc2015.html , spells out the standards for encrypted and cryptographically signed email. Note that signature-as-attachment is required by RFC2015. Note also that munging the content of multipart/signed messages violates RFC2015. This addresses issues with several broken mailing list management software packages. - For a list of mailers supporting RFC2015, see: http://www.spinnaker.de/mutt/rfc2015.html - For information on GnuPG, the GNU Privacy Guard, see http://www.gnupg.org/ Thank you. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 13:02:23 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Speacking of which, good Article on Page B4 in today's Wall Street Journal about encryption. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Jay Sulzberger Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:24 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:25:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jay D. Dyson To: President George W. Bush Cc: Cryptography List , InfoSec News Subject: OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Dear Mr. President, I am writing you to express my thanks for your sincere and thoughtful remarks on today's national tragedy. Like you, I offer my condolences to the families and friends of the victims of this horrific attack. I also write you on behalf of potential victims of a growing and unreasoned response to this travesty. Interspersed with the reports on today's national tragedy, I have been hearing other news that is as disconcerting as the senseless loss of life. Namely, that Federal Law Enforcement Agency spokespersons are talking of limiting not only civil liberties of free passage, but veiled references to endorsing the curtailing of privacy-enabling technologies, all of which are cryptography-based. It seems that those who truly care about freedom and all that it entails are being afforded no time to mourn this day's losses. I believe it no product of wild speculation to suggest that many policiticians and media pundits will once again renew their calls for limitations on public access to strong cryptography. These movements will be built on the graves of the dead in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. The claim will ultimately be made that if cryptography had not been so readily available, our intelligence agencies would have been able to detect and summarily thwart today's attack on the contintental United States. Suffice it to say that I can no sooner embrace such notions than I can embrace the terrorists who brought this tragedy to our nation's shores. And anyone suggesting such a course of action should be met with resistance equal to that which you call on us to muster against the forces of terrorism. The day we sacrifice our liberties in the name of "security" is the day that the terrorists' goals will have been achieved. To reiterate the wisdom of Benjamin Franklin, if we surrender our liberty in the name of security, we shall have neither. It is unfortunate that it seemed necessary to compose this note less than twelve hours after this day's attack, but it is every citizen's duty to take every possible action to avert national disaster; especially one in the making. Thank you for your valuable time. It is my hope that the perpetrators of this crime against the United States will be swiftly brought to justice. God bless America. Sincerely, Jay D. Dyson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: See http://www.treachery.net/~jdyson/ for current keys. iQCVAwUBO56rgLlDRyqRQ2a9AQEDJQP/brn6C5MEUIOrmGr8Mbkoz1yEFvfhPwAa qVmR5q2+udiRgKth474PyFArwr0zrDncSDNWT8FsUspAxqN0J8WzbBYWMbWQijr5 nh37hzwkHCHHVV64QgcPr5Cf6Xxz2tZDYw0dTHl0HvjuS0YpxCl/VergTkrIUxMz zVEt3df/7ak= =TqgQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From rknop at pobox.com Thu Sep 13 13:05:12 2001 From: rknop at pobox.com (Robert A. Knop Jr.) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Writing Congress does help! (was Re: courses of action) In-Reply-To: ; from jnichols@pbp.net on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 03:06:39AM +0000 References: <20010913100345.A9358@sonic.net> Message-ID: <20010913130512.A23011@sonic.net> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 03:06:39AM +0000, Jonathan Nichols wrote: > > > > The things you suggest to do instead of writing letters are all good things > > to do. But EVERYBODY, WRITE THOSE LETTERS. Tell your representatives and > > senators what you think of the SSSCA. Write politely and intelligently, but > > WRITE. It's the least any of us can do, and if enough of us do it, it might > > really make a difference. > > > > -Rob Knop > > He's right... but when he says "write".. I hope he means "get a > pen/pencil/crayon/charcoal and paper, and scrawl out thoughts in your own > handwriting" instead of using a pre-printed letter you found on the Net > somewhere. :) > > Am I right, Rob? Most definitely. To be honest, when I did it, I used my computer keyboard and LaTeX, but I did write my own letter. (I also sent it on to my parents and my in-laws, so they'd have some idea what I'm on about, but I composed it from scratch.) If that is too much to do, then by all means print out, sign, and mail in a letter you got from the EFF or elsewhere. That's better than doing nothing. But if you can take the extra half-hour it will take to write your own letter, it will be much more effective. Writing our representatives is the least we can do. -Rob From ruben at mrbrklyn.com Thu Sep 13 13:06:33 2001 From: ruben at mrbrklyn.com (Brooklyn Linux Solutions) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from jays@panix.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 15:24:00 -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010913160633.A23688@www2> << Thank you for your valuable time. It is my hope that the perpetrators of this crime against the United States will be swiftly brought to justice. God bless America.>> I do not view this as a crime which can be settled with judicial prosecution of a few individuals. In fact, I find this POV repugnant, cowardly, and a copout. Nothing short of a full scale military effort will solve this threat. The ability of foriegn nations to support with man and materials this level of attack need to be ended by extream military attach, even if it means raising several key cities including Terran, Bagdag, Kabal, and Damascus. We need to press this battle until our enemy can not longer wage war against us. This was not a car bombing....... Ruben -- Brooklyn Linux Solutions http://www.mrbrklyn.com http://www.brooklynonline.com 1-718-382-5752 From david at desjardins.org Thu Sep 13 13:17:49 2001 From: david at desjardins.org (David desJardins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #225 - 64 msgs References: Message-ID: <200109132017.NAA20548@happy.xkey.com> Declan McCullagh writes: > But anyway, I did check into this. I was wrong; it was a voice vote in > the House: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR02281:@@@X > > I don't know how Paul voted, but I suspect he voted against the DMCA. "Agreed to by voice vote" means that either no one opposed it, or no one thought it was important enough to have a recorded vote. Anyone who wanted to vote against the bill would insist on a recorded vote. -- David desJardins From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 13:19:54 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing l ist use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109132019.f8DKJvB15330@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 13 Sep, Jeme A Brelin wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: >> We need to show that encryption is vital to commerce and to our >> national security interests, otherwise it will be a casualty of war ( >> and rightly so ). > > We don't need to use their (crappy) reasoning. > > Encryption is vital to freedom of expression which is vital to > democracy... everything else is secondary (at best). Please understand that I am trying to protect these values, not diminish them. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > Commerce and national security are about ten-thousandth on my list of > personal priorities, but personal freedom and expression are right up at > the top. > > J. -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/ffa8b71c/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Thu Sep 13 14:24:57 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:59:26 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com Subject: Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html Congress Mulls Stiff Crypto Laws By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 1:45 p.m. Sep. 13, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- The encryption wars have begun. For nearly a decade, privacy mavens have been worrying that a terrorist attack could prompt Congress to ban communications-scrambling products that frustrate both police wiretaps and U.S. intelligence agencies. Tuesday's catastrophe, which shed more blood on American soil than any event since the Civil War, appears to have started that process. Some politicians and defense hawks are warning that extremists such as Osama bin Laden, who U.S. officials say is a crypto-aficionado and the top suspect in Tuesday's attacks, enjoy unfettered access to privacy-protecting software and hardware that render their communications unintelligible to eavesdroppers. In a floor speech on Thursday, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) called for a global prohibition on encryption products without backdoors for government surveillance. "This is something that we need international cooperation on and we need to have movement on in order to get the information that allows us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in Washington," Gregg said, according to a copy of his remarks that an aide provided. President Clinton appointed an ambassador-rank official, David Aaron, to try this approach, but eventually the administration abandoned the project. Gregg said encryption makers "have as much at risk as we have at risk as a nation, and they should understand that as a matter of citizenship, they have an obligation" to include decryption methods for government agents. Gregg, who previously headed the appropriations subcommittee overseeing the Justice Department, said that such access would only take place with "court oversight." [...] Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, a hawkish think tank that has won accolades from all recent Republican presidents, says that this week's terrorist attacks demonstrate the government must be able to penetrate communications it intercepts. "I'm certainly of the view that we need to let the U.S. government have access to encrypted material under appropriate circumstances and regulations," says Gaffney, an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan. [...] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 13 14:32:34 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109132132.f8DLWgW15558@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 13 Sep, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > > > "This is something that we need international cooperation on and we > need to have movement on in order to get the information that allows > us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in > Washington," Gregg said, according to a copy of his remarks that an > aide provided. Thanks Declan. As always this is the key to our success. Senator Gregg is saying, in effect, that encryption software worldwide should have a back door for US government agents. As well as being repugnant to the value of freedom, such a plan is clearly unworkable and contrary to the interests of even our allies. Is Gregg trying to break the international coalition against the terrorists? Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/0f14d800/attachment.pgp From jeme at brelin.net Thu Sep 13 15:18:54 2001 From: jeme at brelin.net (Jeme A Brelin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010913160633.A23688@www2> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > I do not view this as a crime which can be settled with judicial > prosecution of a few individuals. In fact, I find this POV repugnant, > cowardly, and a copout. No, it won't be settled until the United States stops its rampant global terrorism campaign and no nation or group has reason to believe that the US, en toto, is their enemy. Of course, the intolerant and the mad will always have their own irrational reason and they must be handled individually. > Nothing short of a full scale military effort will solve this threat. > The ability of foriegn nations to support with man and materials this > level of attack need to be ended by extream military attach, even if > it means raising several key cities including Terran, Bagdag, Kabal, > and Damascus. Speaking of the intolerant and the mad... FIRST: You've already decided that the entire middle east is responsible for an act for which nobody has claimed responsibility and nobody has stood trial. Let's try to have a little bit of respect for freedom and justice. SECOND: You want to raze a city or two for the collapse of a couple of buildings? Talk about over-reacting. > We need to press this battle until our enemy can not longer wage war > against us. So, might makes right? > This was not a car bombing....... No shit. J. - -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQE7oTDxkHjb+HfJvjYRAopdAJ9+gMGXCC46r36/O69mnYlek4/U+gCgn5g2 YwP2xz0Re3RHEVJ9Xq0T6rk= =YJSf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 13 15:13:17 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:23 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Writing Congress does help! (was Re: courses of action) In-Reply-To: <20010913130512.A23011@sonic.net> References: <20010913100345.A9358@sonic.net> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010913151217.00aa2ae0@mail.maden.org> At 13:05 13-09-2001, Robert A. Knop Jr. wrote: >Most definitely. To be honest, when I did it, I used my computer keyboard >and LaTeX, but I did write my own letter. (I also sent it on to my parents >and my in-laws, so they'd have some idea what I'm on about, but I composed >it from scratch.) All indications I've heard are that handwritten letters get more weight. -crism [Not signed because attempting to upgrade to PGP 7 ate my laptop completely, and took a week to undo.] -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 15:24:53 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hey buttwipe, this was an act of war, not a local murder, act's of war, aren't dealt with in the courts, get real. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Jeme A Brelin Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:19 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > I do not view this as a crime which can be settled with judicial > prosecution of a few individuals. In fact, I find this POV repugnant, > cowardly, and a copout. No, it won't be settled until the United States stops its rampant global terrorism campaign and no nation or group has reason to believe that the US, en toto, is their enemy. Of course, the intolerant and the mad will always have their own irrational reason and they must be handled individually. > Nothing short of a full scale military effort will solve this threat. > The ability of foriegn nations to support with man and materials this > level of attack need to be ended by extream military attach, even if > it means raising several key cities including Terran, Bagdag, Kabal, > and Damascus. Speaking of the intolerant and the mad... FIRST: You've already decided that the entire middle east is responsible for an act for which nobody has claimed responsibility and nobody has stood trial. Let's try to have a little bit of respect for freedom and justice. SECOND: You want to raze a city or two for the collapse of a couple of buildings? Talk about over-reacting. > We need to press this battle until our enemy can not longer wage war > against us. So, might makes right? > This was not a car bombing....... No shit. J. - -- ----------------- Jeme A Brelin jeme@brelin.net ----------------- [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQE7oTDxkHjb+HfJvjYRAopdAJ9+gMGXCC46r36/O69mnYlek4/U+gCgn5g2 YwP2xz0Re3RHEVJ9Xq0T6rk= =YJSf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 13 15:31:48 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: Civility: mind your manners (was Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd)) In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 03:24:53PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20010913153148.A623@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 03:24:53PM -0700, Charles Eakins (admin@seattle-chat.com) wrote: > Hey buttwipe, this was an act of war, not a local murder, act's of war, > aren't dealt with in the courts, get real. I'll join several others in strongly suggesting you mind your manners, language, and attitude in list and off-list messages. You're not contributing positively to the discussion. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010913/6ad976f1/attachment.pgp From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 15:35:26 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality In-Reply-To: <20010913105911.H28834@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:59:12AM -0700 References: <20010912223316.A16338@lemuria.org> <20010913105055.D17266@lemuria.org> <20010913110856.C12714@3soft.de> <20010913120320.A17613@lemuria.org> <20010913105911.H28834@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010914003526.C17583@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > seriously, this is a PR suicide. trying to claim a RIGHT for a > > text-to-speech feature? get real. > > The issue isn't the feature's being enabled or disabled, it's the weight > of law behind what is only a technical issue. I agree completely that DMCA is a bad law, that EUCD will become one and that circumvention prohibitions in absence of copyright infringement are possible the most stupid thing I've seen in legislation so far (right in front of that famous law about female drivers from the early 20th century). -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 15:39:08 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:28:31PM -0700 References: <20010913121448.L28834@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010914003908.D17583@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:28:31PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > Hmm very interesting just did a search on Download.com for RFC 2015, guess > how many hit's I got? 0, you know you and Microsoft Developers have alot in > common, why don't you step out of your box for a little bit, and get with > the real world. This is about education, and getting this out to the > average person, the average net user knows about download.com, and cnet.com, > and zdnet.com etc. They don't know about the url's you presented, and this > is exactly my point! the average user should know that these sites called a "search engine" exist. google returns over 3000 results for "rfc 2015", and all on the first page seem to be direct links to the document in question. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From cycmn at nyct.net Thu Sep 13 15:47:11 2001 From: cycmn at nyct.net (J.E. Cripps) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: Civility: mind your manners (was Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd)) In-Reply-To: <20010913153148.A623@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010913184505.N66166-100000@bsd1.nyct.net> >Karsten M. Self > I'll join several others in strongly suggesting you mind your manners, > language, and attitude in list and off-list messages. You're not > contributing positively to the discussion. I'll ask the same. We need all the contributors' in this thread, please just cool down before you post. This may be the most serious situation we all ever face. > Praying for the victims. As should we all. -- Free Dmitry Sklyarov: http://www.freesklyarov.org Repeal the DMCA: http://www.anti-dmca.org Its STILL fair use or no use: http://www.nyfairuse.org From ed at hintz.org Thu Sep 13 15:50:53 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) Message-ID: <200109132250.f8DMoXc30827@phil.hintz.org> On 9/13/01 3:24 PM, admin@seattle-chat.com thus spake: >Hey buttwipe, this was an act of war, not a local murder, act's of war, >aren't dealt with in the courts, get real. And this has what to do with freeing Dmitry? To my knowledge, he is accused of neither terrorism, inciting war, nor murder, and his case will be dealt with in the courts. And he doesn't really strike me as a buttwipe. free-sklyarov@zork.net not nuke-terrorists@zork.net nor buttwipes@zork.net free-sklyarov@zork.net == all Dmitry all the time. Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 15:54:22 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:24 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <20010914003908.D17583@lemuria.org> Message-ID: Zdnet is a buzzword, I have to tell people about google, I don't have to tell people about zdnet, and it's subsiderary sights. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Tom Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:39 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:28:31PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > Hmm very interesting just did a search on Download.com for RFC 2015, guess > how many hit's I got? 0, you know you and Microsoft Developers have alot in > common, why don't you step out of your box for a little bit, and get with > the real world. This is about education, and getting this out to the > average person, the average net user knows about download.com, and cnet.com, > and zdnet.com etc. They don't know about the url's you presented, and this > is exactly my point! the average user should know that these sites called a "search engine" exist. google returns over 3000 results for "rfc 2015", and all on the first page seem to be direct links to the document in question. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 13 15:49:41 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010913160633.A23688@www2>; from ruben@mrbrklyn.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:06:33PM -0400 References: <20010913160633.A23688@www2> Message-ID: <20010914004941.E17583@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:06:33PM -0400, Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > Nothing short of a full scale military effort will solve this threat. The > ability of foriegn nations to support with man and materials this level of > attack need to be ended by extream military attach, even if it means > raising several key cities including Terran, Bagdag, Kabal, and Damascus. this is *exactly* the attitude that landed Mr. Sklyarov in an american jail - unreflected, overbroad attacks on a threat in disregard of even the worst collateral damage. you are asking for the killing of several MILLION innocent people, you realize that, do you? the chancellor of my country said this was an attack on the whole civilized world. reading some reactions from americans, I'm not so sure anymore if it was really a part of the CIVILIZED world that was attacked. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From dcwornock at home.com Thu Sep 13 16:08:42 2001 From: dcwornock at home.com (D.C. Wornock) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov, Stick to the Subject References: Message-ID: <002601c13ca9$085a9be0$2d23b518@cc653035a> Please lets stick to the subject and not go off on wild tangents such as attacting Harry Browne and our friends in the Libertarian Party. D.C. Wornock From admin at seattle-chat.com Thu Sep 13 16:42:16 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010914004941.E17583@lemuria.org> Message-ID: Alright I can agree, random acts of violence on the middle east would be a bad thing, but your comparison of Dmitry's plight, and the killing of 4000+ innocent Americans I can't. Your an idiot if you think there is. First off, what country are you from, second off, what do you suggest we do, when we find out who this person is? What punishment should we bring against the people that did this, do you think life in prison in club fed is appropriate punishment for 4000+ lives? -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Tom Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:50 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:06:33PM -0400, Brooklyn Linux Solutions wrote: > Nothing short of a full scale military effort will solve this threat. The > ability of foriegn nations to support with man and materials this level of > attack need to be ended by extream military attach, even if it means > raising several key cities including Terran, Bagdag, Kabal, and Damascus. this is *exactly* the attitude that landed Mr. Sklyarov in an american jail - unreflected, overbroad attacks on a threat in disregard of even the worst collateral damage. you are asking for the killing of several MILLION innocent people, you realize that, do you? the chancellor of my country said this was an attack on the whole civilized world. reading some reactions from americans, I'm not so sure anymore if it was really a part of the CIVILIZED world that was attacked. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From ed at hintz.org Thu Sep 13 17:08:55 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) Message-ID: <200109140008.f8E08Zc10830@phil.hintz.org> On 9/13/01 4:42 PM, admin@seattle-chat.com thus spake: >Alright I can agree, random acts of violence on the middle east would be a >bad thing, but your comparison of Dmitry's plight, and the killing of 4000+ >innocent Americans I can't. Your an idiot if you think there is. First >off, what country are you from, second off, what do you suggest we do, when >we find out who this person is? What punishment should we bring against the >people that did this, do you think life in prison in club fed is appropriate >punishment for 4000+ lives? I suppose I should feel better. At least Dmitry was *mentioned* in this post. free-sklyarov@zork.net NOT american-nationalism@zork.net PLEASE, people, can we just TRY to stay on topic here? Sheesh. (BTW, I had a response to Tom too, but with a novel twist: reply to sender. Yes, only he saw my reply. Heavy concept, I know, but hey, it was off topic. As is this. Goodbye.) Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From schoen at loyalty.org Thu Sep 13 20:50:14 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Free Dmitry Sklyarov! Message-ID: <20010913205014.D20903@zork.net> Hi everybody, Once again, please help free Dmitry Sklyarov; that's what this mailing list is for. Wendy Seltzer asked today on dvd-discuss that people return to topic there; I'd like to make the same request of people over here. Wendy added that people might not feel like talking about the DMCA so much at the moment; that's fine, she said, but in that case it's reasonable for the list to be fairly quiet. The attacks on Tuesday are an extremely great tragedy. Many people here have been and will be affected by them. I certainly have been. But this list is meant for freeing Dmitry Sklyarov. Discussion of how the attacks may affect Dmitry's case or the development of copyright law is OK. Discussion of a general nature about the bombing or U.S. counterterrorism or foreign policy -- without a nexus to Dmitry -- is not appropriate here. There are _thousands_ of places on the Internet where such discussion is appropriate, but free-sklyarov isn't one. Thanks to everybody for all your hard work so far. -- 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 burton at relativity.yi.org Thu Sep 13 22:59:33 2001 From: burton at relativity.yi.org (Kevin A. Burton) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> References: <1000395500.14250.249.camel@progeny> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Micheas Herman writes: > I find it ironic that on a mailing list devoted to freeing someone who > is faceing many years in prison for cracking ROT-13 encryption, only one > member of the mailing list consistantly signs his mail. Make that two.. > > If every one one this mailing list starts to sign all their email the topics > that we care about will be brought up by our correspondents. And people will > start to relise, "I want people to know that I really sent that email." and > make the whole discusion much more main stream. It isn't "some mafia figure > doesn't want the government reading his mail" It's "I don't want the > government reading MY mail." And when the inevitable question comes up " What > does someone using encription have to hide?" The answer is "None of your > buisiness." not "good question." Preach on... especially WRT recent events. > > If you use linux and use mutt or evolution. using gpg is seemless once it is > setup. Works GREAT with Emacs/gnus. Kevin - -- Kevin A. Burton ( burton@apache.org, burton@openprivacy.org, burtonator@acm.org ) Cell: 415-595-9965 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596 We can plant a house, we can build a tree -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt iD8DBQE7oZpjAwM6xb2dfE0RAmxWAKCOGmPn6aFRl9yFxx2VH6bBS+nXNgCeN9BV xB4TiL0VkHtALjMEXxTJLQo= =rrdC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tom at lemuria.org Fri Sep 14 00:14:59 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:42:16PM -0700 References: <20010914004941.E17583@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010914091458.D17855@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:42:16PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > Alright I can agree, random acts of violence on the middle east would be a > bad thing, but your comparison of Dmitry's plight, and the killing of 4000+ > innocent Americans I can't. Your an idiot if you think there is. I didn't compare the plight of Dmitry and the killing of innocent americans. I compared the MINDSET behind arresting Dmitry and asking for the murder of innocent arabs. > First off, what country are you from, germany. does that matter? I've gotten a few nasty e-mails and I just can't believe you americans are all 60 years behind in european history. > second off, what do you suggest we do, when we find out who this person is? there will be no justice, face it. the murderers are dead themselves. there may or may not be an organisation behind them. you might be able to identify these supporters and kill them, but what does that gain? most likely more fanatic enemies willing to die for their cause if only they can take as many of you with them as possible. > What punishment should we bring against the people that did this, do you > think life in prison in club fed is appropriate punishment for 4000+ lives? I don't have an answer. but I know that taking more innocent lives is definitely NOT one. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From alexf at hkn.eecs.berkeley.edu Fri Sep 14 01:54:51 2001 From: alexf at hkn.eecs.berkeley.edu (Alex Fabrikant) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: encryption-as-a-right writeups? [Re: [free-sklyarov] War: Dmitry and encryption] In-Reply-To: <200109131519.f8DFJ4I16626@moerbeke> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 proclus@iname.com wrote: > Every website that is related to Free-Dmitry should post a message of > sorrow and outrage to their websites regarding the terrorist attack. > See GNU-Darwin for an example. Just scroll down to the flowers. > > http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/ This is a good idea. I put up some semblance of this on sf.freesklyarov.org and encourage other sites to do something similar. I _would_ like a pointer or two on _good_ (well-argued, reasonably short, understandable to general public) writeups on why encryption is vital to individual rights (to link to under the "educate yourself about it" text), and I can't seem to think of any off the top of my head. Suggestions? -- -alexf From debug at centras.lt Fri Sep 14 10:02:58 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8831101335.20010914190258@centras.lt> JAB> Encryption is vital to freedom of expression which is vital to JAB> democracy... everything else is secondary (at best). I can't agree with that. I am always free to say everything i want though i my be brought to prison for what i say, but i am always free and i do not need encryption for doing any statements -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From proclus at iname.com Fri Sep 14 10:14:00 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this ma iling list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <8831101335.20010914190258@centras.lt> Message-ID: <200109141714.f8EHE4f16779@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 14 Sep, DeBug wrote: > JAB> Encryption is vital to freedom of expression which is vital to > JAB> democracy... everything else is secondary (at best). > I can't agree with that. I am always free to say everything i want > though i my be brought to prison for what i say, but i am always free > and i do not need encryption for doing any statements > I'm working on a position paper on encryption today. http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/war.html All suggestions welcome. Regards, proclus -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/c39f9cd4/attachment.pgp From jlane at redhat.com Fri Sep 14 11:57:16 2001 From: jlane at redhat.com (Jeff Lane) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010914004941.E17583@lemuria.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Tom wrote: > the chancellor of my country said this was an attack on the whole > civilized world. reading some reactions from americans, I'm not so sure > anymore if it was really a part of the CIVILIZED world that was > attacked. Ummm what exactly marks the "civilized world"?? Every civilization thinks that they are the epitome of "civilization". I know of not ONE country on the planet that can be considered civilized by the definition you are implying here. No... the reactions of Americans is NOT a matter of civility. it is a matter of pride, anger, and steeled resolve. Are we a perfect society? Of course not. And we never said we were. However, history has proven time and again (at least the last 250 years or so) that when the people of this country (and before this country was formed) are attacked, they rise up and bite back. We may be a mixed lot, full of whiners, full of softies, full of people who generally do not care one way or another, full of apathy and lethargy, but NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING provokes the unification and strenght of the people of the United States than attacking us. sorry.. just had to throw my 2 cents in... cheers -- Jeffrey Lane, RHCX, EMT From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 12:27:05 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Amen Brother! -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Jeff Lane Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:57 AM To: Tom Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Tom wrote: > the chancellor of my country said this was an attack on the whole > civilized world. reading some reactions from americans, I'm not so sure > anymore if it was really a part of the CIVILIZED world that was > attacked. Ummm what exactly marks the "civilized world"?? Every civilization thinks that they are the epitome of "civilization". I know of not ONE country on the planet that can be considered civilized by the definition you are implying here. No... the reactions of Americans is NOT a matter of civility. it is a matter of pride, anger, and steeled resolve. Are we a perfect society? Of course not. And we never said we were. However, history has proven time and again (at least the last 250 years or so) that when the people of this country (and before this country was formed) are attacked, they rise up and bite back. We may be a mixed lot, full of whiners, full of softies, full of people who generally do not care one way or another, full of apathy and lethargy, but NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING provokes the unification and strenght of the people of the United States than attacking us. sorry.. just had to throw my 2 cents in... cheers -- Jeffrey Lane, RHCX, EMT _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From ed at hintz.org Fri Sep 14 12:29:48 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) Message-ID: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> On 9/14/01 11:57 AM, jlane@redhat.com thus spake: >We may be a mixed lot, full of whiners, full of softies, full of people >who generally do not care one way or another, full of apathy and lethargy, >but NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING provokes the unification and strenght of >the people of the United States than attacking us. > >sorry.. just had to throw my 2 cents in... Political infighting and nationalism does nothing to free Dmitry. free-sklyarov@zork.net NOT americans-rock@zork.net All Dmitry, all the time. I was asked privately if I really expected we could discuss Dima at a time like this. I don't know if we can. But if we can't, what we CAN do is carry our offtopic conversations offline or to a more worthy forum. Translation: if you ain't got something topical to say, don't say anything at all. Can we now consider this expired equine mammal to be once and for all thoroughly flagellated, and allow it to rest in peace? Please? Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 12:36:45 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> Message-ID: You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not dead. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Edmund A. Hintz Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 12:30 PM To: Jeff Lane; Tom Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) On 9/14/01 11:57 AM, jlane@redhat.com thus spake: >We may be a mixed lot, full of whiners, full of softies, full of people >who generally do not care one way or another, full of apathy and lethargy, >but NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING provokes the unification and strenght of >the people of the United States than attacking us. > >sorry.. just had to throw my 2 cents in... Political infighting and nationalism does nothing to free Dmitry. free-sklyarov@zork.net NOT americans-rock@zork.net All Dmitry, all the time. I was asked privately if I really expected we could discuss Dima at a time like this. I don't know if we can. But if we can't, what we CAN do is carry our offtopic conversations offline or to a more worthy forum. Translation: if you ain't got something topical to say, don't say anything at all. Can we now consider this expired equine mammal to be once and for all thoroughly flagellated, and allow it to rest in peace? Please? Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 14 12:38:50 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> References: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> Message-ID: <20010914123850.J16289@zork.net> Edmund A. Hintz writes: > All Dmitry, all the time. I was asked privately if I really expected we > could discuss Dima at a time like this. I don't know if we can. But if we > can't, what we CAN do is carry our offtopic conversations offline or to a > more worthy forum. > > Translation: if you ain't got something topical to say, don't say > anything at all. Can we now consider this expired equine mammal to be > once and for all thoroughly flagellated, and allow it to rest in peace? > Please? - What do we want? - Conversations about freeing Dmitry Sklyarov! - When do we want them? - Now, or whenever people are ready! If people keep making WTC posts here, with no connection to Dmitry Sklyarov, I will start to moderate their postings. -- 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 schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 14 12:40:21 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> Message-ID: <20010914124021.K16289@zork.net> Charles Eakins writes: > You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very > insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not > dead. American Patriots who don't want to talk about Dmitry Sklyarov should find another list; those who do are welcome here. -- 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 Sep 14 12:39:39 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:25 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:36:45PM -0700 References: <200109141929.f8EJTkc14833@phil.hintz.org> Message-ID: <20010914213939.A18086@lemuria.org> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:36:45PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very > insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not > dead. he is, however, an innocent alien caught in US infighting and imprisoned due to the egotrips of some media mafia lobbyists. the dead are dead and no amount of talk will resurrect them. Dmitry however, can and should still be freed. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 12:46:44 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010914124021.K16289@zork.net> Message-ID: Then you just lost one person that would later be behind dmitry, I won't associate with such heartless people. It's sad you need to push people away. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Seth David Schoen Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 12:40 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) Charles Eakins writes: > You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very > insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not > dead. American Patriots who don't want to talk about Dmitry Sklyarov should find another list; those who do are welcome here. -- 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) _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 12:49:04 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Topicality again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very > insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not > dead. Then why are you posting to free-sklyarov? If you consider the topic of this forum to be insignificant in the light of recent events, then post to what you consider a more important forum. Do not act as if this one can be commandeered. This is not a usenet group, it's a mailing list. People are directly receiving your posts, so it is that much more important to consider the topicality of what you write. Besides, there are so many discussion forums where this stuff is *on* topic! Xcott From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 12:50:47 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010914213939.A18086@lemuria.org> Message-ID: My Heartless statement stands. -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Tom Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 12:40 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:36:45PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > You confuse Patriotism with Nationalism. And Dmitry's plight is very > insignificant at this point and time to most American Patriots, he's not > dead. he is, however, an innocent alien caught in US infighting and imprisoned due to the egotrips of some media mafia lobbyists. the dead are dead and no amount of talk will resurrect them. Dmitry however, can and should still be freed. