Fallout From Def Con: Ebook Hacker Arrested by FBI 367
Richard and many other people sent in news about Dmitry
Sklyarov, a programmer at Russian software company Elcomsoft, who was arrested after giving a talk at Def Con 9 in Las Vegas titled "eBook Security: Theory and Practice." Elcomsoft publishes a program to remove restrictions from encrypted PDF files, which has severely annoyed Adobe Corporation. Adobe was apparently responsible for the arrest, charging that Elcomsoft is violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by publishing the software and giving the presentation at Def Con. (The presentation, by the way, is great - he compares the claimed features of ebook protection schemes with their actual features.) Also at Def Con 9: Hacking for Human Rights.
Re:damn dmac (Score:2)
Another win for the Democrats apparently.
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:2)
s/occuring/occurring/g
s/persuit/pursuit/g
s/imprisioned/imprisoned/g
s/want: The
When Adobe acts like this... (Score:4)
Re:Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:5)
It would be rather ironic if a Russian citizen would end up fighting an American law restricting his free speech.
Yes, DMCA = Legitimization of a Corp Police State (Score:3)
Yes this moves us ever closer to a corporate police state. Some companies, Wackenhut [wackenhut.com] for example, are even positioning themselves to have their own police forces (they already run several prisons).
----
Re:READ THE ARTICLE (Score:2)
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.
Re:I hope (Score:2)
...phil
Oh piffle (Score:2)
Hint: Here in Arizona, an outfit called "The Baptist Foundation" scammed *MILLIONS* of dollars from unwitting retirees across the country who thought they were supporting a religious-related investment fund, people who are now broke and living on Social Security. Guess what: Not *ONE* of the criminals responsible is currently serving time.
-E
Amnesty International's report on USA (Score:2)
Well, click here anyhow. [amnesty.org]
Let's see, the USA tortures prisoners, executes probably innocent prisoners and prisoners who are mentally retarded or who were children at the time of the crime, police brutality is rampant especially against racial minorities, children are often thrown into jail cells with brutal hardened criminals, children held in isolation for months at a time, widespread rape of female prisoners by male prison guards, regularly denies foreign prisoners the right to contact their consulate for legal representation, ...
Of course many other countries are much worse. While we do beat our protesters and frame them for murder [amnesty.org], there are no widespread "Disappearances" of critics of the government. Indeed, a brief search of the Internet will find you hundreds of thousands of people criticising the government. In many countries, criticisms such as these that we are making here would be sufficient to have you "disappeared".
-E
The time has come to boycott Adobe. (Score:2)
I have had entirely enough of this new adversarial stance of theirs.
Let me just delete /opt/Acrobat4... Their UNIX software sucks anyway. The rest of it isn't much better.
Any software company that enforces or relies upon the DMCA should go on our blacklist!
Re:Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:2)
1) Speed limits in the US are about the same as speed limits in Europe, other then the German autobahns. However we measure in miles, not Kilometers, so 55 is about the same as 100, which is a typical speed for back roads. Major roads are faster.
2) There are arugements both ways, but in most of europe the same laws exist, they are just less enforced.
3) Accually this is a local issue. (the feds get overinvoved, but since the 18th ammendment was repealed the feds have no power to force it. (Where Jack Danials in brewed it is illegal drink drink alcohol at any age)
4) State issue. I don't want others on the road with alcohol around though. Though I agree goverment should get out.
Re:More importantly. . . (Score:2)
Re:Here's mine (Score:2)
I am writing to express my disappointment that Adobe would have a person arrested for pointing out flaws in one of it's products. I refer, of course, to the case of Dmitry Sklyarov, who gave a lecture on eBook security at the recent DefCon security convention.
As a customer who cut my chops on Illustrator 1.1, it saddens me to think that Adobe now cares so little about the quality of it's heretofore-excellent products that it seeks to harrass and intimidate those who point out their weaknesses. Some will call it 'hacking' since it involved disabling a security routine, but I see it for what it is - pointing out a flaw in a product. I am thankful to him that he exposed a weakness, thus protecting me from it.
Any company that would have someone arrested for protecting me can no longer enjoy my business.
Sincerely,
Don Negro
Re:damn dmac (Score:2)
Absolutely Incredible (Score:5)
Some of the "security" algorithms this white-hat whistleblower has exposed are incredibly poor. Here are some samples:
If I was a shareholder in any of these companies I would be demanding an investigation. This isn't just shoddy, it's an outright scam! None of these companies should be getting away with this. The customer is being ripped off, yet these shyster companies have the NERVE to use the law against the whistleblowers.
I'm disgusted.
No, Tell Adobe -- really! (Score:2)
2) He's going to be painted as a "hacker" having been caught at DefCon- they're not going to paint this as a civil rights violation that it is, it's "a criminal being put to justice under the DMCA". It's what transpired with 2600- do you REALLY think this poor SOB is going to get a fair trial under those conditions?
While you're at it, tell everyone you know about this- including Congresspeople. Explain to them what is going on and why it's such a bad thing.
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:3)
The person answering on the main line said I was the third person who called, and he actually put me on hold to find out who in Corporate was actually supposed to get these calls. So keep calling!
"mirror" of elmconsoft, and download (Score:4)
Thanks to google, here's a mirror of the http