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 12:57:09 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > Then you just lost one person that would later be behind dmitry, I won't > associate with such heartless people. It's sad you need to push people > away. "Later?" Am I to understand that you don't even have an opinion yet about Sklyarov? You're not behind him now? But subscribed? Are you also posting stuff to mailing lists about knitting and kite-flying and homebrewing? Honestly, you are massively overreacting. What about all those heartless people who went back to their jobs, and are working instead spending all day meditating on the tragedy? What about the Weather Channel showing weather forecasts, rather than 24 hour coverage of the attack aftermath? What about grocery stores that are still selling vegetables and TV dinners when they could just sell American flags? Sorry, but people still have business to attend to, and there are places and forums and things that have purposes other than talking about bombing Afghanistan. If you don't like it, boycott everything. Xcott From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 13:01:18 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No I was behind him, I help setup the seattle chapter, I will be stepping down, and getting out of this crap, keep pushing, and you will lose a few more people. Actually , I'm home today trying to get my sister home from a hostile country. -----Original Message----- From: Xcott Craver [mailto:sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 12:57 PM To: Charles Eakins Cc: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: RE: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > Then you just lost one person that would later be behind dmitry, I won't > associate with such heartless people. It's sad you need to push people > away. "Later?" Am I to understand that you don't even have an opinion yet about Sklyarov? You're not behind him now? But subscribed? Are you also posting stuff to mailing lists about knitting and kite-flying and homebrewing? Honestly, you are massively overreacting. What about all those heartless people who went back to their jobs, and are working instead spending all day meditating on the tragedy? What about the Weather Channel showing weather forecasts, rather than 24 hour coverage of the attack aftermath? What about grocery stores that are still selling vegetables and TV dinners when they could just sell American flags? Sorry, but people still have business to attend to, and there are places and forums and things that have purposes other than talking about bombing Afghanistan. If you don't like it, boycott everything. Xcott From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 14 13:05:20 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: <20010914124021.K16289@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010914130520.L16289@zork.net> Charles Eakins writes: > Then you just lost one person that would later be behind dmitry, I won't > associate with such heartless people. It's sad you need to push people > away. I'm not the movement to free Dmitry Sklyarov, I'm just the free-sklyarov@zork.net list administrator, who lost a friend and former coworker on UAL 175 Tuesday and says that people who want to post here are going to be expected to maintain relevance to Dmitry Sklyarov. If you want to create a free-sklyarov-and-talk-about-wtc or a talk-about-wtc-and-free-sklyarov list, I will announce it here. As Scott reminds us, 722 people have voluntarily chosen to subscribe to this list in the expectation that they would hear about freeing Dmitry. And we've already lost ten subscribers in the past two days, apparently because of off-topic WTC threads. -- 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 Sep 14 13:08:22 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:50:47PM -0700 References: <20010914213939.A18086@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010914220822.A18188@lemuria.org> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:50:47PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > My Heartless statement stands. it's easier to be heartless when you're half a planet away. but it's sad when germans have to remind americans about a russian unjustly imprisoned for free speech. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From johnny_aio2 at yahoo.com Fri Sep 14 13:41:14 2001 From: johnny_aio2 at yahoo.com (Johnny Crow) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010914164059.00a63160@pop.mail.yahoo.com> I realize this is off-topic, but it's something that's come up on every mailing list I'm on, and I felt the need to answer the various people who've asked for my opinion (and, in fact, all of the people who didn't) all at once. First of all, The United states has spent the past 56 years making enemies of the entire rest of the world, and now it's coming back to haunt them. Fact: An estimated One MILLION Iraq citizens have died since Desert Storm as a result of health problems and sanctions placed upon that country by the United States. Gulf War Syndrome, Depleted Uranium shells left in the ground, and poverty in the streets have led to approximately 8,333 deaths every single month since that war. Many, if not most of them, children. Can anyone blame the Arabs for viewing the united states as pure evil for inflicting this upon them? Fact: Bin Laden, the fellow popularly blamed for the attack on NYC and Washington was trained by the CIA in terrorist tactics. Don't believe me? Check this out: http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1 . The United States has for decades now supported international terrorism in the name of supporting their political agendas worldwide. The examples are too numerous to name, but include Brazil, Cuba, Afghanistan... in short, the US is willing to train and pay terrible people to commit terrible crimes in order to force their agenda upon the world. Fact: The US, for all that they have no target to attack; no clear culprit-nation to launch an attack against, is asking for financial aid from the world to supplement the $300 billion they already spend EVERY YEAR on their military budget (13 times what their next closest competitor annually spends). One might ask one''s self what they need all that cash for; their military force is already demonstratively so far in advance of any opposition they might face. Of course, George Bush wants this to be a ground war, so perhaps the US's technology and military readiness doesn't matter. Fact: That footage which aired of Palestinian children celebrating in the streets which was aired time and time and time again was actually filmed TEN YEARS EARLIER. CNN whipped it out because they felt it would be an effective means to help whip the US citizenry into a frenzy. Your own media is willing to lie to you in order to elicit the reactions they want from you. Beware. In the end, it seems to me that there are a lot of lessons to be learned from this terrible tragedy. First among them is that the USA cannot continue to bully the world without fear of repercussions forever. The millions upon millions of civilians which the US has killed over the years were joined this week in death by a few thousand US citizens. Should the US decide to continue with their wanton bloodshed, this cycle of violence will never end. Vengeance begets vengeance begets vengeance. Yes, it was terrible what happened in the US this week. But that doesn't justify the Us doing the exact same thing to whatever city their enemies live in. Not only would bombing another city be just as evil an act on the part of the US as that which was perpetrated upon them, it will just lead to yet more violence, and yet more deaths. And nobody will benefit from that. I urge each of you to read up on some of the pertinent facts at hand here from some people who are more interested in reporting the truth than in keeping the sponsors happy: Michael Moore speaks out about the US's abuses of the rest of the world... http://www.michaelmoore.com/2001_0912.html Michael Moran talks about Bin Laden's CIA training... http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1 Finally, Counterpunch; who have been reporting all the things the mainstream media has been refusing to... http://www.counterpunch.org And that's what I have to say about that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/7f3a9170/attachment.html From admin at seattle-chat.com Fri Sep 14 13:49:15 2001 From: admin at seattle-chat.com (Charles Eakins) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:26 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010914164059.00a63160@pop.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Fuck off -----Original Message----- From: free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net [mailto:free-sklyarov-admin@zork.net]On Behalf Of Johnny Crow Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:41 PM To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) I realize this is off-topic, but it's something that's come up on every mailing list I'm on, and I felt the need to answer the various people who've asked for my opinion (and, in fact, all of the people who didn't) all at once. First of all, The United states has spent the past 56 years making enemies of the entire rest of the world, and now it's coming back to haunt them. Fact: An estimated One MILLION Iraq citizens have died since Desert Storm as a result of health problems and sanctions placed upon that country by the United States. Gulf War Syndrome, Depleted Uranium shells left in the ground, and poverty in the streets have led to approximately 8,333 deaths every single month since that war. Many, if not most of them, children. Can anyone blame the Arabs for viewing the united states as pure evil for inflicting this upon them? Fact: Bin Laden, the fellow popularly blamed for the attack on NYC and Washington was trained by the CIA in terrorist tactics. Don't believe me? Check this out: http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1 . The United States has for decades now supported international terrorism in the name of supporting their political agendas worldwide. The examples are too numerous to name, but include Brazil, Cuba, Afghanistan... in short, the US is willing to train and pay terrible people to commit terrible crimes in order to force their agenda upon the world. Fact: The US, for all that they have no target to attack; no clear culprit-nation to launch an attack against, is asking for financial aid from the world to supplement the $300 billion they already spend EVERY YEAR on their military budget (13 times what their next closest competitor annually spends). One might ask one''s self what they need all that cash for; their military force is already demonstratively so far in advance of any opposition they might face. Of course, George Bush wants this to be a ground war, so perhaps the US's technology and military readiness doesn't matter. Fact: That footage which aired of Palestinian children celebrating in the streets which was aired time and time and time again was actually filmed TEN YEARS EARLIER. CNN whipped it out because they felt it would be an effective means to help whip the US citizenry into a frenzy. Your own media is willing to lie to you in order to elicit the reactions they want from you. Beware. In the end, it seems to me that there are a lot of lessons to be learned from this terrible tragedy. First among them is that the USA cannot continue to bully the world without fear of repercussions forever. The millions upon millions of civilians which the US has killed over the years were joined this week in death by a few thousand US citizens. Should the US decide to continue with their wanton bloodshed, this cycle of violence will never end. Vengeance begets vengeance begets vengeance. Yes, it was terrible what happened in the US this week. But that doesn't justify the Us doing the exact same thing to whatever city their enemies live in. Not only would bombing another city be just as evil an act on the part of the US as that which was perpetrated upon them, it will just lead to yet more violence, and yet more deaths. And nobody will benefit from that. I urge each of you to read up on some of the pertinent facts at hand here from some people who are more interested in reporting the truth than in keeping the sponsors happy: Michael Moore speaks out about the US's abuses of the rest of the world... http://www.michaelmoore.com/2001_0912.html Michael Moran talks about Bin Laden's CIA training... http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1 Finally, Counterpunch; who have been reporting all the things the mainstream media has been refusing to... http://www.counterpunch.org And that's what I have to say about that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/2e198502/attachment.htm From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 14 13:57:35 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:27 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this ma iling list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <200109141714.f8EHE4f16779@pico.mbg.cornell.edu>; from proclus@iname.com on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 01:14:00PM -0400 References: <8831101335.20010914190258@centras.lt> <200109141714.f8EHE4f16779@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Message-ID: <20010914135735.O13236@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 01:14:00PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > On 14 Sep, DeBug wrote: > > JAB> Encryption is vital to freedom of expression which is vital to > > JAB> democracy... everything else is secondary (at best). > > I can't agree with that. I am always free to say everything i want > > though i my be brought to prison for what i say, but i am always free > > and i do not need encryption for doing any statements > > > > I'm working on a position paper on encryption today. > > http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/war.html > > All suggestions welcome. Well considered. Worth its own discussion thread IMO. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/dd9848e9/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 14 14:06:35 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:27 2005 Subject: 3rd party unsub req (was Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd)) In-Reply-To: ; from admin@seattle-chat.com on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:46:44PM -0700 References: <20010914124021.K16289@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010914140635.Q13236@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:46:44PM -0700, Charles Eakins (admin@seattle-chat.com) wrote: > Then you just lost one person that would later be behind dmitry, I won't > associate with such heartless people. It's sad you need to push people > away. If Charles doesn't unsub of his own volition, I'm asking the list admin, my friend Seth, who's lost friends of his own in the attacks of this past Tuesday, to please exercise administrative prerogative. We're all dealing with tragedies. Part of dealing with them means not abdicating all other activities. That's declaring victory for the terrorists. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/c07994bb/attachment.pgp From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 14 14:07:33 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:27 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010914164059.00a63160@pop.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20010914140733.M16289@zork.net> Johnny Crow and Charles Eakins are no longer allowed to post to free-sklyarov. If either of them would like to set up an alternate forum, I will advertise it here. -- 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 jsheldon at rochester.rr.com Fri Sep 14 14:07:23 2001 From: jsheldon at rochester.rr.com (jsheldon@rochester.rr.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:27 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Peace Message-ID: <200109142107.f8EL7xJ05271@auragen.com> I think everyone is emotionally frazzled. We all are confused, sad, angry, ... We don't need any flame wars here, I think we all had enough anger for one week. We are all on this forum for one reason and that is Dmitry. Anything else that isn't about Dmitry is off-topic and should probably be discussed in the approriate place. However, if someone post something off-topic, bite your tongue and maybe send them a polite private email telling them your position. Peace, Jason From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 14 14:09:42 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:27 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <20010914140733.M16289@zork.net> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010914164059.00a63160@pop.mail.yahoo.com> <20010914140733.M16289@zork.net> Message-ID: <20010914140942.N16289@zork.net> Seth David Schoen writes: > Johnny Crow and Charles Eakins are no longer allowed to post to > free-sklyarov. (In particular, any posts from them are flagged for moderator review; if they post on topic, their posts might be approved, with a delay which could be significant.) -- 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 alex at 2600.COM Fri Sep 14 14:10:17 2001 From: alex at 2600.COM (Neon Samurai) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010914220822.A18188@lemuria.org> Message-ID: Moreover, it's one thing to ask a list to stay on topic and another entirely to be belligerent, rude and apathetic during such an emotionally charged time for most Americans. There is no need for that, unless you're trying to lose support for the Free Dmitry cause. Best, Alex On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Tom wrote: > Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 22:08:22 +0200 > From: Tom > To: free-sklyarov@zork.net > Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] OPEN LETTER: Tragedy followed by travesty. > (fwd) > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:50:47PM -0700, Charles Eakins wrote: > > My Heartless statement stands. > > it's easier to be heartless when you're half a planet away. but it's > sad when germans have to remind americans about a russian unjustly > imprisoned for free speech. > > > -- > -- http://web.lemuria.org > -- > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov > From martinb at kemokid.com Fri Sep 14 14:10:37 2001 From: martinb at kemokid.com (Martin Baker) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Encryption position paper In-Reply-To: <20010914135735.O13236@navel.introspect> Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 01:14:00PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > > I'm working on a position paper on encryption today. > > > > http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/war.html > > > > All suggestions welcome. > > Well considered. > > Worth its own discussion thread IMO. I had a problem with the last paragraph, about how governments might get warrants and demand private keys, etc. This has happened in the UK, with the RIP (Regulation of Investigative Powers - which, of course, increases police power) bill. If the government asks, you must turn over private keys, and you may not tell anyone. If you tell anyone, you can be jailed. This would happen even if you, as an employee of a company, told your superiors that you had been forced to turn over company keys to the police. I don't think we need any legislation like that, thank you very much. I also think the argument can be made without reference to a "war" which has not been declared against an enemy which has not been named. Accepting the government's argument that "national security" is paramount is going to be used against you. Peace, Martin From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 14:17:52 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] (no subject) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Charles Eakins wrote: > Fuck off Apparently, even people who *do* talk about the WTC attack here are heartless bastards to you, unless they specifically call for us to pull out the nukes and turn Afghanistan into a piece of glass. Oh, how cruel of this guy to warn us to not butcher civilians in bloody retaliation. If he had any compassion, I guess he'd want us to murder a large number of innocent people. Xcott [Perez's Postulate: Human beings are irony generation machines.] From proclus at iname.com Fri Sep 14 14:23:42 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Encryption position paper In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200109142123.f8ELNjT17001@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 14 Sep, Martin Baker wrote: > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > >> on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 01:14:00PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > >> > I'm working on a position paper on encryption today. >> > >> > http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/war.html >> > >> > All suggestions welcome. >> >> Well considered. >> >> Worth its own discussion thread IMO. > > I had a problem with the last paragraph, about how governments might get > warrants and demand private keys, etc. This has happened in the UK, with > the RIP (Regulation of Investigative Powers - which, of course, > increases police power) bill. If the government asks, you must turn over > private keys, and you may not tell anyone. If you tell anyone, you can be > jailed. This would happen even if you, as an employee of a company, told > your superiors that you had been forced to turn over company keys to the > police. I don't think we need any legislation like that, thank you very > much. > Thanks for the input! Yes, that last part was a tough decision. You will note that I would required a warrant to be issued in order for the agents to demand your encryption keys. It can't be arbitrary that way, and I think that there are many good analogies to conventional warrants to be made there. I specifically did not mention Britain's law, because from my impressions of it, it might be quite an overstep from the US point of view. Finally, I think that it is a reasonable concession that would give the national security hawks in congress something to crow about. ;-} > I also think the argument can be made without reference to a "war" which > has not been declared against an enemy which has not been named. Accepting > the government's argument that "national security" is paramount is going > to be used against you. I'm taking the state of war as an assumption, as is the congress. As I have been saying, we must tailor our arguments to the situation at hand. Encryption is a great example here of how American-style freedom often coincides with true national security interests. This is why I brought up the proprietary encryption vendors and web commerce, because it appears to me that they have too much to gain from the monolithic model, which is clearly contrary to freedom and to national security in the long run. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > Peace, > Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/d7ba79e4/attachment.pgp From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 14:30:43 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Encouraging level of Dmitry Awareness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I flew back to NJ last weekend to register for another academic year, and took my lovely Free Dmitry shirt with me. I wore it to a number of student social events, prepared to explain the shirt to everyone who asked. Instead, a lot of people were already informed, very reassuring. Whenever someone did ask, "um, why do you want to boycott Adobe?" or "Dmitry who?" in conversation, there was always someone else in that conversation who would explain the situation. Granted, these were grad students, so maybe they're more likely to know than the average person (or they should: this was a grad student arrested for material related to his research.) Xcott From crawford at goingware.com Fri Sep 14 15:13:44 2001 From: crawford at goingware.com (Michael D. Crawford) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: encryption-as-a-right writeups? Message-ID: <3BA28118.386A6164@goingware.com> You ask for writeups about the importance of encryption to the public. I submit "Why You Should Use Encryption": http://www.goingware.com/encryption/ I know there's a broken link somewhere in the page. Someday I shall get around to fixing it. Best, Mike -- Michael D. Crawford GoingWare Inc. - Expert Software Development and Consulting http://www.goingware.com crawford@goingware.com Tilting at Windmills for a Better Tomorrow. From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 14 16:49:27 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:28 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] ST: [declan@well.com: FC: Columnist calls for Draconian Net-crackdown after attacks] Message-ID: <20010914164927.B23148@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/8954eaef/attachment.pgp From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Fri Sep 14 16:59:00 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: <20010913173621.A18805@lemuria.org> Message-ID: > what I'm saying is that you don't have a moral right > that the reader, software or e-book support a given feature. I'm saying that you should not be imprisoned for implementing features protected by the rights of fair use. In my mind I'm realizing the need for a "correct" DMCA, as it's Congress' obligation to protect copyright of media that does deliver on the purchaser's ownership rights. From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 17:15:18 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, John Dempsey wrote: > In my mind I'm realizing the need for a "correct" DMCA, as it's Congress' > obligation to protect copyright of media that does deliver on the > purchaser's ownership rights. But here's a question: what would even be in a "correct" DMCA? That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle just fine? Xcott From ed at hintz.org Fri Sep 14 17:20:24 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" Message-ID: <200109150020.f8F0KPc16405@phil.hintz.org> On 9/14/01 5:15 PM, sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU thus spake: > That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's > in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle > just fine? Hear hear. This is one of the points that Bruce Schneier makes constantly, and it makes good sense to me. Don't make new laws to cover the net, adapt existing ones to it. Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 14 17:30:47 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: ; from sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:15:18PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010914173047.B23927@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:15:18PM -0400, Xcott Craver (sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU) wrote: > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, John Dempsey wrote: > > > In my mind I'm realizing the need for a "correct" DMCA, as it's Congress' > > obligation to protect copyright of media that does deliver on the > > purchaser's ownership rights. > > But here's a question: what would even be in a "correct" DMCA? > > That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's > in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle > just fine? An additional penalty for circumventing technical means ***strictly limited to actions resulting in infringement of copyright*** might be a fair compromise. It's a little extra bite to existing law, but not an expansion of scope. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/a0034cfe/attachment.pgp From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 14 19:21:56 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: <20010914173047.B23927@navel.introspect> Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:15:18PM -0400, Xcott Craver (sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU) wrote: > > > > That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's > > in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle > > just fine? > > An additional penalty for circumventing technical means ***strictly > limited to actions resulting in infringement of copyright*** might be a > fair compromise. This would be more like standard bans on "burglarious tools." But I wonder about the legislative approach. The fact is that the entertainment industry gives lots of money to congresspeople. I am pessimistic about any fair compromise making it past them. Xcott From jays at panix.com Fri Sep 14 19:54:01 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore use (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 16:19:30 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com Subject: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore use May be relevant, given the new focus in DC on restricting privacy and crypto... Text of the Hatch-Feinstein "Combating Terrorism Act of 2001": http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html Discussion of the CTA: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/s091301.html -Declan ******** http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46852,00.html Senate OKs FBI Net Spying By Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 12:55 p.m. Sep. 14, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- FBI agents soon may be able to spy on Internet users legally without a court order. On Thursday evening, two days after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, the Senate approved the "Combating Terrorism Act of 2001," which enhances police wiretap powers and permits monitoring in more situations. The measure, proposed by Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Dianne Feinstein (D-California), says any U.S. attorney or state attorney general can order the installation of the FBI's Carnivore surveillance system. Previously, there were stiffer restrictions on Carnivore and other Internet surveillance techniques. Its bipartisan sponsors argue that such laws are necessary to thwart terrorism. "It is essential that we give our law enforcement authorities every possible tool to search out and bring to justice those individuals who have brought such indiscriminate death into our backyard," Hatch said during the debate on the Senate floor. [...] --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From wiljan at pobox.com Fri Sep 14 20:56:06 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Help Please Message-ID: <200109150313.WAA000.46@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> I need some help in writing to congress. I think that the only thing I can ask or beg for, that will help Dmitry, is the introduction of a resolution that states that "Prosecution of Dmitry Sklyarov, a foreign national, under this law was not and is not the intent of Congress". For such a resolution to go anywhere I have to be able to back it up and so the following. I do not want to sound like a lawyer, I am not. I ask for your comments and criticism. -will- Illegal DMCA US constitution article 1 sec 8 gives congress power to create "copyright" but not the power to censor. The DMCA chapter 12 censors authors like Dmitry. For my own understanding, when considering only writing ---- not music etc. A right: Those beliefs and behaviors granted by a supreme power or at least your neighbors. i.e. not granted by government or law. Law may protect or deny such rights but not create them. A privilege: An advantage granted by law. An author: One who creates a "work". A work: Something one can hold or at least point to. i.e. more substantial than an idea or concept. Copyright then grants certain exclusive privilege to an author in regard to his work. Copyright thus deny those rights in that same work to the public. The certain privileges are enumerated in 17 USC 106 and limited by the next few sections. All other rights to that work are retained by the public. When you get to the DMCA, especially chapter 12, congress creates a distinction in authors. The "good" authors benefit publishers. The "bad" authors, like Dmitry and Prof. Felton do not benefit publishers only the public. Chapter 12 strips "bad" authors of their privilege under copyright, even strips their "right" to publish. If the "bad" author tries to exercise the privilege of publishing for profit that author is a criminal under chapter 12. I believe this is called censorship. Censorship that benefits only one segment of the public or industry is, I believe, illegal not only under amendment I, but also under amendments IX and X. From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 14 21:10:21 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [jays@panix.com: [free-sklyarov] Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore use (fwd)] Message-ID: <20010914211021.H24645@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010914/6ce9c966/attachment.pgp From tom at lemuria.org Sat Sep 15 03:00:18 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: ; from john.dempsey7@verizon.net on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 07:59:00PM -0400 References: <20010913173621.A18805@lemuria.org> Message-ID: <20010915120018.B18528@lemuria.org> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 07:59:00PM -0400, John Dempsey wrote: > > what I'm saying is that you don't have a moral right > > that the reader, software or e-book support a given feature. > > I'm saying that you should not be imprisoned for implementing features > protected by the rights of fair use. I absolutely agree. but that STILL doesn't make it "illegal" or a violation of your "rights" to disable a text-to-speech feature. yes, you should have a right to re-enable it if you can and want. but you should NOT have a right that it is enabled. end of discussion, I'm tired of the back-and-forth. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From huaiyu_zhu at yahoo.com Sat Sep 15 03:12:17 2001 From: huaiyu_zhu at yahoo.com (Huaiyu Zhu) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Right or feature? Message-ID: Is read-aloud a right or a feature? There are two types of "intellectual properties" involved - the copyright of the book (authorship), and the copyright of the software that converts text to speech (capability). If it refers to the capability, it is a feature. Which means if I buy the ebook-reader with that feature, I can use it to read any ebook I own. Or if I just buy a per seat or limited time license, I could use it on any ebook I own within that limit. Furthermore, if I do not buy it there, I could buy from someone else, or even write my own read-aloud program. In any case it is none of the publisher's business. On the other hand, if it refers to the authorship, it is a right. If the copyright holder (mostly the publisher) says no, then I cannot do it even if I have bought or developed the capability to do it. That is a right to be granted or denied by the copyright holder. And the publisher can do it on a per book or even per copy basis. Which one does the "not allowed to be read aloud" clause mean in the Alice ebook? It does not matter, due to the ugliness of DMCA: Traditionally, and morally justifiably, the publisher could only control "read aloud" as a feature. However, under the DMCA, if the ebook is copy-restricted, the only way I can exercise the right is by using the officially sold feature. Any third-party text-to-speech program has to circumvent the restriction, thereby being illegal under DMCA. In short, the DMCA stealthily turns the table around: traditionally it was a right of the consumer and a feature from the producer, now it becomes a right of the producer and only a feature sold to the consumer. So I think this topic will not be a PR disaster if it can be clarified to the public. It is in fact one of the key problems with the DMCA. There are some off-topic but understandable comments on this list in the past few days. I want to make one comment about Tuesday's tragic events that hopefully is also pertinent to this list. When a group of people feel being victimized, they often have the tendency to justify victimizing of any one connected to, supportive of, approving of, or in any other way associated with the perceived villains. This is what the terrorists did, what some proposed revenge would do, and, although on a different scale of magnitude but fundamentally of the same kind, what the DMCA does. We live in civilized societies. Part of being civilized is the ability to use ration to resist such (quite natural) basic instincts. Let us not be driven back to stone age by the terrorists. I think it is appropriate for those pro-libertarian or anti-libertarian people to voice their opinion on Sklyarov case or DMCA here, or even on the other side's standing on these issues. But comments on the other side on other topics is, IMHO, quite off-topic here. Personal attacks are very much inappropriate here. They will do nothing to further the argument of the speaker, either. Huaiyu Zhu From schoen at loyalty.org Sat Sep 15 08:11:29 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Right or feature? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010915081129.A8887@zork.net> Huaiyu Zhu writes: > I think it is appropriate for those pro-libertarian or anti-libertarian > people to voice their opinion on Sklyarov case or DMCA here, or even on > the other side's standing on these issues. But comments on the other > side on other topics is, IMHO, quite off-topic here. Personal attacks > are very much inappropriate here. They will do nothing to further the > argument of the speaker, either. Yes, I think it's on topic to talk about whether libertarianism or other political philosophies can encourage people to support Dmitry, or whether these philosophies lead to support of the DMCA. (Also, it's relevant to talk about how or whether we can do outreach to different groups to get them involved.) The libertarianism debate on this list got off-track earlier, but it's not inherently inappropriate. -- 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 jays at panix.com Sat Sep 15 11:28:40 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:32:12 -0700 From: John Gilmore To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com, gnu@toad.com Subject: Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects It's clear that the US administration is putting out feelers to again ban publication of strong encryption. See: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html The evil gnomes who keep advancing unconstitutional US anti-crypto policies know that the current hysteria in Congress and the Administration will not last forever. So they will probably move very quickly -- within a week is my guess -- to re-control encryption, either by a unilateral action of the Administration (by amending the Export Administration Regulations), or by stuffing a rider onto some so-called "emergency" bill in Congress. They maneuvered very carefully in the Bernstein case such that there is no outstanding injunction against violating the Constitution this way -- and even no binding 9th-Circuit precedent that tells them it's unconstitutional to do so. They know in their hearts that numerous judges have found it unconstitutional, but they have proven throughout the seven-year history of the case that they don't give a damn about the Constitution. Which means it may take weeks, months or years for civil liberties workers to get a judge to roll back any such action. Not just days. We won the case, but they squirmed out of any permanent restrictions -- so far. The US government has a new mania for wiretapping everyone in case they might be a terrorist. There's already two bills in Congress to make it trivial for them to wiretap anybody on flimsy excuses, and to retroactively justify their precipitous act of rolling Carnivore boxes into major ISPs this week and demanding, without legal authority, that they be put at the heart of the networks. See: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html Even more than before, we will need good encryption tools, merely to maintain privacy for law-abiding citizens, political activists, and human rights workers. (In the current hysteria, mere messages advocating peace or Constitutional rights might best be encrypted.) The European Parliament also recently recommended that European communications be routinely encrypted to protect them from pervasive US Echelon wiretaps. Some US developers, who thought such a reversal would never happen, have built or maintained a number of good open source encryption tools in the United States, and may not have lined up solid foreign maintainers or home sites. LET'S FIX THAT! We need volunteers in many countries to mirror current distributions, CVS trees, etc. We need volunteers to also act as maintainers, accepting patches and integrating them into solid releases. (Note that too many countries have pledged to stand toe-to-toe with the US while they march off to make war on somebody they can't figure out who it is yet. If you live in one of those countries, you may suddenly find that your own crypto regs have been sneakily altered. Take care that each useful package has maintainers and distribution points in diverse countries.) I haven't kept close track of which packages are in danger. I suggest that people nominate packages on this mailing list, and that others immediately grab mirror copies of them as they are nominated. And that some of those who mirror them keep quiet, in case hysterical governments make a concerted effort to stamp out all copies and/or all major distribution sites. If you aren't the quiet type, then *AFTER* IMMEDIATELY PULLING A COPY OF THE CODE OUTSIDE US JURISDICTION, announce your mirror on this mailing list. We freedom-loving US citizens have had to rely on the freedom-loving citizens of saner countries, to do the work of making strong encryption, for many years. We had a brief respite, which we will eventually resume for good. In the meantime, please let me apologize for my countrymen and for my government, for asking you to shoulder most of the burden again. Thank you so much. John Gilmore PS: Companies with proprietary encryption packages might consider immediately open-sourcing and exporting their encryption add-ins, so their customers can still get them from overseas archives. Or taking other actions to safeguard the privacy and integrity of their customers' data and their society's infrastructure. I also advise that they lobby like hell to keep privacy and integrity legal in the US. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com From pablos at kadrevis.com Sat Sep 15 12:53:37 2001 From: pablos at kadrevis.com (Pablos Kadrevis) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:29 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals Message-ID: <3BA3B1C1.6060903@kadrevis.com> People of Earth, The founders of Boycott Adobe are requesting proposals on the theme of 'What to do with www.boycottadobe.com'. We've received a lot of mail from people who think Adobe got off too lightly the first time around and are looking to the community for advice. The most reasonable proposal will be accepted and the three domain names will be assigned to the winning individual or group. From what they've written, it looks like it will be a hot autumn for Adobe unless Dmitry is freed. Do not be afraid, Bill Scannell & Paul Holman From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 15 12:59:57 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:30 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <3BA3B1C1.6060903@kadrevis.com> Message-ID: <200109152000.f8FK0BI02786@moerbeke> Boycott Adobe should be kept ready in the event of a return to the boycott. There is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to play nice, and we need to be ready to rekindle the boycott in great strength at any time. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ On 15 Sep, Pablos Kadrevis wrote: > People of Earth, > > The founders of Boycott Adobe are requesting proposals on the theme of 'What > to do with www.boycottadobe.com'. We've received a lot of mail from people > who think Adobe got off too lightly the first time around and are looking to > the community for advice. > > The most reasonable proposal will be accepted and the three domain names > will be assigned to the winning individual or group. From what they've written, it looks like it will be a hot autumn for Adobe > unless Dmitry is freed. > > Do not be afraid, > > Bill Scannell & Paul Holman > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010915/751e446b/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 15 13:56:56 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:30 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <200109152000.f8FK0BI02786@moerbeke>; from proclus@iname.com on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 03:59:57PM -0400 References: <3BA3B1C1.6060903@kadrevis.com> <200109152000.f8FK0BI02786@moerbeke> Message-ID: <20010915135656.E1781@navel.introspect> on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 03:59:57PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > On 15 Sep, Pablos Kadrevis wrote: > > People of Earth, > > > > The founders of Boycott Adobe are requesting proposals on the theme of 'What > > to do with www.boycottadobe.com'. We've received a lot of mail from people > > who think Adobe got off too lightly the first time around and are looking to > > the community for advice. > > > > The most reasonable proposal will be accepted and the three domain > > names will be assigned to the winning individual or group. From what > > they've written, it looks like it will be a hot autumn for Adobe > > unless Dmitry is freed. Please use postfix quoting format: your reply goes below the material cited. Trim your quotes appropriately and ensure your attributions are accurate. Thank you. > Boycott Adobe should be kept ready in the event of a return to the > boycott. There is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to > play nice, and we need to be ready to rekindle the boycott in great > strength at any time. Adobe are not playing nice. I vote for reactivating the boycott. I've trimmed my own sig to one line, following identifiers, in deference to the week's events. I'm restoring my prior sig calling for boycott, support for Dmitry, and repeal of the DMCA immediately (it was a matter of time). We're going to see a shitload of poorly formed, and poorly informed, legislation in upcoming months. The motives may or may not be pure, but the curtailment of freedoms must be prevented. The US is not just the home of the brave, but the land of the free. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ Praying for the victims. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010915/f0cc1ba4/attachment.pgp From thomasmreardon at lycos.com Sat Sep 15 15:01:27 2001 From: thomasmreardon at lycos.com (thomas m reardon) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:30 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] please remove me from list-thank you Message-ID: From tom at lemuria.org Sat Sep 15 14:59:42 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:30 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from jays@panix.com on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 02:28:40PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010915235942.A19701@lemuria.org> On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 02:28:40PM -0400, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > Subject: Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects lemuria.org has stood strong against the DeCSS censorship, and I am in the position of working at the provider. complaints, even faxes from the cops, arrive in the room next to mine. :) I can take copies of anything that needs a home. I can't play maintainer or invest much time as I'm already stretched thin, but I hereby offer lemuria.org as an archive site. please contact me directly if you need anything mirrored. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Sat Sep 15 15:08:36 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [Fwd: German cops reportedly raid PDF pirate for copyrightinfringement] Message-ID: <3BA3D164.7D65EC39@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> (Forwarded from POLITECH list) -------- Original Message -------- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:31:29 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh [Probably if the same (alleged) act were to take place in the U.S., the same raid would happen. Nothing to do with the DMCA or the SSSCA. The U.S. law in question, assuming the raidee wasn't selling PDFs, is the 1997 NET Act, which made not-for-profit copyright infringements a crime. Share software with your friends or family and go to prison if you get caught. I invite Springer to reply. --Declan] ********* From: Tom Subject: [free-sklyarov] more PDF arrests ? Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:13:22 +0200 User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i this just in on a german newssite: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jes-10.09.01-000/ for those not speaking german, a short summary: someone in munich was raided by 5 cops, PC and peripherals taken, because he allegedly posted a "cracked" (reference to elcomsoft) copyrighted .pdf file on his webpage. the search order explicitly mentions "hacker software for pdf cracking". ********* From: Kurt Foss Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Computer seized in alleged PDF eBook crack To: free-sklyarov@zork.net Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:17:39 -0500 Based on accusations of copyright infringement involving an allegedly cracked PDF version of a recently released book, police in Munich, Germany have reportedly seized the computer and peripheral equipment of a Web site owner. Purchase of the book apparently included a CD-ROM of the contents; according to reports, the protected PDF's security permissions were removed using software from ElcomSoft Co. Ltd -- but not the same controversial application which led to recent indictments for ElcomSoft and employee Dmitry Sklyarov on violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=231 ********* [Following is what Babelfish makes of the heise.de article. --DBM] House search because of gecrackter PDF file (update) The public prosecutor's office Munich let seize the computer system of an Website operator, because it is to have still offered a in copyright matters protected and PDF file gecrackte in addition. According to specification of the concerning at least five officials penetrated into his dwelling and carried one PC with monitor as well as two scanners and some diskettes forward. In that heise on-line available search resolution of the district court running is called it that in particular for data carriering with the PDF data as well as, so literally, " Heckersoftware is looked up for decoding PDF Verschluesselungsprogrammen ". With the corpus Delicti concerns it a PDF file, which is attached to CD on the " manual of the printed media ". The Website operator said heise on-line, the public prosecutor's office accuses to him now the file with the help of the software " Advanced pdf Recovery " the Russian company ElcomSoft to have gecrackt. This software, which can be downloaded in a demo version free of charge, decodes Adobe Acrobat PDF files, which are provided with an owner password, in order it against modifications, supplements, printing, extracting text or pictures to protect. One the programmer von ElcomSoft is located at present in the USA before court, because he is to have cracked the protection of another Adobe program. In the search resolution, which obviously decreases/goes back to a charge of the scientific Springer publishing house, an offence against copyright is accused to suspecting. Usually in such cases on the civil way a requirement for omission is interspersed. The director/conductor of the responsible residents of Munich public prosecutor, Dr. Hubert full man, acknowledged opposite heise on-line that in the course of a preliminary investigation a house search was executed. The analysis of the seized evidence would take about six weeks. Only then is to be counted on results. On the uncommon methodology during a copyright infringement addressed, full man said: " a proportionateness is given already alone, because a judge, who enjoys judicial independence, signed the resolution. " If he did not want to give closer specification to the procedure and the looked up evidence, it stressed however that he could not be come the search resolution (the heise on-line is present) for with one hour of preparation time the set discussion ( jes / c't) ********* ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Sat Sep 15 15:23:54 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <200109152000.f8FK0BI02786@moerbeke> Message-ID: > Boycott Adobe should be kept ready The campaign to boycott Adobe should be kept active, and transform itself for the long-haul, prosletizing both the shallowness of their position, and alternatives to their products. The DMCA is not a weapon if people are too afraid to kill with it. From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Sat Sep 15 16:50:44 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Keep Signing the Petition to Strike Down the DMCA Message-ID: <3BA3E954.E080C608@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> http://www.PetitionOnline.com/nixdmca/petition.html To: US Congress and the Judiciary We, the undersigned, are citizens who believe that the anti-circumvention provisions in Chapter 12 of the U.S. Copyright Act, enacted in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") must be repealed or struck down as unconstitutional. We believe that this law contradicts the interest that we, the People, intended when we delegated Congress the Constitutional Power "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries". We agree with Julie Cohen, writing for 46 intellectual property professors who find that "The DMCA's anti-device provisions are not a valid exercise of any of Congress' enumerated powers." We endorse their amicus brief submitted in Universal v. Corley: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20010126_ny_lawprofs_amicus.html We agree with the Supreme Court that copyright is not a birth right, but a "wholely statutory" grant (Wharton v. Peters, 1834). The Copyright grant exists by the grace of the public as a public investment for the public benefit, much like a loan. "The sole interest of the United States and the primary object in conferring the monopoly lie in the general benefits derived by the public from the labors of authors" (US v. Paramount Pictures, 1948; Sony v. Universal City Studios, 1984). This DMCA wrongly inhibits fair use of digital material by giving publishers a false right to control access to their digital material. Fair use is the quid-pro-quo that we, the People, demand in return for a temporary exclusive right to profit from a particular expression of one's work. We agree with Justice Stevens that copyright has "never accorded the copyright owner complete control over all possible uses of his work" (Sony v. Universal City Studios, 1984). We agree with Justice O'Connnor that "The author's consent to a reasonable use of his copyrighted works had always been implied by the courts as a necessary incident of the constitutional policy of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts, since a prohibition of such use would inhibit subsequent writers from attempting to improve upon prior works and thus . . . frustrate the very ends sought to be attained." (Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises, 1985). These requirements are Constitutional in origin: ?First Amendment protections [are] embodied in the Copyright Act?s distinction between copyrightable expression and uncopyrightable facts and ideas, and in the latitude for scholarship and comment traditionally afforded by fair use.? (Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises, 1985). Moreover, the DMCA denies basic property rights to purchasers of tangible goods. The doctrine of First Sale protects these property rights, and includes but is not limited to - the right to private performance of audio-visual works (PREI v. Columbia, 1993) - a right to display works, 17 USC 109(c) - a right to copy or adapt digital software works for utilization with a machine 17 USC 117(a)(1) - a right to copy or adapt digital software works for archival purposes In stark contrast, the DMCA takes these property rights from their owners and gives them permanently to publishers. We reject the notion that First Sale provides only the right to resell as advanced to defend the DMCA by certain Courts and the Copyright Office. The Copyright Office recently published a report to Congress about the effect of the DMCA on First Sale without mentioning these rights. To ignore the impact of the DMCA in particular on an owner's private performance right per PREI v. Columbia is an egregious omission. We reject the report and believe it grossly misstates the negative impact to the public of the DMCA. We agree with Professor Felton that the DMCA chills speech and the progress of science in the arena of computer security. We believe that the DMCA will harm, not help, the interests of authors and citizens for this reason. We reject security through censorship. We agree with the 17 eminent Computer Science professors represented by James Tyre and the 8 leading Cryptologists represented Jennifer Granick that: http://cryptome.org/mpaa-v-2600-bac.htm http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20010126_ny_crypto_amicus.html - Computer Code is Expressive Speech. - Academics and Programmers Must Have the Freedom to Communicate Fully in Code. - Source Code And Object Code Are Copyrightable And Thus Entitled To Full First Amendment Protection. - The Protection Given To Code Cannot Be Limited On Account of "Functionality". - The Encryption Research Exemption Is Insufficient - The Anti-dissemination provisions are content based - The DMCA harms rather than furthers a substantial public interest - Inventing false new rights for publishers and effectivly eliminating fair use are not "narrowly tailored" means against copyright infringement In particular, we reject the regulation of code as symbolic conduct under the "O'Brien" standard. Code is simply text, which has no conduct inherently associated with it. Code expresses functional ideas, much as a musical score does. It takes a machine and a willing human operator to turn those ideas into conduct. O'Brien was not arrested for carrying instructions on how to burn his draft card. Finally, we view with disgust the arrest of Dmitry Sklyarov, who is charged with creating tools to read encrypted books. In the middle ages the pre-reform Catholic Church persecuted scholars who tried to translate the Latin bible into the common vernacular. Today encryption has replaced Latin as the tool of choice to stifle the right to read. The protestants who founded this nation, English bible in hand, would look upon the DMCA with the same disgust that they looked upon the evils of the medieval Catholic Church. For the above reasons, we reject chapter 12 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as unconstitutional and bad policy. We demand that Congress repeal it and that Courts strike it down. Failing the rule of law, we, the People, declare "misuse of copyright" by popular decree, and thereby revoke our grant of Copyright to those works protected by chapter 12 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act until such time as the government restores the Copyright Act to a form consistent with the Constitution and the will of the people. Sincerely, The Undersigned From tompoe at renonevada.net Sat Sep 15 17:22:31 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Keep Signing the Petition to Strike Down the DMCA In-Reply-To: <3BA3E954.E080C608@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> References: <3BA3E954.E080C608@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <01091517223100.06380@aether> On Saturday 15 September 2001 16:50, Seth Johnson wrote: > http://www.PetitionOnline.com/nixdmca/petition.html > > > To: US Congress and the Judiciary > ---snip- - - > > Failing the rule of law, we, the People, declare "misuse of copyright" > by popular decree, and thereby revoke our grant of Copyright to those > works protected by chapter 12 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act > until such time as the government restores the Copyright Act to a form > consistent with the Constitution and the will of the people. > > Sincerely, > > The Undersigned Hi: So, the above paragraph is interesting. What's that translate into? Sounds good, though. Thanks, Tom From proclus at iname.com Sat Sep 15 17:59:20 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <20010915135656.E1781@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <200109160059.f8G0xRI03602@moerbeke> On 15 Sep, Karsten M. Self wrote: >> Boycott Adobe should be kept ready in the event of a return to the >> boycott. There is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to >> play nice, and we need to be ready to rekindle the boycott in great >> strength at any time. > > Adobe are not playing nice. I vote for reactivating the boycott. I definitely don't follow you here. Adobe met the boycott demands, and so the boycott crew ended the boycott. We supported them in that. You should go back and read the messages from the first week. If anyone feels strongly about not using Adobe software, GNU-Darwin will gladly aid them with free software alternatives. GNU-Darwin will not actively support a renewed boycott unless Adobe backtracks from the deal. We demand that they honor their agreement in good faith. Here is another message, which explains our view of the good faith conditions. http://zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/2001-September/004089.html Adobe's inaction on behalf of Dmitry, though deplorable, is not grounds for a renewed boycott IMHO, and it may even distract us from the objective of sending Dmitry home. On the other hand, GNU-Darwin will return to the boycott in great strength, if Adobe backtracks from the original agreement. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ > > I've trimmed my own sig to one line, following identifiers, in deference > to the week's events. I'm restoring my prior sig calling for boycott, > support for Dmitry, and repeal of the DMCA immediately (it was a matter > of time). > > We're going to see a shitload of poorly formed, and poorly informed, > legislation in upcoming months. The motives may or may not be pure, but > the curtailment of freedoms must be prevented. > > The US is not just the home of the brave, but the land of the free. > > Peace. > -- Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010915/48671250/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 15 19:21:57 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] ST: [declan@well.com: FC: Columnist calls for Draconian Net-crackdown after attacks] In-Reply-To: <20010914164927.B23148@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:49:27PM -0700 References: <20010914164927.B23148@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010915192157.C12658@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:49:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) wrote: > Semi-topical. > > Also noted: NPR's All Things Considered featured an essay from a woman > (didn't catch the name) who's generally concerned with civil-liberties > losses precipitated from the current crises. There *is* a mainstream > public vein to tap into out there. NB: It was PRI's Marketplace Radio, not ATC. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010915/a4de3a28/attachment.pgp From robertl1 at home.com Sat Sep 15 21:51:43 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010915215123.0240c690@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 08:59 PM 9/15/01 -0400, you wrote: >On 15 Sep, Karsten M. Self wrote: >>> Boycott Adobe should be kept ready in the event of a return to the >>> boycott. There is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to >>> play nice, and we need to be ready to rekindle the boycott in great >>> strength at any time. >> >> Adobe are not playing nice. I vote for reactivating the boycott. > >I definitely don't follow you here. Adobe met the boycott demands, and >so the boycott crew ended the boycott. We supported them in that. You >should go back and read the messages from the first week. proclus states his case well and argues most rationally. I do appreciate that. Nonetheless I am troubled by the state of affairs. Many of us who have been active on this list and elsewhere were disturbed and critical of the original decision to let Adobe off so lightly. It certainly helps that "Adobe withdrew its support for the criminal complaint, stating that 'the prosecution of this individual is not conducive to the best interests of any of the parties involved or the industry.' " but the practical reality is that the charges were not dropped by the DOJ ( a very predicatable outcome, btw) and that as many of us suspected the victory (get a statement from Adobe) was, quite honestly, not all it was cracked up to be as Adobe's waffling PR demonstrates. Now proclus is quite right that "he" and I assume thus GNU-Darwin should not go back on their word. But I don't feel he represented my views, nor I suspect does Karsten feel that proclus represented his. I wonder how many on this list feel represented by proclus? Who is the "boycott" crew and how were they empowered to speak for whom? How many on the list feel that we should NOT actively pursue a boycott of Adobe? I would like to hear more voices. As far as I am concerned, it was a tactical error and has become a strategic error to drop the boycott. Corporate America can see a simple outcome. Use the FBI and DOJ to do your dirty work and then walk away unscathed. I just do not think we can afford to send this message. These are sober times. Freedom in this country is at high risk. Incompetent leadership abounds, and looks for scapegoats. So I ask you to weigh these questions carefully, but lets not back away from one of the most useful weapons around to free Dmitry and to fight the DMCA. Let's boycott Adobe. Bob La Quey From martinb at kemokid.com Sat Sep 15 22:16:55 2001 From: martinb at kemokid.com (Martin Baker) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010915215123.0240c690@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Bob La Quey wrote: > I would like to hear more voices. Although I would like to see a continued boycott of Adobe, this means little for me, since as a FreeBSD and GNU/Linux user the only Adobe software I use is occasionally their $-free but encumbered Acrobat Reader. I think that, especially in this time of destruction, we should constantly be searching for (often literally) constructive solutions. Helping improve xpdf, ghostscript, and ghostview, and all free software in general, and improving and creating free formats (such as Ogg Vorbis) seem to be the best actions. Note that this is a far less visible and immediate solution but potentially much more fruitful long-term. A boycott may force changes but, when ceased, leave Adobe alone. Competitive tools, once created, will continue to exist and take power from Adobe and back to both the creators and the enjoyers of books, music, images, movies, and web pages. Peace, Martin From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sat Sep 15 23:09:30 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010915215123.0240c690@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Bob La Quey wrote: > As far as I am concerned, it was a tactical error and has > become a strategic error to drop the boycott. Well, we didn't know back then what we do now. Now we're seeing the gov't press ahead regardless of Adobe's statement. We wanted Adobe to help undo some of the damage they inflicted, and now we know that their limited cooperation really didn't do anything. Perhaps Adobe can be convinced to help more, if they expect powerful repercussions from a guilty verdict? I.e., we make concrete (and visible) plans now for the most complete and powerful boycott we can possibly engineer, brainstorming many different avenues and creative tactics for both raising awareness and freeing people of any need to choose their formats or products. Maybe if they see a very real, very powerful shit-storm off the coast of San Jose, ADBE will consider Dmitry's legal bills a relatively small and wise investment. So I say, let's at least plan, and use this time and space to discuss all the things we *could* do, if we wanted a boycott of maximal effectiveness. -S From robertl1 at home.com Sun Sep 16 01:05:17 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010915215123.0240c690@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010916004659.02413ec0@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 10:16 PM 9/15/01 -0700, you wrote: >On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Bob La Quey wrote: > >> I would like to hear more voices. > >Although I would like to see a continued boycott of Adobe, this means >little for me, since as a FreeBSD and GNU/Linux user the only Adobe >software I use is occasionally their $-free but encumbered Acrobat Reader. > >I think that, especially in this time of destruction, we should constantly >be searching for (often literally) constructive solutions. Helping improve >xpdf, ghostscript, and ghostview, and all free software in general, and >improving and creating free formats (such as Ogg Vorbis) seem to be the >best actions. > >Note that this is a far less visible and immediate solution but >potentially much more fruitful long-term. A boycott may force changes but, >when ceased, leave Adobe alone. Competitive tools, once created, will >continue to exist and take power from Adobe and back to both the creators >and the enjoyers of books, music, images, movies, and web pages. > >Peace, >Martin Thank you Martin, I agree and have suggested that the key element in a boycott is the provision of alternatives. We must use the forces implicit in Dmitry's situation to energize programmers in the Free and Open Source world to replace Adobe products. This will help to get the word out to a larger community about Dmitry's plight and about the unconstitutional aspects of the DMCA. By focusing on Adobe and Dmitry we make the abstract real. Thus we can use anecdotal communications to reach a larger public, which we must do. Free speech is far too important to leave to the programming community. Similarly the individuals amongst us who have skills in marketing and public relations could use those skills to push these alternatives. This is not now, and has never been, a movement solely of programmers. This is a movement of people who believe deeply in individual freedom. A boycott must not be a passive rejection of Adobe products. A boycott must be an agressive campaign that offers alternatives. Best if those alternatives, e.g. GhostScript http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/ are better known as a result of the Boycott Adobe efforts. Perhaps a better name is Replace Adobe. Onward, Bob La Quey From john at starta.org Sun Sep 16 01:45:42 2001 From: john at starta.org (John Starta) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] French article: Copyright is wrong Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010916014203.05c3e140@popcorn> Le Monde diplomatique [1]: "Copyrights meant to reward artists for their creations are now commercial products that pay most of their dividends to companies that trade in them. We have to think of a new and fairer way to fund creativity." jas [1] From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Sun Sep 16 03:07:38 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:31 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's > in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle > just fine? If you crack the nut of encryption, and publish your cracker, especially for profit, you'd go to jail. Perhaps this is necessary for the same reasoning that we have it now: One broken copy is enough to smash all protection. I'm not saying that's the best idea, and it still chills intellectual freedom. But if you crack the encryption to implement fair use features, but do not leave the encryption removed, you should be safe. While I'm at it I'd say distributing the actual cracker would be unlawful, but documenting the technology should not be a crime. That would reduce the chill to intellectual discourse. "But I wonder about the legislative approach. The fact is that the entertainment industry gives lots of money to congresspeople. I am pessimistic about any fair compromise making it past them." As true as this could be, it remains our only hope. I have wondered for some time whether anyone has drafted a "reasonable DMCA". I suggest it's necessary. John From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sun Sep 16 11:50:48 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, John Dempsey wrote: > If you crack the nut of encryption, and publish your cracker, especially for > profit, you'd go to jail. > Perhaps this is necessary for the same reasoning that we have it now: One > broken copy is enough to smash all protection. I don't think this would be acceptible. It simply won't do to allow fair use circumvention, but disallow the tools needed to perform said circumvention. > But if you crack the encryption to implement fair use features, but do not > leave the encryption removed, you should be safe. One problem here is the definition of "leave." What if you leave the encryption removed on a transient copy in the /tmp directory? And what if fair use means making a backup copy in a different format? Or converting to a different format so you can use the media on your other, unsupported, computer? > While I'm at it I'd say distributing the actual cracker would be unlawful, > but documenting the technology should not be a crime. This would be like allowing people to publish papers on astronomy, but outlawing telescopes. There's nothing for scientists to publish if they can't access tools for research, and to a certain extent you can't expect them to build their own from scratch. > John Xcott From jays at panix.com Sun Sep 16 11:55:29 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Open Letter from Don Marti to Michael Eisner, Head of Disney Message-ID:
Linux Journal Home > Articles > Conversations #34 Friday, September 14, 2001 | Last Updated 03:31pm Open Letter to Michael Eisner, Chairman and CEO, Walt Disney Company by Don Marti 14-September-2001 Open letter to Michael Eisner, Chairman and CEO, Walt Disney Company. Dear Mr. Eisner, I hear you're planning a trip to Washington, DC next month to close the deal on a computer censorship bill, the SSSCA, you're buying from Congress. I'm writing to ask you to please stay home. I'm not asking because of concerns for your safety. All Americans are getting back to regular work and travel, and that's the right thing to do. But you and your bill should stay out of Washington, DC, and let our elected representatives do their jobs. Here's why. On the morning of September 11th, I was wondering about one thing. Nothing the mass media could spare the time to answer, though. My question was "What happened to Jim and Ari?" They work in a building facing the World Trade Center, and often use the subway station underneath. In mid-morning, an internet server still chugging along on lower Broadway passed along the answer. "I just talked to Ari. He and Jim are OK." That was it. A few words, passed along by a freely available mail program on an old Pentium system in the corner of an office. Words that ended up copied many times and passed along to internet places where Jim and Ari's friends gather. Low-budget Internet hosts you've never heard of, with names like zork.crackmonkey.org and barley.nylug.org, running software you've never heard of, with names like Postfix and GNU Mailman. This isn't the flashy Internet of IPOs and Herman Miller chairs. It's the Internet where a regular person with a couple books and a used computer can start up a meeting, an argument, a conversation about anything. No venture capitalists, no advertisers, no licenses, no chat room monitors--just independent know-how, Linux Documentation Project style. What did we learn from the low-profile Internet this week? Just little things. Some guy went to one hospital to give blood, they sent him to another, and everyone with type O blood please come, too. The A Train is running, making all stops except World Trade Center. Here's a complete bus schedule. A librarian in Indiana told the police she is keeping the library open, so that people can get on the Internet for news of their friends and family. The Ventures came out with a song called, "Be Strong America" and their webmaster put it up as an MP3 file for free distribution. Other people posted photos and movies of their trips by foot out of Manhattan or Washington. Forwarded copies made the proverbial rounds as if they were virus warnings or lawyer jokes. The song is corny, and the news is minor, but I know from the Jim and Ari message how much it could mean. On the evening of the 11th, President Bush said, "These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve." Americans knew that because, as we watched TV, our inboxes became full of copies of copies of copies of individual stories of human steel. The stories weren't all good news. A sister's friend and her fiancee, missing. One of the members of someone's favorite band was working his day job at a sky-high restaurant. Another sister was a flight attendant. And nobody would say the Internet could help with that loss. It wasn't accurate or eloquent. Primitive reactions spewed out, ill-informed calls for revenge, racism, ignorance--the best I could say for some of the hateful garbage was, well, at least this guy is just typing, instead of breaking shop windows or worse. It's wasn't fun and it wasn't sanitary; there can be no happy ending to this story. But it was America. President Bush said, "The federal government and all our agencies are conducting business. But it is not business as usual." Mr. Eisner, please take that as a hint. It's a mistake for any American to shut down another's freedom to speak, whether the person being censored is editing an on-line newspaper or just making tweaks to the software that runs the "Crackmonkey" site. The SSSCA, which you are in the middle of buying from Congress, would outlaw the software that powers the independent Internet, the Internet that had many of us crying on our keyboards this week, from loss, relief or rage. At times like this, a slightly cracked monkey means more to us than a perfectly coiffed mouse. It would be shameful for you to show up at the US Capitol with a duffel bag full of "campaign contributions" at a time like this. Paying Congress to silence your fellow citizens, now, is not the act of a loyal American. The SSSCA is all the more dangerous because we're a big country. I would love to be able to say that even without the Internet, our independent radio stations, local newspapers and town meetings would get our communicating done. I would love to be able to say that many voices in all media brought us news, personal appeals, debate. But that's not what happened. Blame the price of paper, the limited radio spectrum or our spread-out geography, but the fact is that the only national, public voice most of us have is the Internet. Our national conversation runs on open standards and interoperable software. Allowing it to exist only at the pleasure of major media corporations and software giants would turn our democracy over to unaccountable private-sector rulers. I recognize that you just want more outlets for your movies, and the Internet might look like TV to you at first. But you have plenty of markets for your products--not just TV, but the multiplexes, the theme parks, the malls. Please let Americans keep our disorderly public places, too. The Internet is annoying, flaming and rumor-mongering, but for many of us it's all the free speech we've got. Mr. Eisner, please stay home. Sincerely, Donald B. Marti Jr. American For more information: cryptome.org/sssca.htm
From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 16 14:27:42 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Feature "rights" In-Reply-To: ; from john.dempsey7@verizon.net on Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 06:07:38AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010916142741.G32351@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 06:07:38AM -0400, John Dempsey (john.dempsey7@verizon.net) wrote: > > That is: if you take away the fair use infringements, what's > > in there that plain old ordinary copyright law wouldn't handle > > just fine? > > If you crack the nut of encryption, and publish your cracker, especially for > profit, you'd go to jail. This is unacceptable. It is a prior restraint on speech. > Perhaps this is necessary for the same reasoning that we have it now: > One broken copy is enough to smash all protection. This shibboleth has been trotted out again and again, with no proof whatsoever. In fact, the evidence is contrary: free electronic copies of material spur commercial sales of same: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/japan/index.html Markets for Information Goods Hal R. Varian University of California, Berkeley April 1998 (revised: October 16, 1998) <...> Previewing and browsing Information producers typically offer opportunities for browsing their products: Hollywood offers previews, the music industry offers radio broadcasts, and the publishing industry offers bookstores, nowadays complete with easy chairs and cappucinos. One of the great difficulties faced by sellers of information on the Internet is figuring out ways to browse the products. Video and previews work well, but it appears that previewing textual information would be quite difficult. However, things are not quite as bad as they seem. The National Academy of Sciences Press found that when they posted the full text of book on the Web, the sales of those books went up by a factor of three. Posting the material on the Web allowed potential customers to preview the material, but anyone who really wanted to read the book would download it. MIT Press had a similar experience with monographs and online journals. <...> Simply: there is a friction to producing and distributing even free copies of works over the Internet (or via other electronic or physical distribution networks). Frictions equal costs. And, barring a business model, there are low incentives. An equivalent statement to "One broken copy is enough to smash all protection" is: "the marginal cost of distributing works is nil". If this is in fact the case, then there is a serious market iniquity in information goods: works whose market cost should approach a far lower value are being sold at multiples of actual cost. This is already the subject of conspiracy and antitrust probes in the area of music CD sales -- the US$16 price of a new CD is far in excess of the US$0.20 of materials. It's also far in excess of the $7-$8 price of vinyl records that CDs replaced. There's something rotten in Denmark. > While I'm at it I'd say distributing the actual cracker would be > unlawful, but documenting the technology should not be a crime. That > would reduce the chill to intellectual discourse. Very marginally. > "But I wonder about the legislative approach. The fact is that the > entertainment industry gives lots of money to congresspeople. I am > pessimistic about any fair compromise making it past them." > > As true as this could be, it remains our only hope. I have wondered > for some time whether anyone has drafted a "reasonable DMCA". > I suggest it's necessary. It's not the only approach. We have courts. We have mass civil disobediance. The Boucher proposals merit study, and may be a "reasonable DMCA". I've made my own suggestions. Yours don't meet the mark. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010916/5eaf87f7/attachment.pgp From mw at themail.com Sun Sep 16 15:42:53 2001 From: mw at themail.com (mw@themail.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] august 29 - dmitry speech Message-ID: <200109161842433.SM00870@mail.TheMail.com> For those of you who didn't get a chance to go to San Fran on August 29th, and would like to see Dmitry's speech at the fundraiser, I digitized it. It was done with a hi-8 camcorder and only shows Dmitry at the end, but you can see the crowd and hear his speech. the link is at http://www.dmcasucks.org It's 9 meg and I don't know how much longer I can keep it up there...so get it while you can. -aicra p.s. the most 1337 part is that my debian has only free software and I was able to make the mpg using ffmpeg. :) __________________________________________________________________ TheMail.com - Full featured premium email you can count on. Sign-up today at http://www.themail.com/ From schoen at loyalty.org Sun Sep 16 22:08:54 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [jays@panix.com: [free-sklyarov-announce] New York City Noon Monday 17 September 2001: Rally to Free Dmitry Sklyarov] Message-ID: <20010916220854.E8887@zork.net> Wow! ----- Forwarded message from Jay Sulzberger ----- From: Jay Sulzberger To: Subject: [free-sklyarov-announce] New York City Noon Monday 17 September 2001: Rally to Free Dmitry Sklyarov Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 00:54:07 -0400 (EDT) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Noon Monday 17 September 2001 at 41st Street and Fifth Avenue, before the New York Public Library, on the Island of Manhattan, there will be a rally to free Dmitry Sklyarov. Note that this is not an LXNY event, but rather the ninth of a series of rallies, whose Lead Organizer and First Contact is Leonid Gorkin lgorkin@excite.com or lgorkin1@nyc.rr.com Do not bring any sticks to this rally. There is a New York City regulation forbidding sticks at gatherings. The New York City police officers who told us of this regulation were parfit gentle in their courtesy. There have been and will be rallies in about twenty cities. http://freesklyarov.org/calendar Much of the organizing of New York City Rallies to Free Dmitry take place on the fairuse mailing list of NYFairUse, which list may be joined at http://www.nyfairuse.org To download a flyer go to: http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/dmitry-links For more information: http://freesklyarov.org http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov http://eff.org http://www.dibona.com/dmca http://www.templetons.com/brad/free.html http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0108.html This week the United States of America was attacked. One big objective of the attack is to drive us to forget our Bill of Rights. We will not forget. We have a right to use our computers in our homes as we see fit. We will defend this right. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/bor.html Dmitry Sklyarov has been indicted. If convicted on all counts he faces 25 years in prison. He is accused of distributing a tool to manipulate files in certain Adobe formats. All manipulation occurs inside a single computer. The tool checks as best it can that the file it operates on is owned by the person running the tool. Under the DMCA, distribution of such a tool is a felony. If traditional copyright law were like the DMCA, then distribution of paper, pencils, ink, pens, and cameras would also be a felony. Today computers for home and business use contain no spy hardware nor any spy software, except for certain Trojans which may have slipped past the owner's defenses. Under the DMCA and further federal legislation proposed by Senator Hollings all personal computers will be required to contain over one megabyte of spy firmware which will monitor every single read and write of the hard disk. Under the proposed legislation the operating system will report back to Infotainment Central any "suspicious use" of the hard disk. Law enforcement agencies will easily get secret writs of computer tapping and be able to watch everything you do at home on what once was your own machine. Infotainment Central will be able to disable your computer without permission from you. Indictment: http://archive.nytimes.com/2001/08/31/technology/31HACK.html http://cryptome.org/dmitry-indict.htm http://cryptome.org/dmitry-burton.htm Proposed legislation: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701.html http://cryptome.org/sssca http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0109.html http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/16/1647231 http://www2.linuxjournal.com/articles/conversations/0034.html Our rallies and all the work of propaganda and education have been important in alerting the world to the threat facing not only Dmitry, but everyone who uses computers and everyone who uses the Great Commons of the Net. Despite our alert, the government of the United States has chosen to prosecute Dmitry. Our response must be clear, forceful, and effective. Why do we rally at the New York Public Library? Because the Association of American Publishers has declared that they plan to close down all free public libraries. Their chosen tool is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. As demonstrated by the indictment of Dmitry Sklyarov, the DMCA does indeed outlaw fair use of books that you, or the library, have bought and paid for: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36584-2001Feb7.html http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-201-6545588-0.html http://www.visi.com/~tneu/pro-book.html http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/08/23/pirate/index.html http://www.macfergus.com/niels/dmca/index.html http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html http://www.fsf.org/philosophy http://www.loc.gov/copyright/reports/studies/dmca/comments http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Sklyarov http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Sklyarov/boucher_ashcroft_dmca.html http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/July01/ginsparg.archive.ws.html http://arXiv.org/blurb/pg01unesco.html http://xxx.lanl.gov http://front.math.ucdavis.edu http://www.baen.com/library/home.htm http://www.lightandmatter.com/article/article.html http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/30/opinion/30LESS.html http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/08/07/lessig.html http://www.immaterial.net/page.php3?id=44 http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/articles/issue12/LU12-ebenmoglen.html http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu http://cryptome.org http://www.ala.org We need marchers and leafleteers and copiers of leaflets and designers of leaflets and propagandizers and lobbyists and lawyers and coders and water carriers and publicists and diplomats. Come to the Rally and help! Come to the Rally and meet allies! Dmitry Sklyarov today faces twenty-five years in prison for distributing a program which allows you to make fair use of books you have bought and paid for. Come to the Rally and help get Dmitry free! Free to go home and free to do his work. Jay Sulzberger Corresponding Secretary LXNY LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization. http://www.lxny.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7pXnuB3aRsiQGU5gRAjfGAKCDcfgaJURmoURqvg9KntOlFH7rdQCghoRj 9E4CQPyCGso3Q6+nKAntK4s= =P/+y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov-announce mailing list free-sklyarov-announce@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov-announce ----- End forwarded message ----- -- 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 jays at panix.com Sun Sep 16 23:11:08 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [jays@panix.com: [free-sklyarov-announce] New York City Noon Monday 17 September 2001: Rally to Free Dmitry Sklyarov] In-Reply-To: <20010916220854.E8887@zork.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Seth David Schoen wrote: > Wow! Thanks, Seth! And more thanks, and a much bigger Wow!, to you for running the free-sklyarov@zork.net list! Free Dmitry! Down the DMCA! Stop the SSSCA! Fight for the Fourth Amendment! oo--JS. From david.haworth at altavista.net Mon Sep 17 00:17:49 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Why don't the subscribers of this mailing list use gpg og pgp? In-Reply-To: <8831101335.20010914190258@centras.lt>; from debug@centras.lt on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 07:02:58PM +0200 References: <8831101335.20010914190258@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010917091749.A20794@3soft.de> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 07:02:58PM +0200, DeBug wrote: > I can't agree with that. I am always free to say everything i want > though i my be brought to prison for what i say, but i am always free > and i do not need encryption for doing any statements Encryption technology gives you 2 things: 1. The ability to say what you like, in private, to someone, without fear that others are eavesdropping 2. The ability to not say what you don't want - i.e. not to have statements falsely attributed to you. The second is perhaps the most important for public discussion. With digital media, it's far too easy to impersonate someone else. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010917/9eaaec41/attachment.pgp From moseng2 at underwhelm.org Mon Sep 17 02:06:33 2001 From: moseng2 at underwhelm.org (nobody) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Minnesota Protesters Announce Lecture Series Message-ID: Below is our press release. Please also read our request for donations--we want to advertise this lecture series both to ensure a good audience for our speakers and to encourage organizers in other cities to pursue similar high-profile events to foster public debate. http://www.underwhelm.org/plea.html http://www.underwhelm.org/lectures.html Thanks! Chris Moseng Free Dmitry. Repeal the DMCA. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCA-minnesota/ --------------------------------------------------- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 17, 2001 For information contact: freedima@underwhelm.org Chris Moseng - 651-353-1513 CITIZEN GROUP TO INFORM COMMUNITY OF DIGITAL COPYRIGHT ISSUES -- Group seeks to repeal DMCA, free Dmitry Sklyarov, protect fair use rights and academic freedom from corporate lobbyists MINNEAPOLIS -- In response to the arrest this summer of Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian programmer accused of violating the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, (DMCA) a draconian new copyright law, concerned citizens calling themselves "Minnesotans for Fair Copyright" will meet on Monday to announce a lecture series intended to foster community debate about copyright and intellectual property law. "Copyright is frequently called a delicate balance," says Chris Moseng, a member of Minnesotans for Fair Copyright, "a balance between the first amendment and the copyright clause in the constitution. Since the DMCA was passed in 1998, the balance is no longer delicate. The DMCA placed a lead weight on the side of private industry, destroying the balance that had been carefully crafted by the judicial system over decades." The DMCA was and remains strongly supported by corporate lobbyists from companies like Disney, Universal Studios and Microsoft. Computer programmers, professors, scientists and students, however, are critical of the law. The group's top priority will be to secure the release of Russian citizen Dmitry Sklyarov. He wrote an algorithm for the "Advanced eBook Processor," a tool for converting Adobe's eBook copy-protection format into the more convenient and portable PDF format. The program is legal in Russia, where the product was developed. But Mr. Sklyarov was arrested when he came to the United States to speak at conference about the flaws in the eBook copy-protection system. He faces up to five years in prison and tens of thousands of dollars in fines under the DMCA. "The irony of this man being imprisoned in the United States and longing to return to once-Communist Russia so he can regain his right to free speech is simply staggering." said Paul Cantrell, a St. Paul software developer. In response to Mr. Sklyarov's arrest and prosecution, the group plans to sponsor a series of lectures by prominent experts in the fields of law, cryptography, and rhetoric to help the public understand the implications of the DMCA and the challenges digital technology present to policy makers as they update copyright law for a new century. The group also seeks the repeal of the DMCA and will explore related issues such as the Napster controversy, conflicts over DVD encryption and music watermarking and the related issues of free speech, academic freedom, and fair use. The announcement will take place on Monday September 17 at 6:30 in room 3-111 of the Computer Science and Engineering building of the University of Minnesota Minneapolis campus. It is open to the public. More information and lecture series updates can be found at the group's website, at http://www.underwhelm.org. October 4: Dan Burk of the University of Minnesota's Law School October 18: John Logie of the University of Minnesota's Department of Rhetoric October 31: Bruce Schneier of Counterpane Internet Security, author of Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World From martinb at kemokid.com Mon Sep 17 04:00:12 2001 From: martinb at kemokid.com (Martin Baker) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] a call to continue Message-ID: This is slightly off-topic, but here goes. For a while I felt that I should stop devoting time and effort to the Free Sklyarov case and focus on efforts for minimizing the violence of the US response and for keeping our civil liberties. After some thought, I realize that that is important as well, but that the best defense of our civil liberties isn't by a "meta-" defense of protesting *about* our civil liberties, but actually exercising them directly about real issues. Thin ice here, but ... I want to point out that I personally do not hold the idea that we must keep doing what we are doing, just because "otherwise the terrorists will have won". I think that involves an incorrect reading of the meanings of and motives behind the attacks. If, however, we retreat from our current causes, then the "Freedom is Slavery" crowd will have won. Peace, Martin From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Mon Sep 17 05:31:24 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NY Fair Use Canvassing Results Message-ID: <3BA5ED1C.D2995F93@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Canvassing Results Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:59:00 -0400 From: Seth Johnson Organization: Real Measures To: fairuse@mrbrklyn.com Results for Canvassing Tactic, 9/9/01: Petition Signatures: 43 Doors Knocked on: 276 Parity Rate per doors knocked: 15.6% The parity rate above is very impressive, and shows that our canvassers have a very emulative practice. It does not show how many people we reached, whether on the sidewalk or at their doors, however. The rate we got among people we actually reached is obviously much higher. We need to get the right denominators: how many we approached/reached in person, and how many of those stopped to hear the rap. This rate shows us that people in the area we targetted are genuinely concerned about the DMCA and its effect on libraries. We need to track how many signed the petition among those we actually reached in person, how many said they would send the letter, how many volunteered to help us actively in our campaign. Those who volunteer to come to a meeting or help in future tactics are high viability volunteers, who build the strength of the organization. I signed one person who volunteered to come to a meeting, another three who wanted us to contact them about what we're doing in the future -- not enough to count on to actually follow through. But that grows as you implement practice, showing you're in motion. We can hone our tools and our rap and determine how well our approach really works now, based on reproducing or improving on these results on the next outreach. Most of all, we put together a team of organizers who displayed great leadership qualities and ability to deliver on the goals that we addressed with the tactic. Seth Johnson From debug at centras.lt Mon Sep 17 06:55:24 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:32 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] a call to continue In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4315460399.20010917155524@centras.lt> MB> "otherwise the terrorists will have won". I think that involves an MB> incorrect reading of the meanings of and motives behind the attacks. If, MB> however, we retreat from our current causes, then the "Freedom is Slavery" MB> crowd will have won. terrorists felt no other option than to make these events happen, as if to say "if your life companions refuse to value me while I am alive, I will make you value me and remember me in death". -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 17 13:24:08 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects (fwd) In-Reply-To: ; from jays@panix.com on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 02:28:40PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20010917132408.B17995@navel.introspect> on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 02:28:40PM -0400, Jay Sulzberger (jays@panix.com) wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:32:12 -0700 > From: John Gilmore > To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com, gnu@toad.com > Subject: Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects > > It's clear that the US administration is putting out feelers to > again ban publication of strong encryption. See: > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html > > The evil gnomes who keep advancing unconstitutional US anti-crypto > policies know that the current hysteria in Congress and the > Administration will not last forever. So they will probably move very > quickly -- within a week is my guess -- to re-control encryption, > either by a unilateral action of the Administration (by amending > the Export Administration Regulations), or by stuffing a rider onto > some so-called "emergency" bill in Congress. <...> > Some US developers, who thought such a reversal would never happen, > have built or maintained a number of good open source encryption tools > in the United States, and may not have lined up solid foreign > maintainers or home sites. > > LET'S FIX THAT! We need volunteers in many countries to mirror > current distributions, CVS trees, etc. We need volunteers to also > act as maintainers, accepting patches and integrating them into > solid releases. <...> > I haven't kept close track of which packages are in danger. I > suggest that people nominate packages on this mailing list, and that > others immediately grab mirror copies of them as they are nominated. > And that some of those who mirror them keep quiet, in case hysterical > governments make a concerted effort to stamp out all copies and/or all > major distribution sites. If you aren't the quiet type, then *AFTER* > IMMEDIATELY PULLING A COPY OF THE CODE OUTSIDE US JURISDICTION, > announce your mirror on this mailing list. My own suggestion for non-US packages. This is drawn from the debian package lists. Packages may be on the non-US list for either crypto and/or patent issues, I suspect several of the latter category are included. I count 85 packages. Package: apache-ssl Size: 406882 Description: Versatile, high-performance HTTP server with SSL support Package: cfs Size: 123270 Description: Cryptographic Filesystem Package: cipe-common Size: 27642 Description: Common files for CIPE VPN software Package: cipe-source Size: 103502 Description: Encrypted IP tunnels over UDP (source) Package: curl-ssl Size: 95458 Description: Get a file from an FTP, GOPHER, or HTTP server. (ssl support) Package: fsh Size: 28712 Description: Fast remote command execution over rsh/ssh/lsh Package: gnupg Size: 898226 Description: GNU privacy guard - a free PGP replacement. Package: gs-pdfencrypt Size: 6184 Description: Provides support to view encrypted PDFs with GhostScript. Package: heimdal-clients Size: 221760 Description: Clients for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-clients-x Size: 74710 Description: X11 files for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-dev Size: 378820 Description: Development files for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-docs Size: 61354 Description: Documentation for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-kdc Size: 86550 Description: KDC for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-lib Size: 293442 Description: Libraries for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-servers Size: 170824 Description: Servers for Heimdal Kerberos Package: heimdal-servers-x Size: 61524 Description: X11 files for Heimdal Kerberos Package: ircii Size: 423212 Description: Internet Relay Chat client Package: kerberos4kth Size: 170130 Description: Shared libraries for kerberos security system. Package: kerberos4kth-clients Size: 159036 Description: Kerberized versions of standard clients: telnet, ftp, etc. Package: kerberos4kth-dev Size: 125810 Description: Static libraries, header files for compiling kerberized applications. Package: kerberos4kth-kdc Size: 59452 Description: Authentication server for kerberos security system. Package: kerberos4kth-services Size: 159218 Description: Kerberized versions of standard services, telnetd, ftpd, etc. Package: kerberos4kth-user Size: 103742 Description: Basic programs to authenticate using kerberos security system. Package: kerberos4kth-x11 Size: 53364 Description: Kerberos X support for secure encrypted X connections Package: kerberos4kth1 Size: 208544 Description: Shared libraries for kerberos security system. Package: kernel-patch-int Size: 196628 Description: International patch for the Linux kernel Package: libapache-mod-ssl Size: 198978 Description: Strong cryptography for Apache Package: libapache-mod-ssl-doc Size: 277788 Description: Documentation for Apache module mod_ssl Package: libnasl0 Size: 39128 Description: Nessus Attack Scripting Language, shared library Package: libnasl0-dev Size: 42644 Description: Nessus Attack Scripting Language, static library and headers Package: libnessus0 Size: 117168 Description: Nessus shared libraries Package: libnessus0-dev Size: 198522 Description: Nessus static libraries and headers Package: libnet-ssleay-perl Size: 71992 Description: Perl module for Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Package: librc21 Size: 4140 Description: Library that implements the RC2 algorithm. Package: librc21-dev Size: 5984 Description: Library that implements the RC2 algorithm - development files. Package: libssl09 Size: 358600 Description: SSL shared libraries Package: libssl09-dev Size: 555960 Description: SSL development libraries Package: lynx-ssl Size: 980420 Description: Text-mode WWW Browser supporting SSL Package: nessus Size: 97058 Description: Remote network security auditor, the client Package: nessus-plugins Size: 213780 Description: Nessus plugins Package: nessusd Size: 44920 Description: Remote network security auditor, the server Package: openssl Size: 281872 Description: Secure Socket Layer and related cryptographic libraries/tools. Package: pavuk Size: 405810 Description: Multiprotocol file graber with textual and graphic control. Package: pipsecd Size: 22322 Description: IPsec tunnel implementation Package: powstatd-crypt Size: 33874 Description: Configurable UPS monitoring daemon Package: ssh Size: 256320 Description: Secure rlogin/rsh/rcp replacement (OpenSSH) Package: ssh-askpass Size: 18180 Description: under X, asks user for a passphrase for ssh-add Package: ssh-askpass-gnome Size: 27332 Description: under X, asks user for a passphrase for ssh-add Package: ssh-askpass-ptk Size: 8222 Description: under X, asks user for a passphrase for ssh-add Package: ssleay Size: 978 Description: Convenience package to replace ssleay with openssl Package: ssltelnet Size: 7344 Description: Convenience Package to replace ssltelnet by telnet(d)-ssl Package: sslwrap Size: 26316 Description: Simple TCP service encryption using TLS/SSL Package: stone-ssl Size: 34112 Description: TCP/IP packet repeater in the application layer.(SSL) Package: stunnel Size: 41782 Description: Universal SSL tunnel for network daemons Package: telnet-ssl Size: 72542 Description: The telnet client with SSL encryption support. Package: telnetd-ssl Size: 40274 Description: The telnet server with SSL encryption support. Package: tunnelv Size: 84690 Description: Encrypted network connection within a TCP/IP connection Package: w3m-ssl Size: 315730 Description: WWW browsable pager with SSL support Package: xpdf-i Size: 999038 Description: Portable Document Format viewer for X11, with decryption support Package: zip-crypt Size: 87046 Description: Archiver for .zip files Package: zmailer-ssl Size: 904226 Description: Mailer for Extreme Performance Demands Package: fortify Size: 154578 Description: World-wide strong cryptography for Netscape Package: fortify-linux-powerpc Size: 47002 Description: Fortify stub files for linux-powerpc architectures Package: fortify-linux-x86 Size: 65156 Description: Fortify stub files for linux-x86 architectures Package: fortify-os2 Size: 39506 Description: Fortify stub files for OS/2 Package: fortify-unix-alpha Size: 50558 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-alpha architectures Package: fortify-unix-hppa Size: 47324 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-hppa architectures Package: fortify-unix-mips Size: 55544 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-mips architectures Package: fortify-unix-powerpc Size: 47234 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-powerpc (non-Linux) architectures Package: fortify-unix-sparc Size: 65504 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-sparc architectures Package: fortify-unix-x86 Size: 59828 Description: Fortify stub files for unix-x86 (non-Linux) architectures Package: gpg-idea Size: 11372 Description: IDEA (PGP 2.x-compatible) module for GNU Privacy Guard Package: gpg-rsa Size: 12668 Description: RSA (PGP 2.x-compatible) module for GNU Privacy Guard Package: gpg-rsaref Size: 11624 Description: RSAREF module for GNU Privacy Guard Package: pgp-i Size: 287270 Description: Public key encryption system (International version) Package: pgp-us Size: 291310 Description: Public key encryption system (US version) Package: pgp5i Size: 899360 Description: Public key encryption system (International version) Package: rsaref Size: 37428 Description: RSADSI's RSAREF encryption library Package: rsaref2 Size: 77522 Description: RSADSI's RSAREF 2.0 encryption library Package: speak-freely Size: 231280 Description: Voice Communication Over Data Networks Package: ssh-askpass-nonfree Size: 7464 Description: under X, asks user for a pasphrase for ssh-add Package: ssh-nonfree Size: 479338 Description: a secure replacement for rlogin, rsh, and rcp (NON-FREE) Package: ssh-socks Size: 67918 Description: a secure replacement for rlogin, rsh, and rcp (with SOCKS support) Package: unzip-crypt Size: 124170 Description: De-archiver for .zip files -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010917/fe5fd642/attachment.pgp From tompoe at renonevada.net Mon Sep 17 15:26:17 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20010917132408.B17995@navel.introspect> References: <20010917132408.B17995@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <01091715261703.16117@aether> On Monday 17 September 2001 13:24, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > My own suggestion for non-US packages. This is drawn from the debian > package lists. Packages may be on the non-US list for either crypto > and/or patent issues, I suspect several of the latter category are > included. I count 85 packages. > They're already with built-in mirroring as well, right? Tom From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 17 21:43:54 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Majority of Americans want anti-encryption laws, poll says] Message-ID: <20010917214354.B5951@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010917/5f01925b/attachment.pgp From burton at relativity.yi.org Tue Sep 18 00:23:33 2001 From: burton at relativity.yi.org (Kevin A. Burton) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Majority of Americans want anti-encryption laws, poll says] In-Reply-To: <20010917214354.B5951@navel.introspect> References: <20010917214354.B5951@navel.introspect> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 "Karsten M. Self" writes: > Realizing that this is only slightly topical here, could someone point > me at a group more apropriate to general crypto/rights discussion? Or > is this it? I would say that the only appropriate forum *would* be crypto experts (probably not the free-skylarov list, although I am sure there are some experts here). That said... congress usually doesn't pay attention to anything that crypto experts say. Their the domestic vs international encryption export policy was patently stupid and bordered on moronic. Do you think that *anyone* had a problem getting 128 bit crypto?? Hm... (from a foreign country) break into a US .edu, setup an SSH tunnel, startup netscape (export) and goto netscape.com to download the 128 bit domestic version. Netscape's DNS will resolve the .edu and give it to you, just fine. Of course the DMCA should make this illegal but something tells me that any advanced terrorism wouldn't care. Kevin - -- Kevin A. Burton ( burton@apache.org, burton@openprivacy.org, burtonator@acm.org ) Cell: 415-595-9965 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596 Yes I know my enemies, they're the teachers who taught me to fight me; compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, The Elite. All of which are American Dreams. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt iD8DBQE7puxxAwM6xb2dfE0RAto9AKC8h2pm5kzv57VmwVdLuXo872h+QgCgyDhl 0R008EG8JlZ5V1mpEkMPYbs= =Xt2k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From svein.ove at aas.no Tue Sep 18 10:49:40 2001 From: svein.ove at aas.no (Svein Ove Aas) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] It won't happen In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01091819475300.23578@vaughn> [I accidentally sent this message privately; sorry.] > We just agreed this force could stop the world. Where's your moxy? As you say, it *could* stop the world; the problem is that it *won't*. At least not without knowledge that everyone else is also in on it; it'd only work if a significant number of people joined, otherwise it would just mean loss of jobs and momentum. The problem here, as far as I can see, is that we have problems agreeing, or at least problems doing something. Perhaps it's time to form a global Guild of Programmers(SysAdmins etc. too)? What do you think? Certainly some form of organization is in order, and we're about the only field that doesn't have it. -- Beware of those who would deny you information, for in their hearts they dream themselves your master. From dcwornock at home.com Tue Sep 18 14:34:47 2001 From: dcwornock at home.com (D.C. Wornock) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A Dictatorship is Inevitable Message-ID: <001e01c14089$bef79b80$2d23b518@cc653035a> Two-hundred and twenty-five years ago there existed the highest percentage of intelligent freedom loving people the world has ever known. The reason is that they were mostly adventurers. People that travel to another country to live are adventurers. While America was being colonized we were a nation of with a high percentage of freedom loving adventurers. However, humans have evolved so that the norm is to trust and believe in kings and leaders to provide for their security and well-being. Because of regression-to-the-norm, we (their descendents) are mostly a nation that love security more than freedom. Instead of self reliance, we trust the government to provide for our needs. Therefore, whether by an individual or committee, America will become a dictatorship. In most police states people are allowed to work, send their children to government approved schools, go on vacations to government approved locations and obtained government approved housing. Sounds a lot like the United States. While we still have considerable freedom of speech and only a few countries such as Cuba are off limits for travel, the restrictions keep growing and only a few protest. At times there will be revolutions, but as always the leaders of the revolutions will seek power for themselves, not freedom for the masses. Only with the colonization a planet on another star system, or perhaps when silicon based life is in control, is there much hope for another country or very large group of freedom loving people. I truly hope that someone can prove to me that I am wrong. D. Wornock -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010918/098e1d0b/attachment.htm From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Tue Sep 18 18:38:33 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Survey on E-Books Message-ID: <3BA7F719.E1A86D1A@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> (Forwarded from Public Access Computer Systems Forum) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: URL address for E-BOOK Survey Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 14:25:09 -0400 From: Mike Thompson On Friday August 31, 2001, PACS-L distributed a survey [posted below -- Seth] relating to the perceptions and opinions of readers and users of E-books (subject line: E-BOOK Survey from the viewpoint of users). Those conducting the survey have let us know that the survey forms can also be access through the Web at the following address: http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/libinfo/eBookSurvey.html Regards, J. Michael Thompson PACS-L - Moderator Referred August 31 Post: (Apologies for all caps -- Seth) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: E-BOOK Survey from the viewpoint of users. Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:39:43 -0400 From: Mounir Khalil WE ARE CONDUCTING A SURVEY RELATING TO THE PERCEPTIONS AND OPINIONS OF READERS AND USERS OF E-BOOKS IN ACCESSING INFORMATION FOR THEIR MANIFOLD ACTIVITIES INCLUDING FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES. THE PUBLISHING, RESELLING, AND VENDOR INDUSTRRIES ARE SPECIFICALLY AND PARTICULARLY ENCOURAGED TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS AND CONCERNS VIS-A-VIS THE E-BOOK. WE, THEREFORE, INVITE YOUR PARTICIPATION AND COOPERATION, AND APPRECIATE YOUR COMPLETING AND RETURNING THE SURVEY BY OCTOBER 15, 2001.(by mail, fax or e-mail) LAST NAME:___________________________FIRST NAME:___________________________ TITLE:___________________________ORGANIZATION:_____________________________ ADDRESS:___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ CITY:________________________STATE_________________ZIP CODE:_______________ COUNTRY:____________________ PHONE:_________________FAX:___________________ E-MAIL: ___________________________________________________________________ TYPE OF BUSINESS IN THE INFORMATION WORLD: ( PLEASE INDICATE e.g. ILL, REFERENCE, SERIALS, INDIVIDUAL ETC where appropriate) ________ACADEMIC _________BUSINESS ________LAW __________MEDICAL ________PUBLIC __________SCHOOL _______SPECIAL _______PUBLISHER_________ VENDOR________ RESELLER________ OTHER_______* (PLEASE SPECIFY*) 1- HOW WOULD YOU DEFINE " ELECTRONIC BOOK" OR "E-BOOK" ? _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 2- HOW DO YOU ACCESS E-BOOK INFORMATION? (A)______INTERNET ________HOMEPAGE (WWW) _______ONLINE DATABASES ______LIBRARIES _______BUSINESS ACCOUNT ______SHARE WITH OTHER INSTITUTIONS ______POCKET PCs ______PALM HELD DEVICES______DIALUP______OTHER (LIST) _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ (B) THE TYPES OF E-BOOKS YOU USE: FICTION______NONFICTION______ (PLEASE SPECIFY:_________________________________________) 3- ARE YOU DOWNLOADING YOUR E-BOOK DATA VIA: __________E-MAIL ___________COMPUTERS ___________PRINTING __________DISKS ________OTHER (SPECIFY)______________ _____________________________________________________ 4. IN YOUR OPINION, WILL E-BOOKS REPLACE THE TRADITIONAL PRINTED FORMAT? _____YES _____NO 5. IN THE MILIEU IN WHICH YOU OPERATE, DO E-BOOKS CIRCULATE? _______YES _______NO 6- WHAT PERCENTAGE OF E-BOOK DATA DO YOU INCLUDE IN YOUR RESEARCH, OR UTILIZE OR CITE IN YOUR BIBLIOGRAPHIES, PROJECTS, OR OTHER ASSIGNMENTS? _______LESS THAN 10% ________20-40% _________MORE THAN 50%_________NONE 7- DO YOU TRANSMIT E-BOOK DATA FROM PUBLISHERS OR THE INTERNET? _________YES ________NO IF (YES) BY : _______FAX ________INTERNET ______E-MAIL _____OTHER (SPECIFY) _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 8- WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES OF USING E-BOOKS OVER THE TRADITIONAL MECHANISMS -- PRINT, MICROFORM, ETC? (PLEASE DESCRIBE "OTHER"* IN DETAIL). MULTIPLE TITLES IN SINGLE BOOK____________ INCLUDES ONLINE DICTIONARY & LINK TO OTHER SITES___________ OLD TITLES CANNOT GO OUT-OF-PRINT_______________ READERS CAN ADD SEVERAL CHAPTERS FROM SEVERAL BOOKS (e.g. course reserves)_____________ UPDATE TEXTBOOKS WITH MINIMALCOST TO USER___________ LOWER PUBLISHING & DISTRIBUTION COSTS________ REDUCE # OF PAPERS AND PHYSICAL SPACE ____________ E-BOOKS ARE A COLLABORATIVE GROUP EXPERIENCE ______________ MAKES USERS FAMILIAR IN & OPERATE IN HARD/SOFTWARE MILIEU___________ GREATER SUPPORT TO ONLINE SERVICES WITH BETTER RESOLUTION & MULTIMEDIA__________ SEARCHING & CROSS REFERENCING WITHIN & OUTSIDE THE TEXT_________________ AMEND TEXT WITH NOTES, GRAPHIC MEDIA, & CHANGE FONTS__________________ STORE MULTIPLE BOOKS SIMULTANEOUSLY FOR PORTABILITY________________ MAKE TEXTBOOKS AVAILABLE FOR JUST-IN-TIME-LEARNING____________________ USED AS A PAD, MAKES WORKING LESS DESK-BASED & MORE MOBILE___________ OTHER* (PLEASE DESCRIBE)_____________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 9- WHAT ARE THE DISADVANTAGES OF USING E-BOOKS? CURRENT EQUIPMENT STANDARDS (CONTRAST, BRIGHTNESS, RESOLUTION) NOT PERFECT_____________ STRAIN ON EYES AND NECK___________ SCREEN DRAW-BACKS_______________ COPYRIGHT PROBLEMS--LICENSING & DISTRIBUTION ISSUES__________________ MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE PRINTED BOOK____________ BATTERIES NEED CHARGING OR REPLACEMENT IN THE PORTABLES_______________ DISPLACES WORKERS IN THE PRINT BOOK INDUSTRY___________ DATA SO FLUID THAT COPYRIGHT BECOMES ELUSIVE TO ENFORCE AND AUTHORS HARD TO COMPENSATE__________ E-BOOK COSTS NOT AFFORDABLE FOR DEVELOPING ECONOMIES_________ E-BOOKS NEED PROTECTION FROM THEFT UNTIL COSTS ARE AS INEXPENSIVE AS PAPERBACKS____________ OTHERS (PLEASE SPECIFY)______________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 10- WHAT ARE OTHER BARRIERS AGAINST USING E-BOOKS? _______LIBRARIES DO NOT SUBSCRIBE OR UTILIZE THE TECHNOLOGY _______UNFAMILIAR WITH ELECTRONIC BOOK MEDIA _______MEDIA COSTS _______NEED TRAINING _______NO ELECTRONIC MEDIA AVAILABLE _______NOT MANY E-BOOKS AVAILABLE RELATING TO THE TOPIC, SUBJECT, AREA, DISCIPLINE SEARCHED _______PAPER FORMAT WILL NOT SIMPLY DISAPPEAR _______THE BOOK AS A DELIVERY PLATFORM HAS TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGES _______OTHERS (PLEASE SPECIFY)______________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 11- IN YOUR OPINION , ARE E-BOOKS COST-EFFECTIVE? ________YES ______NO WHY SO? COMMENTS WELCOME FROM ALL PUBLISHERS, READERS, USERS, INTERESTED OTHERS _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 12- ARE YOU ABLE TO ACCESS E-BOOK DATA FROM COUNTRIES OTHER THAN YOURS--EVEN ASSUMING ACCEPTABLE CONNECTIVITY, PROTOCOLS AND THE LIKE? ________YES _______NO IF (YES) SPECIFY WHICH COUNTRY?______________________ _____________________________________________________ IF (NO) WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS? _________TECHNOLOGY ________CULTURAL ________OTHER (SPECIFY) 13- WILL RESEARCH AND TEACHING BE BETTER WHEN E-BOOKS ARE UNIVERSALLY IN PLACE AND USED? PLEASE COMMENT BELOW* (A) WILL STUDENTS USE E-TEXTBOOKS? ______YES ______NO (B) WILL PROFESSORS/TEACHERS USE E-BOOKS FOR RESEARCH/TEACHING? _______YES ________NO *PLEASE COMMENT:_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 14- WILL ELECTRONIC COPYRIGHT LAWS LIMIT THE USE OF ELECTRONIC BOOKS _______YES ________NO? PLEASE COMMENT_______________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 15- DO YOU USE OR HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH THE FOLLOWING () BRANDS OR () SOFTWARE OR () MODELS? () FRANKLIN EBOOKMAN_________RCA REB-1200________PALM VISOR________ POCKET PCs (COMPAQ, iPAQ, HP Jornada)___________ NUVOMEDIA_________ ROCKET E-BOOK_________SOFTBOOK READER___________ () MICROSOFT READER____________ADOBE GLASSBOOK READER___________ADOBE EBOOK________ GEMSTAR'S E-BOOK___________ OTHER SOFTWARE THAT MAY BE DEEMED INCOMPATIBLE: PLEASE SPECIFY______________________________________ () EVERYBOOK__________ LIBRIUS INC.__________EBOOK CENTRAL_______________OTHER MODELS_____________ PLEASE SPECIFY________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 16-DO YOU HAVE CASE STUDIES OR RESULTS FROM AN E-BOOK STUDY? YES_______ NO_________ IF (YES), HAVE YOU INCORPORATED INFORMATION IN RESPONDING TO THIS QUESTIONNAIRE? YES________ NO_________ IF (NO), COULD YOU PLEASE PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION IN "ADDITIONAL COMMENTS" BELOW: 17-ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS YOU WISH TO MAKE? _______________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION AND RAPID RESPONSE. YOUR REPLY BY OCTOBER 15, 2001 WILL BE APPRECIATED. YOU MAY SEND YOUR REPLY BY FAX OR E-MAIL. A SUMMARY OF THE SURVEY RESULTS WILL BE POSTED AT A LATER DATE WHEN DATA HAVE BEEN ANALYZED. PLEASE SEND YOUR REPLY TO EITHER: MOUNIR KHALIL RAJA JAYATILLEKE CITY COLLEGE/CUNY COLLEGE OF STATEN ISLAND/CUNY TEL.(212) 650-5750 TEL.(718) 982-4016 FAX :(212)650-7618 FAX: (718) 982-4015 E-M:MOUCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU E-M:JAYATILLEKE@POSTBOX.CSI.CUNY.EDU OR : Khalil36@Hotmail.com From seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org Tue Sep 18 19:09:00 2001 From: seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: Keep Signing the Petition to Strike Down the DMCA References: <3BA3E954.E080C608@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <01091517223100.06380@aether> Message-ID: <3BA7FE3C.244ABC78@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> tom poe wrote: > > On Saturday 15 September 2001 16:50, Seth Johnson wrote: > > http://www.PetitionOnline.com/nixdmca/petition.html > > > > Failing the rule of law, we, the People, declare "misuse of copyright" > > by popular decree, and thereby revoke our grant of Copyright to those > > works protected by chapter 12 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act > > until such time as the government restores the Copyright Act to a form > > consistent with the Constitution and the will of the people. > > Hi: So, the above paragraph is interesting. What's that translate into? > Sounds good, though. Thanks, Tom Sounds real good. The whole petition sounds real good. :-) Seth Johnson From schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 19 01:50:02 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:33 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A Dictatorship is Inevitable In-Reply-To: <001e01c14089$bef79b80$2d23b518@cc653035a> References: <001e01c14089$bef79b80$2d23b518@cc653035a> Message-ID: <20010919015002.W8887@zork.net> I will again caution people here to remain on-topic. -- 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 kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 19 13:18:16 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Systems' Q3 earnings report In-Reply-To: <113858616.20020905101717@centras.lt> References: <200109050259.f852xHZ10583@moerbeke> <113858616.20020905101717@centras.lt> Message-ID: http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1636 "Not only did Adobe Systems report a fiscal third-quarter profits and revenues decline from a year ago, but executives cautioned during today's conference with analysts and financial press that its fourth-quarter results are likely to fall below expectations." rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From pboerboom at Dialpad.com Wed Sep 19 13:29:24 2001 From: pboerboom at Dialpad.com (Peter Boerboom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Yahoo! News modifications Message-ID: Apparently, Yahoo's content management system was breached by an outsider recently. An article about Sklyarov was changed as described below. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/254 from the article on securityfocus: Yahoo! News, which learned of the hack from SecurityFocus, says it has closed the security hole that allowed 20-year-old hacker Adrian Lamo to access the portal's web-based production tools Tuesday morning, and modify an August 23rd news story about Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian computer programmer facing federal criminal charges under the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Sklyarov created a computer program that cracks the copy protection scheme used by Adobe Systems' eBook software. His prosecution has come under fire by computer programmers and electronic civil libertarians who argue that the DMCA 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. Lamo tampered with Yahoo!'s copy of a Reuters story that described a delay in Sklyarov's court proceedings, so that the text reported, incorrectly, that the Russian was facing the death penalty. The modified story warned sardonically that Sklyarov's work raised "the haunting specter of inner-city minorities with unrestricted access to literature, and through literature, hope." The text went on to report that Attorney General John Ashcroft held a press conference about the case before "cheering hordes", and incorrectly quoted Ashcroft as saying, "They shall not overcome. Whoever told them that the truth shall set them free was obviously and grossly unfamiliar with federal law." It's more difficult to get into their advertising reporting statistics than their news production tools. Peter Boerboom From schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 19 13:31:58 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Systems' Q3 earnings report In-Reply-To: References: <200109050259.f852xHZ10583@moerbeke> <113858616.20020905101717@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010919133158.J8887@zork.net> Kurt Foss writes: > http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1636 The grammar in the paragraph of that article about Dmitry Sklyarov is a little unclear. Is it suggesting that the analysts _did_ ask about the Boycott Adobe movement, or that they didn't? -- 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 yonica at qwest.net Wed Sep 19 14:43:25 2001 From: yonica at qwest.net (Eric) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] jurisdiction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: hi, I just joined the list, so I don't know if this has been belabored. But I was just wondering if anyone knows, or if anyone has a problem with, how subject matter jurisdiction was obtained over Sklyarov? Does the DMCA apply to persons activities worldwide? Personal jurisdiction over Skly., and subj. matter/personal juris. over Elcom. are not problems for me. But how do US courts get subj. matt. juris. over Skly.'s activities? Eric From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 19 14:48:14 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Systems' Q3 earnings report In-Reply-To: <20010919133158.J8887@zork.net> References: <200109050259.f852xHZ10583@moerbeke> <113858616.20020905101717@centras.lt> <20010919133158.J8887@zork.net> Message-ID: At 1:31 PM -0700 9/19/01, Seth David Schoen wrote: > > http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1636 > >The grammar in the paragraph of that article about Dmitry Sklyarov is a >little unclear. Is it suggesting that the analysts _did_ ask about >the Boycott Adobe movement, or that they didn't? Thanks for noting that akwardness. It's been clarified now. In short: Neither Adobe nor any of the participating analysts mentioned the "Boycott Adobe" movement as possibly having had a negative impact on the company's less-than-expected third-quarter results. It was not cited as having been a factor -- to any degree. I'm not suggesting that it was or wasn't, only that it seemingly wasn't even considered. rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network -- From ed at hintz.org Wed Sep 19 15:08:29 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Systems' Q3 earnings report Message-ID: <200109192208.f8JM8TJ09504@phil.hintz.org> On 9/19/01 2:48 PM, kfoss@planetpdf.com thus spake: >cited as having been a factor -- to any degree. I'm not suggesting >that it was or wasn't, only that it seemingly wasn't even considered. My guess would be the analysts didn't know about it, and Adobe wanted to keep it that way... Which indicates to me perhaps we should have had somebody call in and ask questions. Maybe we should consider this for the Q4 conference... Have a ringer join the QA session and ask something seemingly innocent like "have you performed any studies to ascertain if the arrest of Mr. Sklyarov is in any way related to your earnings shortfalls?" At the very least it would keep the heat on... ;-) Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From doug at mcnaught.org Wed Sep 19 15:08:26 2001 From: doug at mcnaught.org (Doug McNaught) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Yahoo! News modifications In-Reply-To: Peter Boerboom's message of "Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:29:24 -0700" References: Message-ID: Peter Boerboom writes: > Apparently, Yahoo's content management system was breached by an outsider > recently. An article about Sklyarov was changed as described below. [...] > The modified story warned sardonically that Sklyarov's work raised "the > haunting specter of inner-city minorities with unrestricted access to > literature, and through literature, hope." > > The text went on to report that Attorney General John Ashcroft held a press > conference about the case before "cheering hordes", and incorrectly quoted > Ashcroft as saying, "They shall not overcome. Whoever told them that the > truth shall set them free was obviously and grossly unfamiliar with federal > law." It's more difficult to get into their advertising reporting statistics > than their news production tools. I don't condone it, but the perpetrator seems to have a good sense of irony and some literary talent. ;) -Doug -- In a world of steel-eyed death, and men who are fighting to be warm, Come in, she said, I'll give you shelter from the storm. -Dylan From kreizykid at hotmail.com Wed Sep 19 18:37:18 2001 From: kreizykid at hotmail.com (Josiah Draper) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] What's up with Dmitry? References: Message-ID: I haven't been up to date with all the stuff with Dmitry Skylarov for a lil' while, so would someone care to explain what's happened with him & the DCMA lately? Thanks. -Josiah! From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 20 00:50:56 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe breaking Russian law? Message-ID: Adobe breaking Russian law? In an article in the October 2001 issue of Scientific American, a magazine contributing editor proposes that while Adobe Systems brought criminal charges against a Russian programmer and software company for alleged violations of U.S. law, the same fate may await Adobe in Russia. Paul Wallich maintains that Adobe's PDF-viewing applications violate a Russian law that grants users the legal right to make a backup copy of a computer program for personal use without the copyright holder's permission. He cites several law experts who believe the chance of winning a court challenge against Adobe in a Russian court is high. http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1652 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 20 02:13:26 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold: Sept 24-28, San Francisco (Moscone) Message-ID: <20010920021326.B8264@navel.introspect> Seybold is coming up. This is the online/desktop publishing convention held in San Francisco. http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1631 Among the features of the conference will be "a 'community wall' as part of the event where each of you can express your thoughts on our industry and our country." There will also be an "E-Book and DRM Arena and Showcase": http://www.planetebook.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=236 Along with the eBook & eContent Hot Technology Day, September 26-27 at Seybold will feature a Showcase for participating companies, as well as a quick fire "'shootout." Below we preview the companies involved, the speakers taking part and include interviews we have recently carried out with them. The Planet eBook and Digital Rights Management (DRM) Arena gives Seybold San Francisco attendees an opportunity to watch focused, detailed demonstrations on each company's e-book- and DRM-related products and services. The Planet eBook and DRM Arena consists of a classroom-size presentation theater outfitted with a professional theater-style display, with each session running for 45 minutes thoughout the day. Is there any organized effort to have a Sklyarov/DMCA presence at the convention? Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010920/9c623098/attachment.pgp From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 20 02:15:10 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold: Sept 24-28, San Francisco (Moscone) In-Reply-To: <20010920021326.B8264@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920021342.00a62d00@mail.maden.org> At 02:13 20-09-2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: >Is there any organized effort to have a Sklyarov/DMCA presence at the >convention? I am already registed to attend Seybold. I'm not in a position to plan anything, and do have professional obligations to discharge there, but I would be more than happy to partake of any actions, or just to ask irritating questions of Adobe representatives at various fora. -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 20 02:37:15 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold: Sept 24-28, San Francisco (Moscone) In-Reply-To: <20010920021326.B8264@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 02:13:26AM -0700 References: <20010920021326.B8264@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010920113715.E22141@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 02:13:26AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > The Planet eBook and Digital Rights Management (DRM) Arena gives > Seybold San Francisco attendees an opportunity to watch focused, > detailed demonstrations [...] Does that include focused, detailed "Free Dmitry" or "Anti-DMCA" demonstrations? -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010920/3317251a/attachment.pgp From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 20 09:24:07 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 Message-ID: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 Seybold has added what could be one of the livelier sessions at this fall's conference in San Francisco -- an open summit meeting on Wednesday, September 26 from 1:30 to 2:45 p.m. -- to discuss and debate the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and its implications for publishers, authors, software companies, software developers, security professionals and many others who may find themselves on one side of the recently enacted, but yet untested U.S. law. In addition to a group of panelists representing proponents and opponents of the DMCA, Dmitry Sklyarov and Alexander Katalov of ElcomSoft Co. Ltd. have tentatively accepted an invitation from Planet PDF and Seybold to attend this session -- although they will not be able to actively participate due to pending litigation. http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1647 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Sep 20 10:15:58 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01092010155801.08506@aether> On Thursday 20 September 2001 09:24, Kurt Foss wrote: > The Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 > > Seybold has added what could be one of the livelier sessions at this > fall's conference in San Francisco -- an open summit meeting on > Wednesday, September 26 from 1:30 to 2:45 p.m. -- to discuss and > debate the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and > its implications for publishers, authors, software companies, > software developers, security professionals and many others who may > find themselves on one side of the recently enacted, but yet untested > U.S. law. In addition to a group of panelists representing proponents > and opponents of the DMCA, Dmitry Sklyarov and Alexander Katalov of > ElcomSoft Co. Ltd. have tentatively accepted an invitation from > Planet PDF and Seybold to attend this session -- although they will > not be able to actively participate due to pending litigation. Hello: OK. The moment is seized! Here's the BIG PLAN! The academicians among the list are charged with drafting a concise, professional statement. Since there is no controversy surrounding the DMCA, simply a need to educate the public about this outrageous scam on the masses, this should be an opportunity to create a specific document for a specific purpose, and to make it available in hard copy to those attendees on the DMCA side. The opponents don't need it. They will already have printed it from the electronic posting beforehand. There have already been some documents passed along that already state the case very well. Probably a good idea to review them, and decide. A two or three page document is concise. A one page document is concise if the perfect analogy or example of the damage this law has/is/will cause. Let's make the document draft ready for final comments by 9/21st, and final posting by 9/24. Then, whoever is at the conference can print out a few, and have them to hand out. - - - Good Plan! Anyone come across just the right article already? Maybe from eff.org?? Your comments should be directed to this list, as this should be the list's best moment. Your humble, helpful, idiot, Tom From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Thu Sep 20 12:53:35 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe Systems' Q3 earnings report In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Neither Adobe nor any of the participating analysts mentioned the > "Boycott Adobe" movement as possibly having had a negative impact on > the company's less-than-expected third-quarter results. We lost a lot of momentum by their initial about-face. Over the long haul I think we can damage their brand, and make symbolic inroads on their markets. We can certainly make wielding of the DMCA a PR nightmare. This doesn't require financial ruination of Adobe to succeed. Plus analysts are notoriously unwilling to acknowledge activism even when it does seem to have impact. From jlane at redhat.com Thu Sep 20 14:19:15 2001 From: jlane at redhat.com (Jeff Lane) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe breaking Russian law? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Kurt Foss wrote: > Adobe breaking Russian law? Ahhh.. the sweet irony. Perhaps they should invite some Adobe people over to Moscow to demo their products, and then arrest them, and charge them, and put them through the same thing Dmitry is going through at the moment. I really hope this proves fruitful, and the Russians persue it. If for nothing more than a political statement about the whole affair, it would be quite Kharmic. cheers From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 20 14:15:54 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> At 09:24 20-09-2001, Kurt Foss wrote: >Seybold has added what could be one of the livelier sessions at this >fall's conference in San Francisco -- an open summit meeting on >Wednesday Kurt, when you say "open" - do you mean open to those not registered to attend Seybold? I'll be there either way, but it would be cool to get a strong show of support from the local community, too. -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 20 14:42:34 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: At 2:15 PM -0700 9/20/01, Christopher R. Maden wrote: >>Seybold has added what could be one of the livelier sessions at this >>fall's conference in San Francisco -- an open summit meeting on >>Wednesday > >Kurt, when you say "open" - do you mean open to those not registered >to attend Seybold? I'll be there either way, but it would be cool >to get a strong show of support from the local community, too. I just checked the Seybold press release, which says it is "open to all Seybold SF 2001 attendees." I'll try to confirm that. rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network -- From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 20 15:14:58 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: At 2:15 PM -0700 9/20/01, Christopher R. Maden wrote: >>Seybold has added what could be one of the livelier sessions at this >>fall's conference in San Francisco -- an open summit meeting on >>Wednesday > >Kurt, when you say "open" - do you mean open to those not registered >to attend Seybold? I'll be there either way, but it would be cool >to get a strong show of support from the local community, too. I just got the official word from Seybold as to whether the Great DMCA Debate is open to the general public: "They have to register for the Expo, without charge, and then they can attend." Seybold Seminars SF 2001 http://www.key3media.com/seyboldseminars/sf2001 rgds ~ Kurt ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network -- From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 20 16:36:47 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Digital Millennium Copyright Act Great Debate at Seybold SF 2001 In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010920141501.00abfe20@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <166463270.20010920163647@elcomsoft.com> Dear Kurt, >>Kurt, when you say "open" - do you mean open to those not registered >>to attend Seybold? I'll be there either way, but it would be cool >>to get a strong show of support from the local community, too. KF> I just got the official word from Seybold as to whether the Great KF> DMCA Debate is open to the general public: KF> "They have to register for the Expo, without charge, and then they can attend." This is really great - thank you for a good opportunity!!! Hope to see all of you there :-))) -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From yonica at qwest.net Fri Sep 21 01:45:26 2001 From: yonica at qwest.net (Eric) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> Adobe breaking Russian law? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Kurt Foss wrote: > Adobe breaking Russian law? Is anyone prepared to rebut the claim that a Russian court does not have jurisdiction over Adobe? From lblunk at yahoo.com Fri Sep 21 07:46:41 2001 From: lblunk at yahoo.com (Larry Blunk) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:34 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" Message-ID: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> The AAP has put up another press release regarding the DMCA at http://www.publishers.org/home/press/index.htm. Same old tactics. Paint those who oppose the DMCA in broad strokes -- "an Internet culture which opposes the idea of ownership". Use inept and false analogies -- "hacking through encryption ... is analogous to making keys to a bookstore or library and selling them to others so that they can go in after hours and help themselves". __________________________________________________ Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/ From larsg at eurorights.org Fri Sep 21 08:58:26 2001 From: larsg at eurorights.org (Lars Gaarden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [Fwd: [dvd-discuss] Samuelson on Reverse Engineering] Message-ID: <3BAB63A2.9070605@eurorights.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dvd-discuss] Samuelson on Reverse Engineering Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:39:56 -0400 From: Wendy Seltzer Reply-To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu Pam Samuelson has a nice article in Science (online at ) describing the threat to scientific research posed by the anticircumvention rules. A good URL to pass on to those not yet involved in the fight. I hope it will help get the attention of the broader scientific community. She specifically calls for scientists to make themselves heard in the legislative and judicial process -- through advice to Congress and amicus briefs (like the cryptographers' and computer scientists' briefs in 2600 :-). --Wendy -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.com Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Fri Sep 21 09:35:38 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Larry Blunk wrote: > Paint those who oppose the DMCA in broad strokes > -- "an Internet culture which opposes the idea of ownership". I _am_ opposed to the kind of ownership made possible by the DMCA. Namely, corporate ownership of my rights. It's pretty silly for someone to take what doesn't belong to them, and then gripe that people who complain are "opposed to the idea of ownership." Hey, they stole our stuff fair and square! > Use inept and false analogies -- "hacking through encryption ... > is analogous to making keys to a bookstore or library and selling > them to others so that they can go in after hours and help > themselves". Yeah, they can make all the analogies to crime and criminals that they want, but they're still defending a law (and pushing a new one) aimed squarely at innocent people, not criminals. I'd be more impressed with actual evidence of an actual crime, rather than an analogy to a hypothetical crime. Xcott From proclus at iname.com Fri Sep 21 09:37:55 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Links In-Reply-To: <20010911081117.J6566@networkcommand.com> Message-ID: <200109211637.f8LGbxg27561@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> The list has been quiet, maybe due to the Nimda worm? Maybe everyone is swamped and directed towards Washtington. Anyways here are a couple of relevant links, that haven't been posted here to my knowledge. NewsForge: Fritz Hollings (D-Disney) avoids talking about SSSCA http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/20/2047211&mode=thread Science: Anticircumvention Laws Seen as Threat to Science http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5537/2028 Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010921/e53ec08d/attachment.pgp From schoen at loyalty.org Fri Sep 21 09:58:20 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] September 24? Message-ID: <20010921095820.P8887@zork.net> According to old records, there were supposed to be protests on September 24. Does anybody have any specific plans? -- 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 ktneely at astroturfgarden.com Fri Sep 21 11:16:21 2001 From: ktneely at astroturfgarden.com (Kevin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #233 - 13 msgs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Could someone explain or point out the link that explains why American courts are able to arrest/detain/try Dmitry and Dmitry's company? This I don't understand. If the Russian court doesn't have jurisdiction over Adobe, how do the U.S. courts have jurisdiction over Dmitry and Elcomsoft? thanks, K On Fri, 21 Sep 2001 Eric wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Kurt Foss wrote: > > > Adobe breaking Russian law? > > Is anyone prepared to rebut the claim that a Russian court does not have > jurisdiction over Adobe? From jays at panix.com Fri Sep 21 11:51:16 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] September 24? In-Reply-To: <20010921095820.P8887@zork.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Seth David Schoen wrote: > According to old records, there were supposed to be protests on > September 24. Does anybody have any specific plans? > > -- > 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) The regular Monday action of New York Fair Use is scheduled for noon before the New York Public Library. G-d willing, this will be the tenth such action. Sunday 23 September 2001, New York Fair Use will canvass in Brooklyn. oo--JS. From ktneely at astroturfgarden.com Fri Sep 21 13:15:49 2001 From: ktneely at astroturfgarden.com (Kevin) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #233 - 13 msgs In-Reply-To: <20010921144708.D59222-100000@bsd1.nyct.net> Message-ID: Okay, this is what I thought. So, back to the hypothetical situation of Adobe execs in Russia: Russian authorities could arrest and try them because Adobe has a website where someone in Russia could buy their product; this gives Russia the jurisdiction to nab Adobe, if and when representatives from that company were in Russia. That being the case, I wouldn't want to be a programmer for Adobe and find myself travelling in Russia... Is this correct? thanks, K -- [The] haters need to realize that if you mess with the man upstairs, you will get your ass smote. True dat. http://astroturfgarden.com/~ktneely On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, J.E. Cripps wrote: > > Could someone explain or point out the link that explains why American > > courts are able to arrest/detain/try Dmitry and Dmitry's company? This I > > don't understand. If the Russian court doesn't have jurisdiction over > > Adobe, how do the U.S. courts have jurisdiction over Dmitry and Elcomsoft? > > > > thanks, > > It's called jurisdiction. As AIUC (IANAL) one can only arrest or sue > ppl when this exists. Doing business in a country or state has > been held to give jurisdiction (at one time, maybe 1700, ppl had to > be in the state or country IIRC). Elcomsoft had a website, and > supposedly someone in the U.S. bought their product. It probably > would be an interesting and useful defence, except this is such > a dangerous law with the criminal penalties. > > From tompoe at renonevada.net Fri Sep 21 14:05:32 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [Fwd: [dvd-discuss] Samuelson on Reverse Engineering] In-Reply-To: <3BAB63A2.9070605@eurorights.org> References: <3BAB63A2.9070605@eurorights.org> Message-ID: <01092114053201.13292@aether> On Friday 21 September 2001 08:58, Lars Gaarden wrote: > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [dvd-discuss] Samuelson on Reverse Engineering > Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:39:56 -0400 > From: Wendy Seltzer > Reply-To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu > > Pam Samuelson has a nice article in Science (online at > ) describing the > threat to scientific research posed by the anticircumvention rules. A good > URL to pass on to those not yet involved in the fight. > > I hope it will help get the attention of the broader scientific > community. She specifically calls for scientists to make themselves heard > in the legislative and judicial process -- through advice to Congress and > amicus briefs (like the cryptographers' and computer scientists' briefs > in 2600 :-). > > > --Wendy > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.com > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > Hello: This is definitely a leading contender for the handout next week. I vote for this one. As a side-note on the significance of the Free Sklyarov case, the following is offered as a reminder of what might happen if this case goes without a fight: "In a short time, maybe a few years into the milennium, it's expected that all humans on this earth will have their dna profile on file with some central authority. From this central authority, all information will be selectively chosen to be served to the "Public" depending on what their dna profile contains. In search of an easy example, let's start with an individual that has a gene which will express itself in a condition, e.g., muscular dystrophy. The central authority will then preclude information to this individual that might "harm" the individual by subjecting that individual to news about a "miracle cure" that is not "approved" by the central authority. Let's reach a little, now, and imagine someone with a dna profile that does not fit the "normal" profile. The central authority, may, at its discretion, decide that this individual need receive only information found "suitable" for the individual. There would be no information available to the individual about past exceptions to their profile category. These would be individuals that overcame obstacles and provided exceptional contributions to the world as it was, prior to the milennium. Can you think of any good candidates? So, while we're waiting and preparing for this day to arrive, now might be a good time to go ahead and put all information under control. We're real close to having everything digitized, and the only information available will be through "approved" electronic devices. "Unapproved" just plain won't work. Of course, there's always the upside. Just before the Big Transition Day, the world's peoples got together, and each individual copyrighted their dna profile, and, with the force of the DMCA and SSSCA behind them, set the stage for an interesting legal battle over who can access the individual's dna profile, and owns the information contained in that profile. The insurance industry had a heart attack en masse. To connect to the electronic network, please identify yourself. Please identify your device, and we will match you to the information, and the medium through which you will receive the information "we" decide you should have access to. Thank you." From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Fri Sep 21 14:08:14 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] September 24? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > The regular Monday action of New York Fair Use is scheduled for noon > before the New York Public Library. G-d willing, this will be the tenth > such action. I will be INSIDE at the Copyright Town Meeting, "Intellectual Property & Multimedia in the Digital Age", http://www.nypl.org/research/copyright/program.html Noon is the "box lunch" and A STRONG SHOWING FOR SKLYAROV COULD REACH A VERY RECEPTIVE AUDIENCE OUT FRONT AT THIS TIME. Fifth Avenue & 42nd Street, right? John From john.dempsey7 at verizon.net Fri Sep 21 14:08:17 2001 From: john.dempsey7 at verizon.net (John Dempsey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: free-sklyarov digest, Vol 1 #233 - 13 msgs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Adobe execs in Russia: Russian authorities could arrest and try them > because Adobe has a website where someone in Russia could buy their > product; this gives Russia the jurisdiction to nab Adobe, if and when > representatives from that company were in Russia. I want to learn about the force of this law, like, would violating it result in *arrest*, before I go opening my mouth about this lovely scenario. From tompoe at renonevada.net Fri Sep 21 14:38:19 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01092114381903.13292@aether> On Friday 21 September 2001 09:35, Xcott Craver wrote: > On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Larry Blunk wrote: > > Paint those who oppose the DMCA in broad strokes > > -- "an Internet culture which opposes the idea of ownership". > > I _am_ opposed to the kind of ownership made possible by the > DMCA. Namely, corporate ownership of my rights. > Hi, Scott: Good point. Now, for just a moment, think about how the world turns. Let's suppose that there is this big industry push to take control of the masses. Let's suppose that in this group that might consist of the COB's from the petroleum industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the music industry, the computer software industry, the computer hardware industry, the insurance industry, etc, a Plan is being executed by them. They're at the table and planning this scenario that has everyone going through one door. ICANN is the gatekeeper, if-you-will. Content is what it's all about. Assumptions are great, aren't they? What if, what if all the masses turned the tables on them. What if, what if all the masses decided to copyright their dna profiles? What if, having copyrighted their dna profiles, they then locked out the insurance industry from their collective individual medical records, using the "approved, certified, registered" device for viewing individuals' medical records? The insurance industry would have their you-know-what coniption fit. There would have to be a law that says, that's not right. Now, international legal minds would be able to leverage, and get our freedoms back. First thing they'd have to do, would be to free Sklyarov. What do you think? Tom From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Sep 21 23:49:11 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Hello, > The AAP has put up another press release regarding the DMCA > at http://www.publishers.org/home/press/index.htm. Same old > tactics. Paint those who oppose the DMCA in broad strokes > -- "an Internet culture which opposes the idea of ownership". > Use inept and false analogies -- "hacking through encryption ... > is analogous to making keys to a bookstore or library and selling > them to others so that they can go in after hours and help > themselves". Even more here: http://www.publishers.org/home/press/092001speech.htm Some excerpts: > We were very surprised when Adobe decided to withdraw their > complaint against the Russian. However, the Justice Department is > proceeding anyway, and AAP has become "the bad guy" and a prime > target for everyone on the Internet who thinks the DMCA is wrong. I > could fill this room with printed out angry e-mails we've received. > > The Russian hacker was arrested under the anti-circumvention > provision of the DMCA. This provision is one of the keys to being > able to protect copyright ownership on the Internet. No reasonable > person on the planet believes that a totally secure encryption > system can be developed. Any encryption can be cracked, just as with > patience and determination, any lock can be picked. The law permits > an exemption for research, so that if you discover a weakness in my > encryption system and inform me, that's legal. The problem arises if > you hack away until you crack my encryption and then sell your > discovery to allow others to do the same. That's illegal. > In the Adobe case, AAP saluted the government for taking their > enforcement duties under the DMCA seriously. > Other intellectual property associations joined us in backing the > Justice Department's action against the Russian hacker. We will see > what happens with the case. We are also working together to get more > funding the enable the Justice Department to continue enforcing the > DMCA in the future. And I was very surprised by the following: > Consider the case of a New York company that no longer exists. > FileOpen Systems was a firm that sold extra e-book security for > scientific journals and financial newsletters that publishers could > use for their paying customers. ElcomSoft (the same Russian > operation that broke the Adobe e-book code and was profiting from > the sale of hacking software) produced a piece of software that > cracked FileOpen Systems' code, and drove them out of business. As far as I know, that company still exists (www.fileopen.com); moreover, they became "Acrobat 5 Security Partner", and released new version in August. Btw, our software doesn't support FileOpen since late July. /Vladimir vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Sat Sep 22 00:04:15 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <45521478.20010922000415@elcomsoft.com> Vladimir, After reading articles like this I begin seriously thinking about publishing full sources of Advanced eBook Processor on our website! Alex >> The AAP has put up another press release regarding the DMCA >> at http://www.publishers.org/home/press/index.htm. Same old >> tactics. Paint those who oppose the DMCA in broad strokes >> -- "an Internet culture which opposes the idea of ownership". >> Use inept and false analogies -- "hacking through encryption ... >> is analogous to making keys to a bookstore or library and selling >> them to others so that they can go in after hours and help >> themselves". VK> Even more here: VK> http://www.publishers.org/home/press/092001speech.htm VK> Some excerpts: >> We were very surprised when Adobe decided to withdraw their >> complaint against the Russian. However, the Justice Department is >> proceeding anyway, and AAP has become "the bad guy" and a prime >> target for everyone on the Internet who thinks the DMCA is wrong. I >> could fill this room with printed out angry e-mails we've received. >> >> The Russian hacker was arrested under the anti-circumvention >> provision of the DMCA. This provision is one of the keys to being >> able to protect copyright ownership on the Internet. No reasonable >> person on the planet believes that a totally secure encryption >> system can be developed. Any encryption can be cracked, just as with >> patience and determination, any lock can be picked. The law permits >> an exemption for research, so that if you discover a weakness in my >> encryption system and inform me, that's legal. The problem arises if >> you hack away until you crack my encryption and then sell your >> discovery to allow others to do the same. That's illegal. >> In the Adobe case, AAP saluted the government for taking their >> enforcement duties under the DMCA seriously. >> Other intellectual property associations joined us in backing the >> Justice Department's action against the Russian hacker. We will see >> what happens with the case. We are also working together to get more >> funding the enable the Justice Department to continue enforcing the >> DMCA in the future. VK> And I was very surprised by the following: >> Consider the case of a New York company that no longer exists. >> FileOpen Systems was a firm that sold extra e-book security for >> scientific journals and financial newsletters that publishers could >> use for their paying customers. ElcomSoft (the same Russian >> operation that broke the Adobe e-book code and was profiting from >> the sale of hacking software) produced a piece of software that >> cracked FileOpen Systems' code, and drove them out of business. VK> As far as I know, that company still exists (www.fileopen.com); VK> moreover, they became "Acrobat 5 Security Partner", and released new VK> version in August. VK> Btw, our software doesn't support FileOpen since late July. VK> /Vladimir VK> vkatalov@elcomsoft.com VK> _______________________________________________ VK> free-sklyarov mailing list VK> free-sklyarov@zork.net VK> http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From robertl1 at home.com Sat Sep 22 01:07:19 2001 From: robertl1 at home.com (Bob La Quey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <45521478.20010922000415@elcomsoft.com> References: <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010922010629.02893930@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> At 12:04 AM 9/22/01 -0700, you wrote: >Vladimir, > >After reading articles like this I begin seriously thinking about >publishing full sources of Advanced eBook Processor on our website! > >Alex This would be a brilliant move and take the game to a whole new level. Bob La Quey From crism at maden.org Sat Sep 22 01:12:34 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010922010629.02893930@mail.dt1.sdca.home.com> References: <45521478.20010922000415@elcomsoft.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010922011102.00a9f910@mail.maden.org> At 01:07 22-09-2001, Bob La Quey wrote: >At 12:04 AM 9/22/01 -0700, Alex Katalov wrote: > >After reading articles like this I begin seriously thinking about > >publishing full sources of Advanced eBook Processor on our website! > >This would be a brilliant move and take the game to a whole >new level. Yes, but not necessarily a pleasant one - wait until the trial is over and you and Dmitry are safely out of the country! Then do it. (-: -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sat Sep 22 11:03:23 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 22 Sep 2001, Vladimir Katalov wrote: > http://www.publishers.org/home/press/092001speech.htm > Some excerpts: > > No reasonable > > person on the planet believes that a totally secure encryption > > system can be developed. Any encryption can be cracked, just as with > > patience and determination, any lock can be picked. The standard cop-out used by creators of fraudulent snake-oil. "Well, *no* toy is absolutely 100% safe in *all* instances." There is a very big, very clear line separating this eBook technology from real encryption software which experts trust. The eBook stuff isn't even possible in theory, much less practice. I know this has been repeated countless times, but it just annoys me that they must drag down the entire industry by suggesting *everything* is as crummy as their pretend technologies that never really did anything. > > The law permits > > an exemption for research, so that if you discover a weakness in my > > encryption system and inform me, that's legal. I wish people would agree on this. =Xcott From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 22 17:44:26 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:35 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] NYT: Disney quote Message-ID: <20010922174426.A6960@navel.introspect> Apropos the SSSCA, the following is found in today's New York Times: http://archives.nytimes.com/2001/09/23/business/23DISN.html After the terrorist attack on New York, Disney stores in Manhattan swapped the colorful merchandise that usually fills their display windows for huge posters quoting the company's founder, Walt Disney: "Tomorrow will be better for as long as America keeps alive the ideals of freedom and a better life." Irony? Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010922/e4c66e4c/attachment.pgp From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Sun Sep 23 07:05:03 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <005b01c14438$c315fce0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, Vladimir Katalov! > Even more here: > > http://www.publishers.org/home/press/092001speech.htm > > Some excerpts: > > > We were very surprised when Adobe decided to withdraw their > > complaint against the Russian. However, the Justice Department is > > proceeding anyway, and AAP has become "the bad guy" and a prime > > target for everyone on the Internet who thinks the DMCA is wrong. I > > could fill this room with printed out angry e-mails we've received. Yooo-Hooo!!! Our e-mails really work! 8-) But Adobe & AAP stone age state of mind will bring them down. They waste money and time in efforts to reverse achievements of computer age. Its now XXI century, but they want to earn money by just pressing "copy" button, investing only in FBI and DoJ. COPY E-BOOK IS NOT PUBLISHING IT ON PAPER. Those, who benifit from new technologies, always win -- learn the history. When the city builds water-supply, those, who make money on wells, loose their profit. The problem is -- how many they will take with themselves into graves. - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Sun Sep 23 07:22:22 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com><7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <45521478.20010922000415@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <006101c1443b$2df05950$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, Alex Katalov! > After reading articles like this I begin seriously thinking about > publishing full sources of Advanced eBook Processor on our website! Also e-book authors can consider investing in "pirate" industry. Russia have one good example of legal "pirate"-type industry. "Buka" game publisher published bestseller "Heroes of Might and Magic ]I[" at the price of "pirate" CD-ROM and used "pirate" CD-sellers as distribution network. They got the same revenue, the "pirates" have -- really good money because of many customers. It is good to write an article to the authors, describing true situation with "digital rights" and freedoms. I think, all good authors write for being read by readers, not design cruel tools for police prosecution. Evil corporations, like AAP and Adobe, that try to fight with changed reality, are already dead. They are in the past, we have the future. - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From dmarti at zgp.org Sun Sep 23 08:23:06 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <005b01c14438$c315fce0$0100a8c0@sharhan> References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <005b01c14438$c315fce0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: <20010923082306.A8396@zgp.org> begin Ilya V. Vasilyev quotation of Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 06:05:03PM +0400: > Yooo-Hooo!!! Our e-mails really work! 8-) Ms. Schroeder committed the exact same mistake we do -- she spoke to an organization that already agrees with her, in this case, WIPO. I'm sure she didn't change any minds, any more than Prof. Lessig changed anyone's mind at the "Free Dmitry" defense fund benefit party. The people to talk to are the authors. If you know a freedom-loving author and can explain to them that the speech is full of crap and Dmitry should go free, that's worth more than a hundred speeches to already-friendly crowds. -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti Free Dmitry: http://eff.org/ dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs: http://burnallgifs.org/ From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sun Sep 23 08:37:42 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <006101c1443b$2df05950$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Ilya V. Vasilyev wrote: > It is good to write an article to the authors, describing true situation > with "digital rights" and freedoms. I think, all good authors write for > being read by readers, not design cruel tools for police prosecution. Another important point to raise to authors: posterity. Authors would surely reject the idea of "privication," vs publication, if they knew the odds of these proprietary, strictly controlled eBooks being accessible 100 years from now. A wee bit of immortality is one of the few perks of being an author. In fact, even open electronic formats should worry authors, because we're not sure about their survivability over time vs paper. There are researchers trying to develop "eternity services," highly distributed archival systems approximating the long-term survivability of printed archives. Unfortunately, this might require an electronic publication medium that is largely irreversible (with normal books, you are not allowed to "undo" your publication even if you really wanted to) and so the software and publishing industries would see such a service as the absolute worst case of all their piracy nightmares. Thus you will not see an eternity service implemented any time soon. -Scott [There's an interesting research topic: designing a "spontaneous" eternity service, which can spring into existence by distributed grass-roots efforts even in the presence of a censor who controls all upstream providers and is friendly with law enforcement.] From kfoss at planetpdf.com Sun Sep 23 10:00:26 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP surprised by Adobe's withdrawal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: AAP surprised by Adobe's withdrawal Speaking at an international conference on intellectual property rights this past week, the president of the Association of American Publishers (AAP) says her organization was surprised when Adobe Systems withdrew its complaint against Russian software programmer Dmitry Sklyarov. Patricia Schroeder told attendees that the unexpected move left the AAP to defend the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). She also said that by cracking the company's PDF-based security solution, Moscow-based ElcomSoft Co. Ltd. drove FileOpen Systems, Inc. of New York out of business. (The latter point, however, appears to be inaccurate.) http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1654 ____________________ Kurt Foss - Editor _______________________ Planet PDF - A world of Acrobat/PDF news, tips, tools and forums mailto:kfoss@binarything.com | mailto:kfoss@planetpdf.com http://www.binarything.com/ | http://www.planetpdf.com/ BinaryThing.com - The ePublishing Network From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 23 12:36:01 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <20010923082306.A8396@zgp.org>; from dmarti@zgp.org on Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 08:23:06AM -0700 References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <005b01c14438$c315fce0$0100a8c0@sharhan> <20010923082306.A8396@zgp.org> Message-ID: <20010923123601.C22082@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 08:23:06AM -0700, Don Marti (dmarti@zgp.org) wrote: > begin Ilya V. Vasilyev quotation of Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 06:05:03PM +0400: > > > Yooo-Hooo!!! Our e-mails really work! 8-) > > Ms. Schroeder committed the exact same mistake we do -- she spoke to > an organization that already agrees with her, in this case, WIPO. > I'm sure she didn't change any minds, any more than Prof. Lessig > changed anyone's mind at the "Free Dmitry" defense fund benefit > party. > > The people to talk to are the authors. If you know a freedom-loving > author and can explain to them that the speech is full of crap and > Dmitry should go free, that's worth more than a hundred speeches > to already-friendly crowds. How about pressing the independent bookstores, for starters, then moving to chains. I might even know someone who works at Kepplers.... Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010923/6ec351db/attachment.pgp From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Sun Sep 23 08:13:14 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com><7656525616.20010922104911@elcomsoft.com> <45521478.20010922000415@elcomsoft.com> <006101c1443b$2df05950$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: <000201c144a6$efd024e0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, All! In Russia we lived under non-free speach, and learned to read "between lines". I study AAP President words carefully, and learned, that truth is on our side. Read his last words again: == Patricia Schroeder, AAP == There is no way the world is going to be able to deal with online protection of property unless we stand together and have strong enforcement policies in our countries. We also need to educate the public. This will be very hard to do because things have gone so far. Making the most noise doesn't mean one is right. That must be remembered by all of us as we proceed. == Patricia Schroeder, AAP == That means: (!) Anti-DMCA Free Dmitry movement is "making the most noise". That means, people understand us and are on our side. Even our enemies are forced to state this, they are frightened. (!) AAP business model is not firm. It requires "strong enforcement police" in every country, more tax money. If some country failed with police support or police has to spend money against murders, etc., their system will crush. Seems not good business model. We must go on, improving our position, until they start to "educate the public" with "strong enforcement police". If we give up, they will start new round of outrageous lie. They can -- they already brought into life false "pirate" model (murders, rape,..). - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From rabbi at quickie.net Sun Sep 23 20:55:09 2001 From: rabbi at quickie.net (Len Sassaman) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [declan@well.com: FC: Majority of Americans want anti-encryption laws, poll says] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 18 Sep 2001, Kevin A. Burton wrote: > I would say that the only appropriate forum *would* be crypto experts > (probably not the free-skylarov list, although I am sure there are > some experts here). There's a few. ;) > That said... congress usually doesn't pay attention to anything that crypto > experts say. Not necessarily true. > Their the domestic vs international encryption export policy was > patently stupid and bordered on moronic. Do you think that *anyone* > had a problem getting 128 bit crypto?? Yes, it was stupid. And thanks to a lot of hard work by some of those "crypto experts," civil liberties lobbyists, (and certainly the EFF's own Princess of Light), etc., that policy has changed. -- Len Sassaman Security Architect | "I must play their game, of Technology Consultant | not seeing I see the game." | http://sion.quickie.net | --R .D. Laing From tompoe at renonevada.net Sun Sep 23 21:04:20 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <000201c144a6$efd024e0$0100a8c0@sharhan> References: <20010921144641.93502.qmail@web10007.mail.yahoo.com> <006101c1443b$2df05950$0100a8c0@sharhan> <000201c144a6$efd024e0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: <01092321042003.24483@aether> On Sunday 23 September 2001 08:13, Ilya V. Vasilyev wrote: > Hi, All! > > In Russia we lived under non-free speach, and learned to read "between > lines". I study AAP President words carefully, and learned, that truth is > on our side. Read his last words again: > > == Patricia Schroeder, AAP == > There is no way the world is going to be able to deal with online > protection of property unless we stand together and have strong enforcement > policies in our countries. We also need to educate the public. This will be > very hard to do because things have gone so far. Making the most noise > doesn't mean one is right. That must be remembered by all of us as we > proceed. > == Patricia Schroeder, AAP == - - -snip - - - Hi: I agree with you 100%. She says, "We also need to educate the public." An honorable challenge for all sides. She says, "This will be very hard to do because things have gone so far." The truth is prevailing? Lies are harder to come by? Why would this be very hard to do? She says, "Making the most noise doesn't mean one is right." Who actually is making the most noise? Are they, with their media interviews, media coverage, public appearances? She says, "That must be remembered by all of us as we proceed." Are they shifting to a strategy of closed communications? Are they headed "underground", "behind the scenes", or possibly increased lobbying? Tom From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sun Sep 23 21:07:32 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <000201c144a6$efd024e0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Ilya V. Vasilyev wrote: > (!) AAP business model is not firm. It requires "strong enforcement > police" in every country, more tax money. If some country failed with > police support or police has to spend money against murders, etc., their > system will crush. Seems not good business model. Yes, and they will always require that strong enforcement, because the business model is amazingly unstable and ill-conceived. The only way to keep it from collapsing is by forcing people to participate in it by federal law, *and* enforcing that law by putting computer chips in every household. Crazy, no? Geez, imagine if the architects of the dot.com "new economy" tried this approach. They just allowed their badly designed business models to fail; instead, they could have passed laws forcing all Americans to visit their web sites, click on their banner ads, and buy the advertisers' products, or face jail time. It could be a federal crime to point out that a business plan makes no sense. It's a bit of a cliche to compare such folly to The Emperor's New Clothes, but here it's so amazingly fitting! These folks are passing laws requiring the whole world to pretend that fluffy, intangible information is actually concrete, physical property that can actually be metered and rendered uncopiable. SSSCA mandates the inclusion of security technologies nobody invented yet, and which nobody ever will. Xcott From sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Sun Sep 23 21:21:57 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <01092321042003.24483@aether> Message-ID: On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, tom poe wrote: > She says, "We also need to educate the public." An honorable challenge for > all sides. I just read an article about how to organize a university course on computer ethics. Mostly, however, the article focussed on the ethics of intellectual property, as if this was anywhere *near* the most important issue re: ethics for computer scientists. If I had to design a course on ethics for CS majors, most of it would be about the ethics of unreliable software development practices vs medical and military applications, and such. The rest would mostly cover modern software business tactics and iffy issues like bundling, dumping, selling software "as is," etc. Maybe I'd spend a week or so on intellectual property, and I'd certainly spend at least twice as much time on the dangers of badly designed security systems! I certainly wouldn't force kids through an entire semester of writing reports about what "intellectual property" means to them, or why they shouldn't use Napster. Feh. > She says, "That must be remembered by all of us as we proceed." Are they > shifting to a strategy of closed communications? Are they headed > "underground", "behind the scenes", or possibly increased lobbying? I hope they aren't coming to grips with their colossally bad PR. They've really helped out the Free Dmitry crowd by behaving like the perfect stereotypical evil greedy bastards. Xcott From schoen at loyalty.org Sun Sep 23 21:39:19 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: References: <01092321042003.24483@aether> Message-ID: <20010923213919.W8887@zork.net> Xcott Craver writes: > I certainly wouldn't force kids through an entire semester of > writing reports about what "intellectual property" means to them, > or why they shouldn't use Napster. Feh. http://www.wipout.net/ This is a good contest, making writing about intellectual property law fun for students. It's definitely more exciting than that _other_ contest... I'd want to throw in the phrase "Like other subsidies, 'intellectual property' laws have costs as well as benefits" if I wrote a WIPO or WIPOut essay, or talked to a reporter or a friend about this. I understand that Brian Harvey is teaching a computer ethics course at Berkeley this semester; I imagine he has a much more interesting curriculum. Want to check it out? http://www-telebears.berkeley.edu:3400/cweb/?_InField1=CATALOG&_InField2=COMPSCI&_InField3=195++ Wednesdays and Fridays, 380 Soda Hall. If you've gone back to New Jersey, I can pass this along to free-sklyarov-sfba. -- 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 wiljan at pobox.com Sun Sep 23 23:30:04 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" Message-ID: <200109240551.AAA001.12@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:07:32 Xcott Craver sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU said: > SSSCA mandates the inclusion of security technologies nobody > invented yet, and which nobody ever will. > Xcott But they can spend lots of your money trying. The funding part of the leaked SSSCA is interesting. Funding NIST for six years to give money to industry to try some chips. Industry is now refusing to invest more money on watermarking or content scrambling for these shill groups. You have seen it with AES, NIST is so thorough/slow that six years mabe would get a rough draft of a proposal to try to figure out what, if anything, the SSSCA mandates. -will- still not a market. From tompoe at renonevada.net Sun Sep 23 23:48:26 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: <200109240551.AAA001.12@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> References: <200109240551.AAA001.12@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <01092323482600.25159@aether> On Sunday 23 September 2001 23:30, Will Janoschka wrote: > On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:07:32 Xcott Craver sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU said: > > SSSCA mandates the inclusion of security technologies nobody > > invented yet, and which nobody ever will. > > Xcott > > But they can spend lots of your money trying. The funding part of the > leaked SSSCA is interesting. Funding NIST for six years - - -snip - - - Hi: You know, a few weeks ago, I commented on a topic about this. I follow the federal bid proposals across the agencies, and one thing stood out, among others. The NIST is way out of balance with handing out "sole source" contracts, compared to other agencies. Laws are in place to require bids to be put to market, but this agency has all but abused the practice of "sole source" bidding requirements, which they invariably write off to "he's the only one, or that company is the only one". Interesting fodder for possibly taking a closer look at this impression. It might just be OMBUDSMAN time, eh? Tom From debug at centras.lt Mon Sep 24 01:16:48 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:36 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <283663646.20010924101648@centras.lt> >> It is good to write an article to the authors, describing true situation >> with "digital rights" and freedoms. I think, all good authors write for >> being read by readers, not design cruel tools for police prosecution. XC> Another important point to raise to authors: posterity. XC> Authors would surely reject the idea of "privication," vs XC> publication, if they knew the odds of these proprietary, strictly XC> controlled eBooks being accessible 100 years from now. XC> A wee bit of immortality is one of the few perks of being an XC> author. Another important point is to address readers that it is both in their and authors they love interests to invest a little into public domain -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt From kmself at ix.netcom.com Mon Sep 24 02:27:02 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" In-Reply-To: ; from sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:07:32AM -0400 References: <000201c144a6$efd024e0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Message-ID: <20010924022702.G15861@navel.introspect> on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:07:32AM -0400, Xcott Craver (sacraver@EE.Princeton.EDU) wrote: > SSSCA mandates the inclusion of security technologies nobody invented > yet, and which nobody ever will. If y'all don't mind a bit of OT commentary. One line of thought is that the SSSCA applies specifically to an implementation of security technology that *has* been invented. The law conveniently absolves the inventer from anti-trust liabilities as well. That is, the law is aimed squarely at declaring Microsoft .NET, Hailstorm, and Passport, the one legal standard in computing within the US. The prospect is a bit stretched, but it seems to fit the facts. http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=8163 Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010924/2ff35c21/attachment.pgp From kfoss at planetpdf.com Mon Sep 24 10:31:59 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP apologizes for inaccurate FileOpen comment In-Reply-To: <283663646.20010924101648@centras.lt> References: <283663646.20010924101648@centras.lt> Message-ID: The Association of American Publishers has issued an apology for a misstatement by its CEO, Patricia Schroeder, alleging that ElcomSoft Co. Ltd. had driven FileOpen Systems Inc. out of business. http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?WebPageID=1656 rgds ~ Kurt From tom at lemuria.org Mon Sep 24 10:43:01 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP apologizes for inaccurate FileOpen comment In-Reply-To: ; from kfoss@planetpdf.com on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:31:59PM -0500 References: <283663646.20010924101648@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010924194301.A32613@lemuria.org> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:31:59PM -0500, Kurt Foss wrote: > The Association of American Publishers has issued an apology for a > misstatement by its CEO, Patricia Schroeder, alleging that ElcomSoft > Co. Ltd. had driven FileOpen Systems Inc. out of business. yeah, but they've apologized to fileopen, not elcomsoft. -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From dmarti at zgp.org Mon Sep 24 13:12:17 2001 From: dmarti at zgp.org (Don Marti) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP surprised by Adobe's withdrawal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010924131217.A7122@zgp.org> begin Kurt Foss quotation of Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 12:00:26PM -0500: > Patricia Schroeder told attendees that the > unexpected move left the AAP to defend the controversial Digital > Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Remember folks, it's not the DMCA, it's the _controversial_ DMCA. -- Don Marti What do we want? Free Dmitry! When do we want it? Now! http://zgp.org/~dmarti Free Dmitry: http://eff.org/ dmarti@zgp.org Free the web, burn all GIFs: http://burnallgifs.org/ From schoen at loyalty.org Mon Sep 24 13:17:18 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP surprised by Adobe's withdrawal In-Reply-To: <20010924131217.A7122@zgp.org> References: <20010924131217.A7122@zgp.org> Message-ID: <20010924131718.K17677@zork.net> Don Marti writes: > begin Kurt Foss quotation of Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 12:00:26PM -0500: > > > Patricia Schroeder told attendees that the > > unexpected move left the AAP to defend the controversial Digital > > Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). > > Remember folks, it's not the DMCA, it's the _controversial_ DMCA. EFF used "probably unconstitutional DMCA" in one or two press releases, but "probably unconstitutional" is controversial. -- 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 sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU Mon Sep 24 13:22:23 2001 From: sacraver at EE.Princeton.EDU (Xcott Craver) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP surprised by Adobe's withdrawal In-Reply-To: <20010924131217.A7122@zgp.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Don Marti wrote: > Remember folks, it's not the DMCA, it's the _controversial_ DMCA. I prefer "the dread DMCA," like the dread pirate Roberts. Xcott From david.haworth at altavista.net Mon Sep 24 23:10:07 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] FYI> AAP apologizes for inaccurate FileOpen comment In-Reply-To: ; from kfoss@planetpdf.com on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:31:59PM -0500 References: <283663646.20010924101648@centras.lt> Message-ID: <20010925081007.A23866@3soft.de> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:31:59PM -0500, Kurt Foss wrote: > > The Association of American Publishers has issued an apology [...] Well, it's a start. Now how about apologising for the other inaccuracies in the speech. From the apology: "The statement resulted from a misreading of a report in Time.com" Completely out of touch with reality. And these people are making the rules. *sigh* Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010925/168efa18/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Tue Sep 25 00:44:22 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <200109160059.f8G0xRI03602@moerbeke>; from proclus@iname.com on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 08:59:20PM -0400 References: <20010915135656.E1781@navel.introspect> <200109160059.f8G0xRI03602@moerbeke> Message-ID: <20010925004421.A4436@navel.introspect> on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 08:59:20PM -0400, proclus@iname.com (proclus@iname.com) wrote: > On 15 Sep, Karsten M. Self wrote: > >> Boycott Adobe should be kept ready in the event of a return to the > >> boycott. There is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to > >> play nice, and we need to be ready to rekindle the boycott in great > >> strength at any time. > > > > Adobe are not playing nice. I vote for reactivating the boycott. > > I definitely don't follow you here. Adobe met the boycott demands, and > so the boycott crew ended the boycott. We supported them in that. You > should go back and read the messages from the first week. You and I have a difference in position then. I wasn't party to the initial discussion. I didn't agree to the terms of the initial boycott. My impression is that Adobe has made motions to create the appearance of distance between themselves and the Sklyarov case without taking active steps to cause charges to be dropped against Dmitry, to oppose the expansion of charges which now include Elcom, to oppose generally criminal prosecution based on the DMCA, or to oppose the DMCA. Specifically, quoting from Adobe's FAQ: http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elco - we respect the grand jury's and federal government's role in prosecuting this case. - we are in complete agreement with the government's decision to prosecute the company, ElcomSoft - Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government as required by law. These three positions must change for me to be satisfied. Other individuals or organizations are welcome to follow their own council. > If anyone feels strongly about not using Adobe software, GNU-Darwin > will gladly aid them with free software alternatives. I've stripped the one piece of Adobe software I had (acroread) and am now using xdpf instead. <...> > Adobe's inaction on behalf of Dmitry, though deplorable, is not grounds > for a renewed boycott IMHO, and it may even distract us from the > objective of sending Dmitry home. On the other hand, GNU-Darwin will > return to the boycott in great strength, if Adobe backtracks from the > original agreement. First, I wasn't party to the initial discussion. I have my own reasons for calling a boycott. I speak for myself. Anyone who wishes to speak with me is welcomed. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010925/99f72d23/attachment.pgp From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Tue Sep 25 01:01:32 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Digital Rights Management for Ebooks: Publisher Requirements In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com> Hello, Worth reading (subj): http://www.publishers.org/home/drm.pdf Guess who is the author... AAP, of course ;) /Vladimir vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From larsg at eurorights.org Tue Sep 25 01:09:09 2001 From: larsg at eurorights.org (Lars Gaarden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] [Fwd: [Hague-jur-commercial-law] EC consultation on the Hague treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments] Message-ID: <3BB03BA5.8020303@eurorights.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Hague-jur-commercial-law] EC consultation on the Hague treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 14:12:10 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: Hague Convention list EC consultation on the Hague treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments * The European Commission is finally doing a public consultation on the proposed Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments. The proposed (but not firm) meeting date is October 24 in Brussels, and the deadline for signing up to testify is October 15. People can also submit written comments. Everything can be done by email to: mailto:JAI-coop-jud-civil@cec.eu.int * It is expected that the music, movie, software and other e-commerce businsses will turn up in force. Copyright owners are expected to push to have copyright included in the convention. There should be a difference of views expressed on inclusion of copyrights, patents and trademarks, as well as speech related civil litigation, including defamation and libel, plus a host of other issues. * FMI, http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/badly.html http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/whatyoushouldknow.html http://www.hcch.net/e/members/members.html * It is important that people who have concerns about the inclusion of speech and intellectual property in the convention make their views known. If the convention is widely adopted and includes intellectual property, European citizens will be subject to restrictive and broad e-commerce and software patents issued in the US, Japan and other countries, the USA and other countries DMCA style legislation, and more generally, the most restrictive global IP regimes, which will limit the public's rights even more than whatever national laws currently exist (the "weakest link" problem). If speech related torts are included, the defamation laws in China, Jordan, Egypt, the UK and elsewhere will have global reach. * Persons who participate in the consultation should also address the need to protect the public from one-sided and unreasonable "click-on" contracts, such as the recent Microsoft EULA for Frontpage, what says, for example: "You may not use the Software in connection with any site that disparages Microsoft, MSN, MSNBC, Expedia, or their products or services, infringe any intellectual property or other rights of these parties, violate any state, federal or international law, or promote racism, hatred or pornography." For more examples of click-on contract terms, see: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/ucita/licenses/ * To sign-up to testify, send an email note to: JAI-coop-jud-civil@cec.eu.int Jamie Love -------- Original Message -------- Commission Hearing on the Draft Convention of the Conference of the Hague on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters Deadline to apply: October 15, 2001 Provisional date for the Hearing: 24 October 2001 at the Charlemagne Building, Rue de la Loi, 170 - 1040 Brussels To attend, a short registration form is available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/unit/civil/audition10_01/en/index.htm Please complete this form in BLOCK LETTERS and e-mail it (JAI-coop-jud-civil@cec.eu.int) or fax it (+32/2-299.64.57) before 15 October 2001 Written answers to questions (feel free to answer only a few): http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/unit/civil/audition10_01/en/index.htm should be email to: JAI-coop-jud-civil@cec.eu.int or fax it (+32/2-299.64.57 before the hearing. The First Diplomatic Conference in June 2001, produced an "Interim Text" (available at: http://www.hcch.net/e/workprog/jdgm.html) which contains many options and alternatives for issues of concerns for consumers. There had been several informal meetings of experts on E-commerce and intellectual property related issues but these questions were found to be difficult and controversial. There was little consensus on many other issues such as consumer and employment contracts. Thus, the General Affairs and Policy Commission of the Hague Conference decided to defer to January 2002 the decision concerning the continuation of the negotiations. Consultations are to be undertaken between now and then to determine the preconditions for the conclusion of the negotiations relating to both the substance and the method and timetable for future negotiations. In this context, the Commission is organizing a hearing in Brussels to cover the latest status of the Convention. The questionnaire include among other topics: the need for such a Convention, the proposed structure of the Convention, its scope, general rule of jurisdiction, choice of court, contracts concluded with consumers, employment contracts, torts, patent and trademark rights, copyrights, provisionnal and protective measures and relationship between the Hague Convention and European instruments. Note: the agenda has not been finalized yet but we know it will be a day-long hearing with probably a few speakers addressing selected issues. _______________________________________________ Hague-jur-commercial-law mailing list Hague-jur-commercial-law@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/hague-jur-commercial-law -- "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead. From larsg at eurorights.org Tue Sep 25 01:36:25 2001 From: larsg at eurorights.org (Lars Gaarden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Alice in Wonderland continued References: <10434211613.20020903182431@centras.lt> Message-ID: <3BB04209.2070604@eurorights.org> DeBug wrote: > But if we are going to allow to copyright every single > mouse click what a nightmare we'll have > All this shows what a mess copyright system would > produce if we apply "sweat of the brow" doctrine. You should not be allowed copyright on a derivative work unless you get a Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from the clicks required. ;-) -- "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead. From david.haworth at altavista.net Tue Sep 25 02:34:37 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:37 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Digital Rights Management for Ebooks: Publisher Requirements In-Reply-To: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com>; from vkatalov@elcomsoft.com on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:01:32PM +0400 References: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <20010925113437.D23866@3soft.de> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:01:32PM +0400, Vladimir Katalov wrote: > Hello, > > Worth reading (subj): > > http://www.publishers.org/home/drm.pdf > > Guess who is the author... AAP, of course ;) Slashdotted? Or Nimda'd? I can only get as far as AAP's annoying splash screen. -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010925/a6532fcd/attachment.pgp From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Tue Sep 25 02:41:15 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Digital Rights Management for Ebooks: Publisher Requirements In-Reply-To: <20010925113437.D23866@3soft.de> References: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com> <20010925113437.D23866@3soft.de> Message-ID: <766099140.20010925134115@elcomsoft.com> Hello, > Slashdotted? Or Nimda'd? > I can only get as far as AAP's annoying splash screen. No, it is OK. But don't load it into browser; instead, download the file first. Then use Acrobat Reader, or even better, xPDF or something ;) That's not a joke, btw -- a few times, my machine (Win98) chashed just when closing Acrobat Reader with that document loaded. /Vladimir vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Tue Sep 25 03:18:33 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <20010925004421.A4436@navel.introspect>; from kmself@ix.netcom.com on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:44:22AM -0700 References: <20010915135656.E1781@navel.introspect> <200109160059.f8G0xRI03602@moerbeke> <20010925004421.A4436@navel.introspect> Message-ID: <20010925121833.H23866@3soft.de> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:44:22AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > Specifically, quoting from Adobe's FAQ: > > http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elco > > - we respect the grand jury's and federal government's role in > prosecuting this case. > > - we are in complete agreement with the government's decision to > prosecute the company, ElcomSoft > > - Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government as required by > law. > > These three positions must change for me to be satisfied. Other > individuals or organizations are welcome to follow their own council. Weasel words - I expect nothing else from a company of Adobe's standing. I've dropped acroread too for normal documents (xpdf is much faster and renders better on the screen too). But neither xpdf nor gv work correctly with a ppower4 presentation (which I use to avoid Microsoft software). If anyone can suggest an alternative I'd be happy to use it. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010925/1f264d67/attachment.pgp From tompoe at renonevada.net Tue Sep 25 10:41:05 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Digital Rights Management for Ebooks: Publisher Requirements In-Reply-To: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com> References: <133317059.20010925120132@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <01092510410500.30878@aether> On Tuesday 25 September 2001 01:01, Vladimir Katalov wrote: > Hello, > > Worth reading (subj): > > http://www.publishers.org/home/drm.pdf > > Guess who is the author... AAP, of course ;) > > /Vladimir > vkatalov@elcomsoft.com Hi: You know, Vladimir, if you take this, rework it to substitute the phrase, "publisher" for "e-book digital r--- management", it becomes crystal clear that no attempt to lower publishing costs has been attempted. Rather, a blatant attempt to take control of digital publishing, and keep it in the hands of the few. Amazing. Didn't even bother to try and snow the Public. I guess they figured noone will read it. I went to the page about distribution and "why not just one standard", and vomited about paragraph 3. I have noticed that the increased use of pdf is a tradeoff. I personally have no patience to wait for this crap to download and get all set to display an 8KB article. But first, 250KB of pdf nonsense must take place. At some point, the rich will all have broadband connections, so they won't notice. But what about the developing countries? Talk about wiping out the "digital divide". It's a blimy chasm, dropping straight into a "Black Hole" for crying out loud. Who the hell are these jerks? It appears, for what it's worth, that they accept the notion that PC's will be around for some time, and that vendors must be able to compete. The result is, there will be multiple e-book reading devices on some PC's. Looks like I envisioned, incorrectly, of course, that there was a PLAN, which would simply have manufacturers agree on what pieces of the pie they wanted, and make a selection of devices for Internet access, e-book commerce, token information kiosks, etc. A world of embedded appliances, if-you-will. And, the PC disappears for all practical purposes. Looks like, maybe, just maybe, laws notwithstanding, that greed and stupidity will rule the day, and Open Source will be assured a long and productive future. I wonder just how Public libraries, Public agencies, and businesses in the private sector are going to react when the real costs of DRM begin to surface. Dmitry's arrest is even more farcical [sic] when you think about what he represents to the AAP. Not a pirate. Simply one of the vendors that would legitimately be competing in their "view of the world to come". Interoperability and circumvention are synonymous terms in relation to DRM. Amazing. Can't wait 'til this point is driven home in Court. END RANT Tom From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Tue Sep 25 12:46:35 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the futureof E-Commerce" References: Message-ID: <00a101c145fa$db751af0$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, Xcott Craver! > > system will crush. Seems not good business model. > Yes, and they will always require that strong enforcement, because > the business model is amazingly unstable and ill-conceived. > The only way to keep it from collapsing is by forcing people > to participate in it by federal law, *and* enforcing that law > by putting computer chips in every household. Crazy, no? The worst thing that they will also put every non-government security specialist into jail. I am not christian. But seems, the idea of Corporations, makeing super-money without regarding human rights bring us "chip-per-person", controlling all our trade operations (not only!) and Final Global War. > Geez, imagine if the architects of the dot.com "new economy" > tried this approach. They just allowed their badly designed > business models to fail; instead, they could have passed laws > forcing all Americans to visit their web sites, click on their > banner ads, and buy the advertisers' products, or face jail time. Very good parable. If publishers don't want to find their place in the new world, why Dmitry must suffer? There are lot of publishers, not so lazy, as AAP. That really want to _publish_books_for_readers_. > It's a bit of a cliche to compare such folly to The Emperor's > New Clothes, but here it's so amazingly fitting! These folks > are passing laws requiring the whole world to pretend that > fluffy, intangible information is actually concrete, physical > property that can actually be metered and rendered uncopiable. May be, our fathers were wiser, than we. After Dmitry will be free I think about "Software is NOT a book" campaign. Explaining to people the difference between the book (old technology) and software (modern technology) and how the world benifit from scientific results of XX century. - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Tue Sep 25 12:53:56 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP at it again - "DMCA essential to the future of E-Commerce" References: <200109240551.AAA001.12@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <00b501c145fb$d5184550$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, All! > > SSSCA mandates the inclusion of security technologies nobody > > invented yet, and which nobody ever will. > > Xcott > But they can spend lots of your money trying. The funding part of the > leaked SSSCA is interesting. Funding NIST for six years to give money > to industry to try some chips. Industry is now refusing to invest more Someone have calculated, how many $$s US.gov waste on supporting unnatural "Software is a Book" model? And what cost the designing (design, not super-profit!) of all nowadays common used software? Does EFF interesting in advanceing software tax model, when noone will get into prison and no SSSCA-like measures will be used to prosecute citizens? - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ P.S. Software isn't a book, its a book content. CD-ROM is a book, software are not. From proclus at iname.com Tue Sep 25 16:39:36 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <20010925121833.H23866@3soft.de> Message-ID: <200109252339.f8PNde723180@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> On 25 Sep, David Haworth wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:44:22AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: >> >> Specifically, quoting from Adobe's FAQ: >> >> http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200108/elco >> >> - we respect the grand jury's and federal government's role in >> prosecuting this case. >> >> - we are in complete agreement with the government's decision to >> prosecute the company, ElcomSoft >> >> - Adobe intends to cooperate fully with the government as required by >> law. >> >> These three positions must change for me to be satisfied. Other >> individuals or organizations are welcome to follow their own council. > > Weasel words - I expect nothing else from a company of Adobe's > standing. > > I've dropped acroread too for normal documents (xpdf is much faster > and renders better on the screen too). But neither xpdf nor > gv work correctly with a ppower4 presentation (which I use to > avoid Microsoft software). If anyone can suggest an alternative > I'd be happy to use it. > > Dave > For what it is worth, I had one PowerPoint presentation, that I converted to consecutive PNGs after taking screenshots of each slide. Now, I can use ImageMagick (or Quicktime) for the presentation. AbiWord, TeX, The GIMP, etc, will do just fine for future productions. I'm through with PowerPoint, Acroread, PhotoShop, and so on. I'll keep Word and IE around to verify RTF/HTML files for the folks who insist on it (yuck!). Unfortunately, that appears to still be a vocational requirement in my field. BTW, Mac OSX comes with a very nice RTF editor called TextEdit, and an excellent PDF viewer called Preview. All OSX apps can output PDF files, so you can use TextEdit to make PDFs if you want. OSX also recognizes file name extensions correctly, a first for the Mac! For your friends who are upgrading to OSX, we know that some of them will never give up Mac OS, but there is no good reason to use Acroread or Word anymore IMHO. If the OSX software is not enough for them, then they can check out some of the powerful software that we have at GNU-Darwin. We can help them convert their Word documents to less offensive formats. It works real nice. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010925/84df7082/attachment.pgp From wiljan at pobox.com Tue Sep 25 23:20:11 2001 From: wiljan at pobox.com (Will Janoschka) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Court Appearance Message-ID: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Were Dmitry and Elcomsoft to appear in court at 9 am on Sept 24? Was that posponed or has anyone heard what happened? -will- From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 26 01:35:23 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Court Appearance In-Reply-To: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: At 12:20 AM -0600 9/26/01, Will Janoschka wrote: >Were Dmitry and Elcomsoft to appear in court at 9 am > on Sept 24? Was that posponed or has anyone heard what > happened? Further delayed until Nov. 26. rgds ~ Kurt -- From mickeym at mindspring.com Wed Sep 26 11:38:29 2001 From: mickeym at mindspring.com (mickey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case Message-ID: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... mickeym ============================================================ Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from you on this matter. As you know, the patent and copyright system is established by Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: "Congress Shall Have the Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries . . . " This clause allows an inventor or creator to temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without compensation, and it places information associated with an invention in the public domain. Congress has passed legislation such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to enforce copyrights in the new digital era. Mr. Skylarov and Elcom were both indicted by a Federal grand jury on August 28, 2001. The defendants were each indicted on one count of conspiracy to traffic in technology primarily designed to circumvent, and marketed for use in circumventing, technology that protects a right of a copyright owner, two counts of trafficking in technology primarily designed to circumvent technology that protects a right of a copyright owner and two counts of trafficking in technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that protects a right of a copyright owner. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) these are the first indictments under the DMCA. The act requires the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant offered to the public, provided or trafficked in technology that was primarily designed to circumvent copyright protections, or was marketed for use in circumventing copyright protections. The statute provides penalties when the copyright violations are perpetrated for commercial advantage or private financial gain. In addition, certain exceptions exist to the DMCA for non profit libraries, archives and educational institutions. In this case the indictment alleges that Mr. Skylarov wrote a program, the Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR), for the primary purpose of removing any and all limitations on an ebook purchaser's ability to copy, distribute, print, have the text read audibly by the computer or any other limitation imposed by the publisher or distributor of the ebook. Secondly, the indictment alleges that Elcom made the program available for sale over a web site hosted in Chicago, by which individuals could download a copy of the program. The Adobe eBook Reader program is sold by a publisher or distributor to individuals who wish to read an ebook on their computer. The publisher or distributor of the ebook can limit a purchaser's ability to copy, distribute, print or have the text read audibly by the computer. This program enables copyright holders to manage the distribution of an ebook by purchasers. Mr. Skylarov has been released on bail and could face a prison term up to five years. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this groundbreaking trial and will certainly consider changes to the DMCA if it does not work effectively or as intended. Again, thank you for contacting me. It was good to hear from you. Most respectfully, Max Cleland United States Senator MC:mdp ==================================================== From mscottaline at yahoo.com Wed Sep 26 14:59:34 2001 From: mscottaline at yahoo.com (Michael Scottaline) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case In-Reply-To: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20010926145934.1920c2d8.mscottaline@yahoo.com> On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:38:29 -0400 mickey cleverly noted: > > Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... =========== Actually, he's a US Senator not a state senator, which I suppose makes matters even more troubling. Did you learn anything about the case from this letter?? Do you think he even understands anything about the case, much less the issues at stake?? This could have been taken from a weekly news magazine's summary of the case. Actually read more like a HS student's current events essay. Mike > > mickeym > ============================================================ > > Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian > programmer > Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from > you on > this matter. > > As you know, the patent and copyright system is established by > Article I, > Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: "Congress Shall > Have the > Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by > securing for > limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their > respective > Writings and Discoveries . . . " This clause allows an inventor or > creator to > temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without > compensation, and it places information associated with an invention in > the > public domain. Congress has passed legislation such as the Digital > Millennium > Copyright Act (DMCA) to enforce copyrights in the new digital era. > > Mr. Skylarov and Elcom were both indicted by a Federal grand jury on > August > 28, 2001. The defendants were each indicted on one count of conspiracy > to > traffic in technology primarily designed to circumvent, and marketed for > use in > circumventing, technology that protects a right of a copyright owner, > two counts > of trafficking in technology primarily designed to circumvent technology > that > protects a right of a copyright owner and two counts of trafficking in > technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that protects a > right of > a copyright owner. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) these > are the > first indictments under the DMCA. The act requires the government to > prove > beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant offered to the public, > provided or > trafficked in technology that was primarily designed to circumvent > copyright > protections, or was marketed for use in circumventing copyright > protections. > The statute provides penalties when the copyright violations are > perpetrated for > commercial advantage or private financial gain. In addition, certain > exceptions > exist to the DMCA for non profit libraries, archives and educational > institutions. > > In this case the indictment alleges that Mr. Skylarov wrote a > program, the > Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR), for the primary purpose of removing > any and > all limitations on an ebook purchaser's ability to copy, distribute, > print, have > the text read audibly by the computer or any other limitation imposed by > the > publisher or distributor of the ebook. Secondly, the indictment alleges > that > Elcom made the program available for sale over a web site hosted in > Chicago, by > which individuals could download a copy of the program. > > The Adobe eBook Reader program is sold by a publisher or distributor > to > individuals who wish to read an ebook on their computer. The publisher > or > distributor of the ebook can limit a purchaser's ability to copy, > distribute, > print or have the text read audibly by the computer. This program > enables > copyright holders to manage the distribution of an ebook by purchasers. > > Mr. Skylarov has been released on bail and could face a prison term > up to > five years. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this > groundbreaking trial and will certainly consider changes to the DMCA if > it does > not work effectively or as intended. Again, thank you for contacting > me. It > was good to hear from you. > > Most respectfully, > > > > Max Cleland > United States Senator > =================== -- "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you....., he really is an idiot." -Groucho Marx _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From mickeym at mindspring.com Wed Sep 26 12:12:13 2001 From: mickeym at mindspring.com (mickey) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> <20010926145934.1920c2d8.mscottaline@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3BB2288D.2B325246@mindspring.com> The only thing that I see significant is that the letter acknowldges that the case is "groundbreaking." The part about "allows an inventor or creator to temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without compensation" was intriguing, in that it shows the basic misunderstanding of the issue in the case. AEBPR is only useful *after* an author has been compensated for the copy, and the law is predicting that the customer will always allow someone else to use the information without compensation. mickeym Michael Scottaline wrote: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:38:29 -0400 > mickey cleverly noted: > > > > > Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... > =========== > Actually, he's a US Senator not a state senator, which I suppose makes > matters even more troubling. Did you learn anything about the case from > this letter?? Do you think he even understands anything about the case, > much less the issues at stake?? This could have been taken from a weekly > news magazine's summary of the case. Actually read more like a HS > student's current events essay. > Mike > > > > > mickeym > > ============================================================ > > > > Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian > > programmer > > Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from > > you on > > this matter. > > > > As you know, the patent and copyright system is established by > > Article I, > > Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: "Congress Shall > > Have the > > Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by > > securing for > > limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their > > respective > > Writings and Discoveries . . . " This clause allows an inventor or > > creator to > > temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without > > compensation, and it places information associated with an invention in > > the > > public domain. Congress has passed legislation such as the Digital > > Millennium > > Copyright Act (DMCA) to enforce copyrights in the new digital era. > > > > Mr. Skylarov and Elcom were both indicted by a Federal grand jury on > > August > > 28, 2001. The defendants were each indicted on one count of conspiracy > > to > > traffic in technology primarily designed to circumvent, and marketed for > > use in > > circumventing, technology that protects a right of a copyright owner, > > two counts > > of trafficking in technology primarily designed to circumvent technology > > that > > protects a right of a copyright owner and two counts of trafficking in > > technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that protects a > > right of > > a copyright owner. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) these > > are the > > first indictments under the DMCA. The act requires the government to > > prove > > beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant offered to the public, > > provided or > > trafficked in technology that was primarily designed to circumvent > > copyright > > protections, or was marketed for use in circumventing copyright > > protections. > > The statute provides penalties when the copyright violations are > > perpetrated for > > commercial advantage or private financial gain. In addition, certain > > exceptions > > exist to the DMCA for non profit libraries, archives and educational > > institutions. > > > > In this case the indictment alleges that Mr. Skylarov wrote a > > program, the > > Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR), for the primary purpose of removing > > any and > > all limitations on an ebook purchaser's ability to copy, distribute, > > print, have > > the text read audibly by the computer or any other limitation imposed by > > the > > publisher or distributor of the ebook. Secondly, the indictment alleges > > that > > Elcom made the program available for sale over a web site hosted in > > Chicago, by > > which individuals could download a copy of the program. > > > > The Adobe eBook Reader program is sold by a publisher or distributor > > to > > individuals who wish to read an ebook on their computer. The publisher > > or > > distributor of the ebook can limit a purchaser's ability to copy, > > distribute, > > print or have the text read audibly by the computer. This program > > enables > > copyright holders to manage the distribution of an ebook by purchasers. > > > > Mr. Skylarov has been released on bail and could face a prison term > > up to > > five years. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this > > groundbreaking trial and will certainly consider changes to the DMCA if > > it does > > not work effectively or as intended. Again, thank you for contacting > > me. It > > was good to hear from you. > > > > Most respectfully, > > > > > > > > Max Cleland > > United States Senator > > > =================== > -- > "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that > fool you....., he really is an idiot." > > -Groucho Marx > > _________________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From tompoe at renonevada.net Wed Sep 26 12:18:59 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:38 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case In-Reply-To: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <01092612185900.05118@aether> On Wednesday 26 September 2001 11:38, mickey wrote: > Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... > > mickeym > ============================================================ > > Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian > programmer > Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from > you on > this matter. - - -snip- - - Hi: We are supposed to be living in a civilized society, according to Max baby. Regardless of how he states the "facts", he conveniently leaves out the fundamental premise. A program written where it is legal, and sold where it is illegal, is a matter to take up with those those responsible for engaging in such activities. How many employees can dictate conditions to their boss? A programmer is arrested, indicted, and headed for 25 years, not 5, in jail. Max is not only engaging in uncivilized conduct, behavior, and accepted norms, the jerk is not taking responsibility for his actions. When someone does not respond to the premise put forth, that someone needs a big 2X4 across the shoulders to get his/her attention. We need yet another "HALL OF SHAME" for each and every one of these idiots. Well, thanks for sharing the information, Mickey. Tom From schoen at loyalty.org Wed Sep 26 12:19:52 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case In-Reply-To: <3BB2288D.2B325246@mindspring.com> References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> <20010926145934.1920c2d8.mscottaline@yahoo.com> <3BB2288D.2B325246@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20010926121952.A17677@zork.net> mickey writes: > The only thing that I see significant is that the letter acknowldges that the > case is "groundbreaking." The part about "allows an inventor or creator to > temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without > compensation" was intriguing, in that it shows the basic misunderstanding of > the issue in the case. AEBPR is only useful *after* an author has been > compensated for the copy, and the law is predicting that the customer will > always allow someone else to use the information without compensation. In particular, that the risk that the customer will do that is unacceptibly high (so the customer should be prohibited from even getting the chance). -- 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 kmself at ix.netcom.com Wed Sep 26 14:27:07 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case In-Reply-To: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com>; from mickeym@mindspring.com on Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 02:38:29PM -0400 References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20010926142707.A14533@navel.introspect> on Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 02:38:29PM -0400, mickey (mickeym@mindspring.com) wrote: > > Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... > > mickeym > ============================================================ > > Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian programmer > Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from > you on this matter. > > As you know, the patent and copyright system is established by Article > I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: Congress's authority in 17 USC 1201 derives from the Commerce clause, not the copyright clause. 1201 is not copyright legislation, despite its inclusion under the Copoyright title. > "Congress Shall Have the Power . . . To promote the Progress of > Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and > Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and > Discoveries . . . " This clause allows an inventor or creator to > temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without > compensation, and it places information associated with an invention > in the public domain. Exclusive rights are subject to 16 exemptions under copyright law, including, specifically, fair use (17 USC 106). > Congress has passed legislation such as the Digital Millennium > Copyright Act (DMCA) to enforce copyrights in the new digital era. Sieg heil Disney! > Mr. Skylarov has been released on bail and could face a prison term up > to five years. Twenty-five years as I've heard it stated. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010926/ce3aab12/attachment.pgp From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Wed Sep 26 15:10:38 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Max Cleland (GA) response to Sklyarov case References: <3BB220A5.3C49DD6C@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <007901c146db$995aa040$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, mickeym! His text has only legal facts, without demonstration of senator position to the case. Don't be surprised, if any other electorial will get byte-to-byte copy of this letter, if ask him about Sklyarov. Both EFF and APP positions are much better -- at least we know, who are our friends and enemies. The direction to shoot and who is on our back. IMHO, Max Cleland wants just to sit in the chair, wait for the winner and apploud to him. May be, he is a good person, but has too much fear of DMCA sponsors. Until he really understand that controversial (English word-by-word) DMCA and, especially, Adobe products, are uncompatible with human freedom, he will not get support from Free Dmitry movement. - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ > > Below is the text of a letter that I received from my state senator... > > mickeym > ============================================================ > > Thank you for contacting me regarding the arrest of Russian > programmer > Dmitry Skylarov and his employer Elcom Ltd. I appreciate hearing from > you on > this matter. > > As you know, the patent and copyright system is established by > Article I, > Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: "Congress Shall > Have the > Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by > securing for > limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their > respective > Writings and Discoveries . . . " This clause allows an inventor or > creator to > temporarily exclude others from the use of their information without > compensation, and it places information associated with an invention in > the > public domain. Congress has passed legislation such as the Digital > Millennium > Copyright Act (DMCA) to enforce copyrights in the new digital era. > > Mr. Skylarov and Elcom were both indicted by a Federal grand jury on > August > 28, 2001. The defendants were each indicted on one count of conspiracy > to > traffic in technology primarily designed to circumvent, and marketed for > use in > circumventing, technology that protects a right of a copyright owner, > two counts > of trafficking in technology primarily designed to circumvent technology > that > protects a right of a copyright owner and two counts of trafficking in > technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that protects a > right of > a copyright owner. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) these > are the > first indictments under the DMCA. The act requires the government to > prove > beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant offered to the public, > provided or > trafficked in technology that was primarily designed to circumvent > copyright > protections, or was marketed for use in circumventing copyright > protections. > The statute provides penalties when the copyright violations are > perpetrated for > commercial advantage or private financial gain. In addition, certain > exceptions > exist to the DMCA for non profit libraries, archives and educational > institutions. > > In this case the indictment alleges that Mr. Skylarov wrote a > program, the > Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR), for the primary purpose of removing > any and > all limitations on an ebook purchaser's ability to copy, distribute, > print, have > the text read audibly by the computer or any other limitation imposed by > the > publisher or distributor of the ebook. Secondly, the indictment alleges > that > Elcom made the program available for sale over a web site hosted in > Chicago, by > which individuals could download a copy of the program. > > The Adobe eBook Reader program is sold by a publisher or distributor > to > individuals who wish to read an ebook on their computer. The publisher > or > distributor of the ebook can limit a purchaser's ability to copy, > distribute, > print or have the text read audibly by the computer. This program > enables > copyright holders to manage the distribution of an ebook by purchasers. > > Mr. Skylarov has been released on bail and could face a prison term > up to > five years. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this > groundbreaking trial and will certainly consider changes to the DMCA if > it does > not work effectively or as intended. Again, thank you for contacting > me. It > was good to hear from you. > > Most respectfully, > > > > Max Cleland > United States Senator > > MC:mdp > ==================================================== > > > > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From dredd at megacity.org Wed Sep 26 16:09:51 2001 From: dredd at megacity.org (Derek Balling) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Court Appearance In-Reply-To: References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: At 3:35 AM -0500 9/26/01, Kurt Foss wrote: >At 12:20 AM -0600 9/26/01, Will Janoschka wrote: >>Were Dmitry and Elcomsoft to appear in court at 9 am >> on Sept 24? Was that posponed or has anyone heard what >> happened? > >Further delayed until Nov. 26. For the lawyers among us, at what point has a "foreign national held in our country waiting for a trial in the absence of family and friends" been denied his right to a "swift trial"? d -- +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+ | dredd@megacity.org | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+ From wild at eff.org Wed Sep 26 16:12:31 2001 From: wild at eff.org (Will Doherty) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Update on Dmitry Sklyarov Case Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010926161201.030a67d8@mail.eff.org> This is a very brief update on the Dmitry Sklarov case. At the hearing on September 24, the following happened: 1) Joe Burton became the defense attorney for Elcomsoft and dropped representation for Dmitry Sklyarov. 2) John Keker, a well-known attorney from the San Francisco firm Keker and Van Nest, became the new defense attorney for Dmitry Sklyarov. 3) The court agreed to a next hearing date of November 26 at which time the schedule will be set for motions in the trial. In the meantime, the discovery process of the trial is ongoing. Acquit Dmitry and Reform the DMCA, Will Doherty Online Activist / Media Relations Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Web http://www.eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation - Protecting rights in the digital age ------- From ed at hintz.org Wed Sep 26 16:24:14 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Update on Dmitry Sklyarov Case Message-ID: <200109262324.f8QNOEJ28930@phil.hintz.org> On 9/26/01 4:12 PM, wild@eff.org thus spake: >2) John Keker, a well-known attorney from the San Francisco >firm Keker and Van Nest, became the new defense attorney >for Dmitry Sklyarov. Checked up on the web after reading this. The firms site is here: http://www.kvn.com/index.html They've got an article on their site from "California Lawyer" that blows Mr. Keker's horn quite nicely: http://www.kvn.com/art03.html Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From kfoss at planetpdf.com Wed Sep 26 17:31:26 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Sklyarov gets 'lawyer other lawyers would hire' Message-ID: Court hearings for ElcomSoft Co. Ltd. and Dmitry Sklyarov, indicted on five counts of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, have been postponed until Nov. 26. In an expansion of the legal defense team, John W. Keker, selected in a recent survey as the most-often named California 'lawyer other lawyers would hire' and former Iran-Contra special prosecutor of Oliver North, is now representing Sklyarov. Joseph Burton continues to represent ElcomSoft. http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=1662 rgds ~ Kurt -- From ville at oksanen.net Wed Sep 26 23:44:39 2001 From: ville at oksanen.net (Ville Oksanen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] A Dictatorship is Inevitable References: <001e01c14089$bef79b80$2d23b518@cc653035a> <20010919015002.W8887@zork.net> Message-ID: <000d01c1471f$e3403a00$01000001@Microsoft> A place to attend? 4th annual Electronic Book Conference, November 5-7, 2001 in Washington, DC. http://www.itl.nist.gov/div895/ebook2001/index.html Ville _____________________________________________ Ville Oksanen, researcher Helsinki Institute for Information Technology Ville.Oksanen@hiit.fi http://www.hiit.fi/de/mobileipr/ Tel +358 9 451 2875 mobile +358 40 536 085 83 P.O. Box 9600, FIN-02015 HUT, Finland From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 27 00:37:38 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP Position Paper on Scanning In-Reply-To: References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> Message-ID: <6446311157.20010927113738@elcomsoft.com> Hello, http://www.publishers.org/home/abouta/copy/scanning.htm > The AAP recognizes that there are acceptable uses of scanning > technology. We are concerned, however, that many of the activities > for which scanning is now being used are not among them, but are > instead infringements. The very attributes of simplicity, rapidity, > fidelity, and breadth of distribution and display that attract users > to scanning are hallmarks of its potential to devastate the creative > works that are the subject of the scanning. They are also indicators > that scanning of copyrighted works, if undertaken without > permission, is usually illegal. :))) /Vladimir vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 27 00:59:54 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:39 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> Mark Walter, one of the better editors for Seybold Reports, moderated a panel discussion about the DMCA at Seybold today. Seybold is one of the largest publishing technology conferences and exhibitions in the world. Also on stage were free-sklyarov's own Kurt Foss (Planet eBook) and Robin Gross (EFF), and two lawyers with media connections (Alan and Jim). Dmitry, Alex Katalov, and Dmitry's attorney were in the audience. Jim seemed to be on "our side"; he felt that the DMCA had one good feature, which is a mandatory blanket payment for streaming audio royalties, making such streaming broadcasts legal. Alan was very much a supporter of the DMCA, but made many excellent points. First, claims that Dmitry was just helping Adobe out by pointing out a weakness, and should have been hired instead of jailed are revisionist at best. Dmitry was just doing his research, and when Elcom decided to sell the product, it was to offer benefits to consumers, according to their own press release. No mention of publicizing flaws in the Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader was mentioned at the time. Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter into it in the first place. There are certainly problems with that argument; in particular, as Alex and Vladmir K. have pointed out here, the terms of use for many ebooks isn't known in advance; Dmitry's lawyer pointed this out at the session. But that, itself, is something consumers can vote against by refusing to buy an ebook with unknown terms. Dmitry's lawyer also pointed out that this is probably already happening - the ebook market has hardly boomed, and a lot of that may be due to the restrictions on most content's uses. Notable exceptions include Baen, who give their books away unencrypted. But I think that Alan raised some good points; I disagree with him about the impact and correctness of the DMCA, but his analysis was well-reasoned. We should listen to him, and be careful not to make arguments that damage our own cause. In particular, one gentleman claimed that the Constitution guarantees fair use and the "right" of teachers to make copies for students. However, fair use as I understand it is a judicial creation to harmonize the First Amendment and copyright, which is far from a Constitutional guarantee, and the Kinko's case demonstrated clearly that teachers do *not* have a "right" to distribute copies of copyrighted material to their students. Jim made one particularly good point: "attack the motive, not the mechanism." Betamax failed largely because of its built-in copying protection, which caused the consumer market to mostly ignore it. Movies are not widely pirated on VHS because it's easier to get a movie off of cable or just rent one for $3. When movies are pirated, it's to get them onto video before ordinarily available or to get them into a market early. This just further demonstrates Jim's point. The floor was opened to questions early on, and it was a very vigorous, interesting, and at times quite entertaining session. I was sorry not to see more of the regular SF faces there. -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 27 01:30:50 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP Position Paper on Scanning In-Reply-To: <6446311157.20010927113738@elcomsoft.com>; from vkatalov@elcomsoft.com on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 11:37:38AM +0400 References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <6446311157.20010927113738@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <20010927103050.A24947@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 11:37:38AM +0400, Vladimir Katalov wrote: > Hello, > > http://www.publishers.org/home/abouta/copy/scanning.htm > > > The AAP recognizes that there are acceptable uses of scanning > > technology. We are concerned, however, that many of the activities > > for which scanning is now being used are not among them, but are > > instead infringements. The very attributes of simplicity, rapidity, > > fidelity, and breadth of distribution and display that attract users > > to scanning are hallmarks of its potential to devastate the creative > > works that are the subject of the scanning. They are also indicators > > that scanning of copyrighted works, if undertaken without > > permission, is usually illegal. Is there no end to the breathtaking arrogance of these people? Just because scanning is easy doesn't mean it's illegal. Publishing complete bullshit like the AAP often does is easy - but I don't see the AAP presenting themselves for arrest at their nearest FBI office. To be fair, the rest of the article does make some valid points, but completely omits the myriad legal uses of scanning, and so comes to a completely biased conclusion. And since, no doubt, this article is the first shot in an attempt to regulate the sale of scanners, it must not go unchallenged. And the following paragraph is a complete distortion of the truth: > Manipulation > A digital version can be easily manipulated in a computer: > content can be deleted, distorted or modified; identifying > materials, information, and copyright ownership indicia can be > separated from the page or removed. Manipulation can occur with > both page images and digitized text. Distribution of the > manipulated version compromises the reliability of the > underlying work, does a disservice to the reader, and damages > creators and copyright owners. After a digital version has been so manipulated, it is no longer the original work, and so whether is is still subject to the copyright of the original author is debatable and will depend on several factors, including: - Is the modified work masquerading as the original work? If so, then I think most people would see this as a violation of copyright. - Has the author of the new work correctly cited the parts of the original work that he has used? If not, it's plagiarism. If so, it might be considered fair use under many circumstances, depending on the nature of the new work (eg criticism) and the amount of cited material. If the new work is clearly a parody of the original, even the requirement for citation might be relaxed. -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/9c0a0129/attachment.pgp From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 27 02:08:34 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <12156747137.20010927020834@elcomsoft.com> Dear Christopher, CRM> There are certainly problems with that argument; in particular, as Alex and CRM> Vladmir K. have pointed out here, the terms of use for many ebooks isn't CRM> known in advance; Dmitry's lawyer pointed this out at the session. But CRM> that, itself, is something consumers can vote against by refusing to buy an CRM> ebook with unknown terms. If you or anybody else can point me to ANY eBook store with exact terms of use are known before purchase (I mean eBook in Adobe eBook Reader format) - please let me know as soon as possible! I mean that before buying the book I would like to know about all features like: Printing - Enabled Landing - Disabled Read aloud - Enabled etc.. In worst case - it will be OK if you can point me to any on-line store, which provides money back for eBook (so I'll be able to buy book, look on the limitations, and ask money back if I don't need it). This is not joke!!! For our investigations we need to found some number of eBook with pre-defined features - for example with "Read aloud" option enabled only (and all other features disabled). And I already spend hundreds or thousands dollars while buying different eBooks on different on-line shops - with no results (and no money back). So please let me know if you'll surprisingly found what I need!!!! Good luck ;-) -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From david.haworth at altavista.net Thu Sep 27 02:16:22 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org>; from crism@maden.org on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 12:59:54AM -0700 References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <20010927111622.C24947@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 12:59:54AM -0700, Christopher R. Maden wrote: > Mark Walter, one of the better editors for Seybold Reports, moderated a > panel discussion about the DMCA at Seybold today. [...] > Alan was very much a supporter of the DMCA, but made many excellent > points. First, claims that Dmitry was just helping Adobe out by pointing > out a weakness, and should have been hired instead of jailed are > revisionist at best. That's true. What's more, Adobe's product is fundamentally flawed - as are all of the so-called protection products for use on PCs. Even the best cryptographic algorithms are useless if you give the enemy the key. And that's exactly what happens here. The enemy (the public) gets the key - either hidden in the ebook, or somewhere else on his PC, or built into the reader software. > Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to > the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual > property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain > restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't > want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter > into it in the first place. Unless they find that these contract terms are applied after the fact. Here in Europe, such contract terms are null and void, and in the absence of a mutually-agreed contract, normal copyright law applies. I assume that something similar applies in the US. If not, it's time to do something about it. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/ac7c77f3/attachment.pgp From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 27 02:09:04 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <12156747137.20010927020834@elcomsoft.com> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927020740.00a611f0@mail.maden.org> At 02:08 27-09-2001, Alex Katalov wrote: >CRM> There are certainly problems with that argument; in particular, as >Alex and >CRM> Vladmir K. have pointed out here, the terms of use for many ebooks isn't >CRM> known in advance; Dmitry's lawyer pointed this out at the session. But >CRM> that, itself, is something consumers can vote against by refusing to >buy an >CRM> ebook with unknown terms. > >If you or anybody else can point me to ANY eBook store with exact >terms of use are known before purchase (I mean eBook in Adobe eBook Reader >format) I don't know of any. I said "many" because (a) I wasn't specifically referring to Adobe ebooks, and (b) I'm a pedant and I don't know for a fact that there aren't any Adobe ebook stores that tell you the permissions in advance. I don't care for the Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader, regardless of the content, so I haven't looked into it very much. -Chris -- Christopher R. Maden, Principal Consultant, HMM Consulting Int'l, Inc. DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 27 03:22:15 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday Message-ID: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> > Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to > the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual > property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain > restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't > want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter > into it in the first place. OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only _white_ people should read this book? -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 27 03:49:38 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> References: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <258127188.20010927124938@centras.lt> >> Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to >> the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual >> property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain >> restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't >> want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter >> into it in the first place. AK> OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only AK> _white_ people should read this book? Excelent point Alex!!! :) In fact ANY restriction is bad. People should not be prevented to do wrong things however they should be responsible for what they do ... From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 27 04:04:01 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:40 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <200109271104.f8RB47c03764@moerbeke> On 27 Sep, Alex Katalov wrote: > >> Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to >> the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual >> property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain >> restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't >> want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter >> into it in the first place. > > OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only > _white_ people should read this book? > Exactly, these so called contracts are an attempt by the publishers to take away our rights in cyberspace. We enjoy fair use of printed material, and there is no reason why we should not also enjoy fair use of digital material. The license agreements are an attempt to make people pay for something that they are freely entitled to. The contract argument is a sham and a swindle. License agreements should be abolished IMHO. Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ -- Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBOULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/7b9e72aa/attachment.pgp From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 27 04:13:49 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <258127188.20010927124938@centras.lt> References: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> <258127188.20010927124938@centras.lt> Message-ID: <14164263929.20010927041349@elcomsoft.com> I think - that we need to pay more attention in such debates like todays, that "copyright" and "license agreement" are not the same thinks. "Copyright law" exists in most countries even if we don't like it. And at the same time "license agreement" may be (and very often _is_) against human rights, local law, unconstitutional, unlawful etc... Yes - the author of the book can get money for it, if he wants this - but he can't say me how I _must_ read this book if I already pay for it! Somebody may not like the example with _white only_ limitation - but even if the license agreement says so "easy" - that I should read purchased book only while sitting in my bath room, at daylight time and by single eye, and I learn this only after I pay for this book - this license agreement is obviously false from _any_ point of view !!! AK>> OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only AK>> _white_ people should read this book? D> Excelent point Alex!!! :) D> In fact ANY restriction is bad. People should not be prevented to do D> wrong things however they should be responsible for what they do ... >>From this point of view such a contract (for _white_ only) is possible D> but in this case _non white_ people should get compensation and i D> think the best compensation would be to allow them to decide who can D> and who cannot read the book. Most likely they would allow to read it D> for all. So in fact *_white_ only contract* is nonsence. -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 27 04:23:59 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <200109271104.f8RB47c03764@moerbeke> References: <200109271104.f8RB47c03764@moerbeke> Message-ID: <17510188028.20010927132359@centras.lt> pic> contract argument is a sham and a swindle. License agreements should be pic> abolished IMHO. I must disagree here. I think any license agreements should be allowed but society should not protect non-fare agreements Now can we resolve what is fare,right and non-fare,wrong agreement ? -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt From russotto at pond.com Thu Sep 27 05:59:35 2001 From: russotto at pond.com (Matthew T. Russotto) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold and "contracts" Message-ID: <200109271259.IAA03052@pond.com> Christopher R. Maden wrote: > Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to > the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual > property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain > restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't > want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter > into it in the first place. This is fine for regular contracts -- the kind hammered out by both sides over a bargaining table. But for these contracts of adhesion where you supposedly consent to the contract automatically by buying a product or by clicking on some agreement after you buy it, it's a whole different matter. Their legality has been questionable for a long time. There's a law (UCITA) which gives them full force, but it has only been passed in Maryland and Virginia. The rest of us aren't stuck with it. If you accept the sanctity of such e-book "contracts" where you give up your fair use and first sale rights, you must also accept the Microsoft contract which forbids you from using their products to disparage Microsoft, MSN, Microsoft products, etc. I reject both. From debug at centras.lt Thu Sep 27 06:06:10 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <200109271104.f8RB47c03764@moerbeke> References: <200109271104.f8RB47c03764@moerbeke> Message-ID: <916319731.20010927150610@centras.lt> >Now can we resolve what is fare,right and non-fare,wrong agreement ? I think the agreement is fare if noone comes and complains about it but in this case noone needs the agreement :) If somebody comes with complains there is no obvious answer. the same agreement can be resolved in favor of one part in one case and in favor of the other part in another case. When i buy a music CD and create additional copies the question is would the original producer get the money if i did not create additional copies ? If the money would not be generated then i think i must be allowed to create the copies. If the money would be generated then the question is who is to take them ? And here i think the question must be how i am going to spend the money i've just saved/generated, will i spend the money better than original producer would spent ? Maybe the money should be donated to the 3rd party or paid as a tax ... The question in fact is about cherishing new possibilities ( was not it the original goal of copyrights ) and who is to decide what possibilities/businesses should start working The best thing i can imagine is to allow all other people to decide before you do decide yourself. In this case there would be noone to say you that you should not exercize your copyrights, or from the other side there would be noone to say you that you should not misuse IP you've just bought. The whole problem will not be resolved until we have full consensus -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt _______________________________________________ free-sklyarov mailing list free-sklyarov@zork.net http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Thu Sep 27 06:17:10 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP Position Paper on Scanning References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <6446311157.20010927113738@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <003501c14756$bc80ed10$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, Vladimir! Seems, that AAP is more communist, that Soviet Union government. Printing/XEROXing of copyrighted works, if undertaken without permission, is also usially illegal. If you have laser printer or Xerox, you, may be, pirate? > http://www.publishers.org/home/abouta/copy/scanning.htm > > > The AAP recognizes that there are acceptable uses of scanning > > technology. We are concerned, however, that many of the activities > > for which scanning is now being used are not among them, but are > > instead infringements. The very attributes of simplicity, rapidity, > > fidelity, and breadth of distribution and display that attract users > > to scanning are hallmarks of its potential to devastate the creative > > works that are the subject of the scanning. They are also indicators > > that scanning of copyrighted works, if undertaken without > > permission, is usually illegal. > > :))) > > /Vladimir > vkatalov@elcomsoft.com - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From larsg at eurorights.org Thu Sep 27 06:48:47 2001 From: larsg at eurorights.org (Lars Gaarden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] EU and EULAs (Was: Seybold session yesterday) References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> <20010927111622.C24947@3soft.de> Message-ID: <3BB32E3F.9020201@eurorights.org> David Haworth wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 12:59:54AM -0700, Christopher R. Maden wrote: > >>Mark Walter, one of the better editors for Seybold Reports, moderated a >>panel discussion about the DMCA at Seybold today. >> > [...] > >>Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to >>the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual >>property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain >>restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't >>want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter >>into it in the first place. > > Unless they find that these contract terms are applied after the fact. > Here in Europe, such contract terms are null and void, and in the absence > of a mutually-agreed contract, normal copyright law applies. Do you have a reference to laws and court rulings that support this? The reason I ask is because 6.4.4 in the EUCD will make 'click-through' EULAs a convenient opt-out for publishers. I want to understand how these 'contracts' differ from a regular mutually-agreed contract with regards to what terms that are considered legally binding. From what I've been able to find[1] so far, these EU directives apply: E-Commerce Directive Distance Contracts Directive Directive on Electronic Signatures. Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive on Consumer Guarantees. Apart from the ecommerce directive, I have not had time to look at the rest of them. Any links to material regarding online contracts is highly appreciated. [1] http://wwwlaw.murdoch.edu.au/dtlj/articles/vol2_1/koelmanDTLJ2_1.htm -- LarsG From crumley at mail.com Thu Sep 27 07:18:03 2001 From: crumley at mail.com (Jim Crumley) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals Message-ID: <20010927091803.A7817@gordo.space.umn.edu> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:18:33PM +0200, David Haworth wrote: > I've dropped acroread too for normal documents (xpdf is much faster > and renders better on the screen too). But neither xpdf nor > gv work correctly with a ppower4 presentation (which I use to > avoid Microsoft software). If anyone can suggest an alternative > I'd be happy to use it. Well, you might want to try prosper [1], which is another LaTeX class for making slides. It has some advantages over ppower4, but I haven't been able to get the fancier effects to work with xpdf or gv either. Of course, there's always StarOffice (or Open Office) if you don't mind making slide the Powerpoint way. 1. http://prosper.sourceforge.net/ Jim From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 27 10:17:38 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101617.00aaa850@mail.maden.org> At 03:22 27-09-2001, Alex Katalov wrote: > > Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to > > the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual > > property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain > > restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't > > want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter > > into it in the first place. > >OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only >_white_ people should read this book? You've asked the wrong person for the answer you're looking for, I think. I think that that if you don't like that contract, you shouldn't buy that book. In fact, if a company is exercising racist policies like that, I think you should refuse to do any business with that company whatsoever, and publicize the policies far and wide. Drive them out of business. -crism oops, are my politics showing? -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From crism at maden.org Thu Sep 27 10:20:23 2001 From: crism at maden.org (Christopher R. Maden) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold and "contracts" In-Reply-To: <200109271259.IAA03052@pond.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101927.00aaf130@mail.maden.org> At 05:59 27-09-2001, Matthew T. Russotto wrote: >If you accept the sanctity of such e-book "contracts" >where you give up your fair use and first sale rights, you must also >accept the Microsoft contract which forbids you from using their >products to disparage Microsoft, MSN, Microsoft products, etc. I >reject both. Though I wouldn't use the word "sanctity", this is precisely why I don't use MS products (except that I'm stuck with Windows on this machine, for now). -crism -- David Shapiro: You know what you doing. Free Dmitry! For great justice. === Freelance Text Nerd: === PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 27 10:32:49 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: At 12:59 AM -0700 9/27/01, Christopher R. Maden wrote: >There are certainly problems with that argument; in particular, as >Alex and Vladmir K. have pointed out here, the terms of use for many >ebooks isn't known in advance; Dmitry's lawyer pointed this out at >the session. Actually, that was a point _I_ made in response to Allan Adler's premise that if the marketplace doesn't like the restrictions made on certain eBooks, they should refuse to buy them. I pointed that the flaw in his logic is that publishers don't *provide* that information prior to purchase -- you only learn what permissions you have *after* you acquire an eBook. Nonetheless, Allan repeated his statement later in the session, completely ignoring the Catch-22 situation created by publishers. Seems we need a "Lemon Law" for eBooks that says permissions/flaws need to be honestly disclosed prior to purchase. After checking with Adobe on this point, there's no technological reason this can't be done with its current DRM solution. rgds ~ Kurt -- From nbhs2 at i-2000.com Thu Sep 27 10:40:02 2001 From: nbhs2 at i-2000.com (Michael Scottaline) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold and "contracts" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101927.00aaf130@mail.maden.org> References: <200109271259.IAA03052@pond.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101927.00aaf130@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <20010927134002.77ffd843.nbhs2@i-2000.com> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 10:20:23 -0700 "Christopher R. Maden" insightfully noted: CM> At 05:59 27-09-2001, Matthew T. Russotto wrote: CM> >If you accept the sanctity of such e-book "contracts" CM> >where you give up your fair use and first sale rights, you must also CM> >accept the Microsoft contract which forbids you from using their CM> >products to disparage Microsoft, MSN, Microsoft products, etc. I CM> >reject both. CM> CM> Though I wouldn't use the word "sanctity", this is precisely why I CM> don't CM> use MS products (except that I'm stuck with Windows on this machine, CM> for now). ========================== Yes...., but at least while in windows, you are using a non M$ mail program!! Mike -- "Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance." --Will Durant From ilya at theIlya.com Thu Sep 27 10:57:34 2001 From: ilya at theIlya.com (Ilya Volynets) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Who is The Biggest Pirate? Message-ID: <20010927175738.27798.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> Here is a small letter someone put together and sent to piracy-reporting eMail address of AAP. ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Who is The Biggest Pirate? Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 10:53:47 -0700 From: anatoly To: ahoffman@publishers.org http://www.publishers.org/home/itr/reward.htm I have got on this site just out of curiosity in relation to "Adobe / Sklyarov" case. It is my opinion that the most powerful engine of modern society development is cultural progress, which in turn depends directly on free circulation of ideas and works of art. I mean work of art in wide sense of the word: books, movies, videos, music media, etc. Books, news paper articles go in the first and last place here, they are the most important. What AAP does is just horrible. The clear trend here is to limit all free circulation of ideas, which in long run means to turn our society into police state (like former USSR, for example) and to actually slow down any normal development. In short run publishers will simply kill their market. The primitive idea of their is loss of subscription and royalty revenues, but you cannot be sure that those who want book for free would pay for it. USA is not "reading country", but opposite: it is mostly "TV watching" country. So, if you want to develop reading market then make book as accessible as possible: people, who copy your book by their own means save your advertisement money. On this soil real book lovers grow, and real book lover will rather pay for good publication instead of handmade copy. One more point is that Copyright laws in their today form do not protect authors, but kill them. I understand this sounds quite radical, but I believe this is truth. If an author cannot give his or her work to any publisher, etc. this means he or she must predict who will pay the best AND FOR WHAT. And this means the author is not free any more. My conclusion is: all you have done up to date and are trying to do further is horrible. I would say AAP is trying hard to actually steal culture from people and I would ask then, who is the biggest pirate here? Sincerely, Anatoly Volynets ------------------------------------------------------- From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 27 13:05:20 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP Position Paper on Scanning In-Reply-To: <20010927103050.A24947@3soft.de>; from david.haworth@altavista.net on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 10:30:50AM +0200 References: <200109260523.AAA000.38@cressida.nereid.ar-digit.net> <6446311157.20010927113738@elcomsoft.com> <20010927103050.A24947@3soft.de> Message-ID: <20010927130519.F6100@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 10:30:50AM +0200, David Haworth (david.haworth@altavista.net) wrote: > And the following paragraph is a complete distortion of the truth: > > > Manipulation A digital version can be easily manipulated in a > > computer: content can be deleted, distorted or modified; identifying > > materials, information, and copyright ownership indicia can be > > separated from the page or removed. Manipulation can occur with both > > page images and digitized text. Distribution of the manipulated > > version compromises the reliability of the underlying work, does a > > disservice to the reader, and damages creators and copyright owners. > > After a digital version has been so manipulated, it is no longer > the original work, and so whether is is still subject to the copyright > of the original author is debatable and will depend on several > factors, including: This will vary by jurisdiction. In the US, significant quotation may still be copyright violation. This is a problem particularly in domains such as "found" art, collage (particularly digital collage), and jazz or other musical composition in which quotation and reference are critical components of the art. > - Is the modified work masquerading as the original work? If so, > then I think most people would see this as a violation of > copyright. This I'd generally agree with. > - Has the author of the new work correctly cited the parts of the > original work that he has used? If not, it's plagiarism. Citation need not occur so long as it's clear that the work is not claimed as original. I remember a BBC radio piece some years back (1998 or so) in which musical quotations in popular music were traced. This would be another interesting study for use and value of the public domain. > If so, it might be considered fair use under many circumstances, > depending on the nature of the new work (eg criticism) and the > amount of cited material. If the new work is clearly a parody of > the original, even the requirement for citation might be relaxed. You're ommitting a number of other issues as well. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/c3095e5d/attachment.pgp From tom at lemuria.org Thu Sep 27 13:13:19 2001 From: tom at lemuria.org (Tom) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <14164263929.20010927041349@elcomsoft.com>; from akatalov@elcomsoft.com on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 04:13:49AM -0700 References: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> <258127188.20010927124938@centras.lt> <14164263929.20010927041349@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <20010927221318.D3602@lemuria.org> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 04:13:49AM -0700, Alex Katalov wrote: > Somebody may not like the example with _white only_ limitation - but > even if the license agreement says so "easy" - that I should read > purchased book only while sitting in my bath room, at daylight time > and by single eye, and I learn this only after I pay for this book - > this license agreement is obviously false from _any_ point of view !!! is it? copyright law also includes (in some countries) the right of the author to the "integrity of the work". what if he believes that this is the only way that you can correctly experience his work? think artist, not corporation. > >>From this point of view such a contract (for _white_ only) is possible > D> but in this case _non white_ people should get compensation and i > D> think the best compensation would be to allow them to decide who can > D> and who cannot read the book. Most likely they would allow to read it > D> for all. So in fact *_white_ only contract* is nonsence. is it? how about the author? he may feel that he wants only white people to read it. here's a different solution: - define a set of restrictions as "open publishing" (the standard copyright things: no illegal copying, etc.) - everything with that set and no others has normal copyright terms (whatever those may be) - any, and I do mean *any*, other restrictions are allowed, provided that the customer is informed completely about them *prior* to sale. in addition, copyright terms for these "restricted publishing" works is considerably less (no more than half the usual term, more like 25% or 10% of it). -- -- http://web.lemuria.org -- From ed at hintz.org Thu Sep 27 14:17:01 2001 From: ed at hintz.org (Edmund A. Hintz) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] AAP Position Paper on Scanning Message-ID: <200109272116.f8RLGRJ00885@phil.hintz.org> On 9/27/01 1:05 PM, kmself@ix.netcom.com thus spake: >Citation need not occur so long as it's clear that the work is not >claimed as original. > >I remember a BBC radio piece some years back (1998 or so) in which >musical quotations in popular music were traced. This would be another >interesting study for use and value of the public domain. Indeed. The Jones quote "originality is the art of concealing ones source" applies here. In fact, I've enjoyed tracing obscure references through musical history many a time, often these concealed references are fascinating to unearth. I must admit this art seems to be suffering a bit of late. One of the most striking examples of this downturn is "Music of the Night" from Lloyd Webber's Phantom, where the dramatic climax of the music is taken virtually note for note from Puccini's "La Fanciulla del West" (the last note of the MOTN version goes down, rather than up to a C IIRC, but it's otherwise identical. Phantom fans think MOTN sounds odd in Italian when I play the passage for them). Perhaps this is due to the relative obscurity of Fanciulla, but more obfuscation would be nice... Nonetheless, the recording industry has delt with sampling non-public domain within the rap/hip hop genre, so there is even a precedent for using copyright protected snippets in "original" works. And another example of how a somewhat more open policy results in profits for both the original artist and the sampler. Peace, Edmund A. Hintz **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer, Mac Techie, Unix Geek, * | * But I'm not the only one... Mac/Unix Consultant * /|\ * I hope someday you'll join us, */ | \* And the world will live as one. '78 Westy ***** Imagine." http://www.hintz.org From kmself at ix.netcom.com Thu Sep 27 15:52:37 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101617.00aaa850@mail.maden.org>; from crism@maden.org on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 10:17:38AM -0700 References: <3161168561.20010927032215@elcomsoft.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101617.00aaa850@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <20010927155236.G6100@navel.introspect> on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 10:17:38AM -0700, Christopher R. Maden (crism@maden.org) wrote: > At 03:22 27-09-2001, Alex Katalov wrote: > > > Another excellent point he made was that fair use may not be relevant to > > > the debate here. If the *contract* for using a piece of intellectual > > > property, like the licensing terms on an ebook, specify certain > > > restrictions, then fair use doesn't come into play. If customers don't > > > want to abide by the terms of the contract, they should refuse to enter > > > into it in the first place. > > > >OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only > >_white_ people should read this book? > > You've asked the wrong person for the answer you're looking for, I > think. I think that that if you don't like that contract, you shouldn't > buy that book. You're missing the point: Terms of the contract are *NOT* available prior to purchase. The broader point is that publishers are attempting to portray licensing of material as an acceptable alternative to copyrighting it. If the publishers aren't going to utilize the protections offered by copyright, and instead resort to licensing, what obligation does the public have to grant publishers copyright privileges? Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/1b5f8b94/attachment.pgp From ath at limm.mgimo.ru Thu Sep 27 17:03:53 2001 From: ath at limm.mgimo.ru (Ilya V. Vasilyev) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Abobe+DMCA > USSR ! References: <20010927175738.27798.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> Message-ID: <00d501c147b1$14fd4290$0100a8c0@sharhan> Hi, All! AV> What AAP does is just horrible. The clear trend here is to limit all free AV> circulation of ideas, which in long run means to turn our society into police AV> state (like former USSR, for example) and to actually slow down any normal AV> development. As a person, who lived in USSR, I would say -- the society Adobe and DMCA wants is *much* worse, than USSR. * In USSR it was non encouraged, but you was allowed to hardcopy books. * Person, who import Xerox machine to USSR, wasn't put into prison in few days after arrival. * In USSR you had free libraries, where you can read any book from any country. Except of anti-communist books, of course. * In USSR you can take a book from friend. Only if this book is anti-communist, police will arrest you. Adobe+DMCA wants to outlaw *ANY* book shareing. * If people make and distribute books, they want ("samizdat"), they were not charged just because they make books. Only "bad content" samizdat was a crime. They want Farenheit 451 future for the whole world! - - - Ilya V. Vasilyev Civil Hackers' School Moscow Center +7(095)162-4767 http://hscool.org/ From akatalov at elcomsoft.com Thu Sep 27 17:56:25 2001 From: akatalov at elcomsoft.com (Alex Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:41 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] The Best Book Catalog in the World" Message-ID: <9421148395.20010927175625@elcomsoft.com> Hi guys, Look what I found in The Best Book Catalog in the World" - really fun books available for order from Loompanics Enterprises, Inc. - Port Townsend, WA. "How to make driver's licenses and other ID on your home computer" by Max Forge, 104 pp, $12.00 "How to steal food from the supermarket" "Making crime pay" "How to screw the post office" "Guide to intercepting Cellphone, Cordless & Other phone calls on Scaners & Shortwave receivers" "Escape from controlled custody" "The complete guide to lock picking" "Home workshop prototype firearms - How to design, build and sell your own small arms" "How to build your own BAZOOKA" "Becoming a succesful mass murderer or serial killer: The Complete Handbook" "Practical LSD manufacture - 2nd edition" "A practical guide to growing poppies and making opium" "Sectrets of methamphetamine manufacture" And many other very interesting books - totally 250 pages catalog of such staff!!! -- Best regards, Alex mailto:akatalov@elcomsoft.com From proclus at iname.com Thu Sep 27 18:07:15 2001 From: proclus at iname.com (proclus@iname.com) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] The Best Book Catalog in the World" In-Reply-To: <9421148395.20010927175625@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <200109280107.f8S17HE02132@pico.mbg.cornell.edu> Ain't free speech and press wonderful! ;-} Regards, proclus http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ On 27 Sep, Alex Katalov wrote: > Hi guys, > > Look what I found in The Best Book Catalog in the World" - really fun > books available for order from Loompanics Enterprises, Inc. - Port > Townsend, WA. > > "How to make driver's licenses and other ID on your home computer" > by Max Forge, 104 pp, $12.00 > > "How to steal food from the supermarket" > > "Making crime pay" > > "How to screw the post office" > > "Guide to intercepting Cellphone, Cordless & Other phone calls on > Scaners & Shortwave receivers" > > "Escape from controlled custody" > > "The complete guide to lock picking" > > "Home workshop prototype firearms - How to design, build and sell your > own small arms" > > "How to build your own BAZOOKA" > > "Becoming a succesful mass murderer or serial killer: The Complete > Handbook" > > "Practical LSD manufacture - 2nd edition" > > "A practical guide to growing poppies and making opium" > > "Sectrets of methamphetamine manufacture" > > And many other very interesting books - totally 250 pages catalog of > such staff!!! > -- Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010927/9ff01543/attachment.pgp From kfoss at planetpdf.com Thu Sep 27 19:11:48 2001 From: kfoss at planetpdf.com (Kurt Foss) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: The Best Book Catalog in the World" In-Reply-To: <9421148395.20010927175625@elcomsoft.com> References: <9421148395.20010927175625@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: Vlad, Even better: --- NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain of the books and papers in this catalog deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. Loompanics Unlimited does not advocate the breaking of any law. Our books are sold for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon information in this catalog. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of information in this catalog. --- Maybe you can use this same disclaimer with AEBPR! rgds ~ Kurt From tompoe at renonevada.net Thu Sep 27 19:35:41 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Re: The Best Book Catalog in the World" In-Reply-To: References: <9421148395.20010927175625@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <01092719354100.10941@aether> On Thursday 27 September 2001 19:11, Kurt Foss wrote: > > Maybe you can use this same disclaimer with AEBPR! > > rgds ~ Kurt > > _______________________________________________ > free-sklyarov mailing list > free-sklyarov@zork.net > http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov Hi: You could, but then our legislators would be considered distinguished, proud, and honorable men and women. Our country would be a beacon of hope for the rest of the world. Democracy would shine like the brightest star in the universe. But then, our legislators would be relegated to a life of comfort, not rich, not poor. Better we not have a disclaimer, better we have corrupt and dishonorable, greedy, disgraceful, jerks with their pockets full of campaign funds. Tom From david.haworth at altavista.net Fri Sep 28 00:38:02 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] EU and EULAs (Was: Seybold session yesterday) In-Reply-To: <3BB32E3F.9020201@eurorights.org>; from larsg@eurorights.org on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 03:48:47PM +0200 References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927004631.00a52ec0@mail.maden.org> <20010927111622.C24947@3soft.de> <3BB32E3F.9020201@eurorights.org> Message-ID: <20010928093802.A26056@3soft.de> Hi Lars & all, On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 03:48:47PM +0200, Lars Gaarden wrote: > > Do you have a reference to laws and court rulings that support this? > > The reason I ask is because 6.4.4 in the EUCD will make 'click-through' > EULAs a convenient opt-out for publishers. I want to understand how > these 'contracts' differ from a regular mutually-agreed contract with > regards to what terms that are considered legally binding. The Directive on Unfair Terms & Conditions is the one to look for. Theres an informative page at http://www.oft.gov.uk/html/consume/general.htm#uct If you follow the link "regular bulletins" thee are loads of cases - don't have time to look right now. I used to subscribe to Which? magazine many years ago. The back page always contained a few stories about peoples attempts to get compensation for shoddy goods & services. The basic gist of the cases where people had a contract imposed after they'd paid for the goods was that such terms weren't valid (unless of course the consumer could gain advantage from them). That would also apply to shrink-wrap licenses, especially in the ridiculous case of "by opening this package you agree to the terms and conditions inside". All this applies only to "consumer" purchases, not to commercial purchases, and of course it's UK law (but pretty similar to the EU directive). This could all change after the EUCD though :-( Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010928/ea526ef5/attachment.pgp From vkatalov at elcomsoft.com Fri Sep 28 00:47:37 2001 From: vkatalov at elcomsoft.com (Vladimir Katalov) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Who is The Biggest Pirate? In-Reply-To: <20010927175738.27798.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> References: <20010927175738.27798.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> Message-ID: <1853825318.20010928114737@elcomsoft.com> Hello, > http://www.publishers.org/home/itr/reward.htm Sorry, does anybody have a copy of that page -- and if yes, could you please send it to me? For some reason, publishers.org site is not accessible from our location today :( /Vladimir vkatalov@elcomsoft.com From debug at centras.lt Fri Sep 28 02:04:29 2001 From: debug at centras.lt (DeBug) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Seybold session yesterday In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101617.00aaa850@mail.maden.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010927101617.00aaa850@mail.maden.org> Message-ID: <117951522.20010928110429@centras.lt> >>OK - and what if this "contract" (license agreement) says that only >>_white_ people should read this book? CRM> You've asked the wrong person for the answer you're looking for, I CRM> think. I think that that if you don't like that contract, you shouldn't CRM> buy that book. In fact, if a company is exercising racist policies like CRM> that, I think you should refuse to do any business with that company CRM> whatsoever, and publicize the policies far and wide. Drive them out of CRM> business. I think that "don't like don't buy" doctrine is not good. Not any contract can be accepted by society, there are things society can not tolerate and doing nothing (not buying) is not enough, Imagine a situation were 100-200 businessmen occupy all businesses (highly automated with robots and computers) and leave no space for other people... Now they can decide to sell their products to each other only (and probably to their family members) In fact they do not need other people neither as workforse nor as consumers Should the rest of the world sit and wait ? -- Best regards, DeBug mailto:debug@centras.lt -- What I wrote above is hereby dedicated to the public domain and may be freely used, in whole or in part, with or without attribution. From david.haworth at altavista.net Fri Sep 28 02:11:16 2001 From: david.haworth at altavista.net (David Haworth) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:42 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Boycott Adobe: Call for Proposals In-Reply-To: <20010927091803.A7817@gordo.space.umn.edu>; from crumley@mail.com on Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 09:18:03AM -0500 References: <20010927091803.A7817@gordo.space.umn.edu> Message-ID: <20010928111116.B26056@3soft.de> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 09:18:03AM -0500, Jim Crumley wrote: > > Well, you might want to try prosper [1], which is another LaTeX > class for making slides. It has some advantages over ppower4, > but I haven't been able to get the fancier effects to work with > xpdf or gv either. Of course, there's always StarOffice (or Open > Office) if you don't mind making slide the Powerpoint way. > > 1. http://prosper.sourceforge.net/ I don't like StarOffice for exactly the same reasons that I don't like MS-Office. But thanks for the tip. Dave -- David Haworth Baiersdorf, Germany david.haworth@altavista.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010928/65dc6ce4/attachment.pgp From kmself at ix.netcom.com Fri Sep 28 11:15:07 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:43 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Who is The Biggest Pirate? In-Reply-To: <1853825318.20010928114737@elcomsoft.com>; from vkatalov@elcomsoft.com on Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 11:47:37AM +0400 References: <20010927175738.27798.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> <1853825318.20010928114737@elcomsoft.com> Message-ID: <20010928111506.H30485@navel.introspect> on Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 11:47:37AM +0400, Vladimir Katalov (vkatalov@elcomsoft.com) wrote: > Hello, > > > http://www.publishers.org/home/itr/reward.htm > > Sorry, does anybody have a copy of that page -- and if yes, could you > please send it to me? For some reason, publishers.org site is not > accessible from our location today :( Done (offline). Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010928/11807f03/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Sat Sep 29 00:38:50 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:53 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] W3C ridiculous new policy on patents (fwd) Message-ID: >From: "Adam Warner" >Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy >Subject: Urgent: W3C Patent Policy Issue >Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 02:32:29 +1200 >Lines: 321 >Message-ID: <9p21lt$fupso$1@ID-105510.news.dfncis.de> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.55.104.94 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1001687551 16738200 210.55.104.94 (16 [105510]) >X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail >User-Agent: Pan/0.10.0.90 (Unix) >X-Comment-To: ALL >Xref: news.panix.com comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:234766 comp.os.linux.advocacy:548381 Hi all, I have prepared a document dicussing the W3C's Patent Policy Framework that is available on my web site at: http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy/draft.xhtml (Plain/print version) and http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy (Web site version) I have also included the document below in the event that my web site becomes inaccessible. Please give the issues I have raised careful consideration and provide the W3C with a comment by Sunday if you have concerns about this issue (by emailing www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org). *** Everyone, this is not an operating system advocacy post. There is no reason Linux and Windows users cannot unite to protect royalty-free web standards *** Regards, Adam Warner W3C and the Promotion of Fee-based Standards for the Web Adam Warner On 16 August 2001 the W3C made public a proposal to substantially change their patent policy framework. Amongst the changes is support for a new licensing model (called RAND) that legitimises the W3C's role in developing and promoting standards that could require the payment of royalties. This is a substantial shift in the philosophical direction of the W3C and should be of extreme concern to anyone who values being able to implement W3C standards in a royalty-free manner. In particular this has profound implications for the support and implementation of future W3C standards by the free software community. It is likely to extinguish free software development and deployment in the areas where the payment of royalties is required. The last call review period closes on 30 September 2001 (two days from the time I am writing this abstract). The W3C is aware of the importance of this issue and states "As the policy has ramifications on the Web community at large, and as the Web Community have consistently helped W3C in its efforts, views from this diverse community are essential."[1] However, as evidence of how well this issue has been publicised, only two relevant public comments have been made to the W3C archive to date. It is a matter of urgency that you make your views known. A final policy is expected from the W3C by February 2002. Please email all comments or suggested corrections to this document to comment@openphd.net. This draft is copyright Adam Warner, 28 September 2001. It may be distributed freely. Table of Contents An Overview of the W3C W3C Recommendation Process RAND Licensing Legitimising RAND Back-door RAND RAND in Action What You Can Do Essential Reference An Overview of the W3C The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C, http://www.w3.org) has been highly successful to date in its pursuit of "leading the Web to its full potential". It actively promotes vendor neutral open and universal standards. Its membership is to be commended for its ability to achieve consensus and coordination with other standards bodies and consortia. The W3C has over 500 member organisations and approximately 66 full-time employees. Even large and influential companies have only one vote at the Advisory Committee level. Tim Berners-Lee, the Director of the W3C (http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee) is also the inventor of the World Wide Web. The W3C is a distinguished organisation producing quality specifications, guidelines, software and validation tools. The W3C is involved in these important areas: * The architecture domain (e.g. DOM, the Document Object Model). * Document formats (e.g. HTML, mathematics and graphics). * Interaction (e.g. multimedia). * Technological and societal issues (e.g. privacy, encryption and the legal issues). * Web accessibility initiatives (e.g. for user agents and authoring tools). Crucially the work of the W3C is available to all. The W3C has an ongoing role in the development of the World Wide Web from purely static document hosting to dynamic documents, application services and automated applications. W3C Recommendation Process The W3C recommendation process typically follows a five step procedure: * Interested parties submit notes to the W3C. * A working draft is produced (these typically come with big disclaimers, and their citing as anything other than work in progress is inappropriate). * Candidate recommendations are made. * A recommendation is proposed (this means the working group has reached consensus and the work has been proposed by the Director to the Advisory Committee for review). * Recommendation. These have been ratified and can be relied upon to not change. The W3C's Patent Policy Framework is at the Working Draft stage. The Working Draft plainly states: "This Last Call period will be the only opportunity for public comment."[2] Remember that "The Last Call period closes 30 September 2001." Furthermore, "As we have begun to use portions of the policy in the day-to-day operations of W3C, we plan to skip the Candidate Recommendation and move directly to an Advisory Committee Review of a Proposed Recommendation draft." Later in this article I will show some of the consequences of this in the release of the Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG 1.0) Recommendation. RAND Licensing This is the new licensing model the W3C is proposing that will allow for non-royalty-free standards to become W3C sanctioned recommendations. RAND stands for "Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory" terms. "RAND means that someone may or may not need to pay a fee, and that it is at the discretion of the license holder."[3] In essence it requires that any company that imposes licensing restriction must impose those restrictions uniformly (the non-discriminatory part of the definition). It appears to follow that non-commercial organisations cannot be given any preferential treatment over commercial organisations since that would be discriminatory licensing. The Working Draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/) (reproduced in the Patent Policy Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ) also states that RAND allows for licensing audits (RAND "may include reasonable, customary terms relating to operation or maintenance of the license relationship such as the following: audit (when relevant to fees), choice of law, and dispute resolution.") Legitimising RAND The W3C states that "Recommendations addressing higher-level services may be appropriate for licensing on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) terms." It is clear that "patent processes will increasingly affect the Web. These factors make it clear that the W3C must have an effective policy to address the inevitable increase in patent issues that will come before the W3C Membership and the development community as a whole." What isn't clear is that the appropriate response is for the W3C to condone RAND licensing terms and to actively promote non-free licenses. As part of the theoretical underpinning of this new policy we are told: "On the other hand, there are other technologies, typically higher level, where it might be appropriate to accept fee-bearing requirements in a Recommendation. It is worth restating that, as of today, W3C is not aware of any fee-based license required for any of its Recommendations. Thus, there is an established history of RF [Royalty Free]." This distinction between lower and higher level technologies appears to be somewhat arbitrary and misleading. Any technology that becomes sufficiently used on the World Wide Web will become a part of everyday infrastructure. For example it might be considered that a moving picture format is sufficiently high level for RAND licensing to be appropriate. But if that moving picture format becomes an integrated baseline technology in future products then the chance of a future fee being associated with that technology could be devastating.[4] The W3C has recognised the pressures from (some of) its members to be able to exploit the potentially lucrative Internet-related patents they have been accumulating. There appears to be a resignation that it may be better for the W3C to promote standards that have non-free conditions attached rather than to receive no consensus on potential recommendations. However by doing this the W3C is diminishing the significant tool they have to encourage royalty-free licensing: their official stamp of approval on Internet technologies and credit to the companies that provide those technologies. The support of the W3C is an important factor for a web-based standard to achieve dominance. A company might be willing to provide their intellectual property on royalty-free terms to receive W3C approval and thus an increasing chance for their sponsored standard to become widely adopted. Now those same companies may think they can get the best of both worlds: A W3C recommendation and the reserved right to charge licensing fees in the future. The prospect of future fees could also have a chilling effect upon free/open source software development. Standards that require licensing fees to implement are, for obvious reasons, totally incompatible with the use of free software. If the free/open source software communities will not be able to rely upon the W3C to pursue royalty-free standards the question has to be raised whether the support of a new institution is appropriate. Given my admiration for all the W3C has contributed to the development of the World Wide Web this would be a tragic development. Back-door RAND If an Advisory Committee Representative to the W3C (each member organisation of the W3C has an ACR) fails to respond to requests for patent disclosures by default "they will commit their Member company to license all Essential Claims needed to implement W3C recommendations on at least RAND terms. This is true whether any personnel from the Member company participates in a WG or not." This means oversight, negligence or perhaps deception is rewarded by requiring the commitment to a RAND license rather than a royalty-free one. If a relevant patent was disclosed at the appropriate time it might have been worked around, or the working group may have even disbanded. For members to face a financial incentive to disclose there should be a deterrent in the form of royalty-free licensing. Few things would be more lucrative than being entitled to charge RAND fees on an established W3C web standard though a simple oversight. RAND in Action Even though RAND is only a Working Draft and public comment has for the first time been solicited (and very shortly closes) the W3C has already begun using RAND in its day-to-day operations. This can be seen in the recently released Scalable Vector Graphics Standard (SVG 1.0): http://www.w3.org/2001/07/SVG10-IPR-statements.html Apple, IBM, Eastman Kodak and Quark have all only been willing to supply their intellectual property or potential future intellectual property under RAND licensing terms. This means that in the event that one of their patents overlap the SVG specification they have reserved the right to start charging royalties or set other licensing restrictions upon a non-discriminatory basis. Presently the SVG specification is free to use. The uncovering of a favourable patent or a legal reinterpretation could change that. For example it is stated: "Kodak does not believe it currently has any essential claims that fall within the specification of the Recommendation as currently understood and interpreted by Kodak for implementors of SVG. However, Kodak hereby identifies U.S. Patent 5,459,819 and affirms that in the event that any claim of this patent is interpreted as an essential claim within the specification of the Recommendation in its current or later amended form, Kodak agrees to provide a RAND License as set forth in the previous paragraph." The significant change here is that Kodak (as a particular example) are not giving standards users an assurance that they will be able to continue to use SVG on a royalty-free basis in the future. A windfall judgement and we could have a problem of GIF-style proportions--even though SVG is a W3C sanctioned standard and the company potentially doing the enforcing helped create the standard for people to freely use in the first place. Users could feel far more secure that SVG will remain a free standard if for example Kodak said that in the event that any claim of their patent is interpreted as an essential claim within the specification of the Recommendation in its current or later amended form, Kodak agrees to provide a royalty-free license. What You Can Do 1. As a matter of urgency, send a comment to www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org before 30 September 2001. You can check out the current archive of responses here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/. 2. Spread the word about this issue as soon as possible. 3. Ask companies that are members of the W3C to give an undertaking to only support the development of royalty-free standards. This will require significant change to the Working Draft of the W3C's Patent Policy Framework. 4. Do you have a professional relationship with any of the authors or companies of the Working Draft? If so it may be appropriate to send a message to the relevant organisation. These are the listed authors of the Working Draft: * Michele Herman, Microsoft, micheleh@microsoft.com * Scott Peterson, Hewlett-Packard, scott_k_peterson@hp.com * Tony Piotrowski, Philips, tony.piotrowski@philips.com * Barry Rein, Pennie & Edmonds (for W3C), barry@pennie.com * Daniel Weitzner, W3C/MIT, djweitzner@w3.org * Helene Plotka Workman, Apple Computer, plotka@apple.com It is also stated here: http://www.w3.org/2001/08/patentnews that "W3C Members Apple, AT&T, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, ILOG, Microsoft, Nortel Networks, The Open Group, Philips Electronics, Reuters, and Sun worked on this draft together with W3C Team members." Essential Reference W3C Patent Policy Framework, W3C Working Draft 16 August 2001: http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/ Backgrounder for W3C Patent Policy Framework: http://www.w3.org/2001/08/patentnews Patent Policy Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ SVG 1.0 Patent Statements: http://www.w3.org/2001/07/SVG10-IPR-statements.html Notes [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/08/patentnews [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/ [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/08/patentnews [4] For example, a scenario where the majority of future web appliances included this decoding ability in their ROM. From tompoe at renonevada.net Sat Sep 29 10:26:51 2001 From: tompoe at renonevada.net (tom poe) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] W3C ridiculous new policy on patents (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01092910265100.17529@aether> On Saturday 29 September 2001 00:38, Jay Sulzberger wrote: > Hi all, > > I have prepared a document dicussing the W3C's Patent Policy Framework > that is available on my web site at: > > http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy/draft.xhtml > (Plain/print version) > > and > > http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy > (Web site version) > > I have also included the document below in the event that my web site > becomes inaccessible. > > Please give the issues I have raised careful consideration and provide > the W3C with a comment by Sunday if you have concerns about this issue > (by emailing www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org). > Hello: This is NOT an issue for discussion. Any organization that promotes fee-based software, is a proprietary firm. W3C.org is fraudulently presenting itself to the Public, and especially, to those developers that are now working for a profit-making institution without full disclosure, or compensation for their work. Good By, W3C.com. And, I was looking forward to working with Batik. Too Bad. Tom From schoen at loyalty.org Sat Sep 29 10:35:20 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] W3C Message-ID: <20010929103520.A1049@zork.net> I'm glad to know about the W3C patent policy, and I might submit a comment, but can someone show how this relates to Dmitry Sklyarov? -- 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 kmself at ix.netcom.com Sat Sep 29 15:50:21 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Fwd: Publishers offer reward for reports of copyright, DMCA violations] Message-ID: <20010929155021.A25496@navel.introspect> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010929/f832fd21/attachment.pgp From jays at panix.com Sat Sep 29 23:51:58 2001 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My letter to the W3C: Please do not allow any W3C standard to be encumbered by patents. Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 02:42:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Jay Sulzberger To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org Cc: Jay Sulzberger Subject: Please do not allow any W3C standard to be encumbered by patents. If a "standard" is not freely licensed, then, with complete effectiveness, it locks out free software. Up until now, the W3C has supported a free market in web software by its old settled policy of requiring that all standards be free standards, in a sense close to that of "free software". A move to trammeled standards, in addition to the complete suppression of free software competitors, would also do grave damage to all but the few companies with the patent departments and lawyers to fight the non-market bureaucratic and judicial battles such non-free standards would induce. Thus any non-free standard does not only eliminate free software, it eliminates all but a few players, whose sole claim to domination is their ability to pay for patent filings and lawyers' fees and gifts to legislators. Please do not allow the World Wide Web Consortium to be so crudely captured by such a small group of companies, which companies did not invent the Web, and which today do not control it. Jay Sulzberger For purposes of identification and free advertising only: Jay Sulzberger Corresponding Secretary LXNY LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization. http://www.lxny.org From ilya at theIlya.com Sun Sep 30 11:18:36 2001 From: ilya at theIlya.com (Ilya Volynets) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:54 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My letter to the W3C: Please do not allow any W3C standard to be encumbered by patents. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20010930181839.7607.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hmm... This definitely doesn't dirrectly realte to freeing Dmitry, but oh my, it caused real responce. Or at least big part of responce (mail is pouring in www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org at rate of 5 msg/min). Maybe there should be some freedom@zork.net list, where all concerned people would sign up to receive messages like this? Ilya. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAju3Yf8ACgkQtKh84cA8u2mZ+gCfeBD28LCkU8TFw5HMbi0pta/s tfcAn0GAXs1XdY9zA+MKZVB8HfDqt+Xy =LeN3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From kmself at ix.netcom.com Sun Sep 30 12:00:22 2001 From: kmself at ix.netcom.com (Karsten M. Self) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] My letter to the W3C: Please do not allow any W3C standard to be encumbered by patents. In-Reply-To: <20010930181839.7607.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com>; from ilya@theIlya.com on Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 11:18:36AM -0700 References: <20010930181839.7607.qmail@gateway.total-knowledge.com> Message-ID: <20010930120022.A13453@navel.introspect> on Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 11:18:36AM -0700, Ilya Volynets (ilya@theIlya.com) wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hmm... This definitely doesn't dirrectly realte to > freeing Dmitry, but oh my, it caused real responce. > Or at least big part of responce (mail is pouring in > www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org at rate of 5 msg/min). > Maybe there should be some freedom@zork.net list, where all > concerned people would sign up to receive messages like this? There's interest in finding a spot to host a "free software law" issues list. I'm currently looking for hosts, I can moderate it. Who's an admin contact at zork? Other options include EFF and Crynwr, the current host of the FSB (free software business) list. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://frotz.zork.net/pipermail/free-sklyarov/attachments/20010930/cefb7fc8/attachment.pgp From schoen at loyalty.org Sun Sep 30 16:01:04 2001 From: schoen at loyalty.org (Seth David Schoen) Date: Fri Jul 8 22:08:55 2005 Subject: [free-sklyarov] Events? Message-ID: <20010930160104.H10371@zork.net> I know there may be a bit of a lull now because there won't be anything going on in court until November. Although it's nice if people would like to fight the DMCA, the SSSCA, UCITA, software patents, restrictions on cryptography, and so on -- and I hope you will -- it would be great if there could be actual Sklyarov-relevant things continuing in the meantime. Does anyone have any plans? I'll try to get in touch with the new lawyer sometime soon and find out whether he has any recommendations. -- 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)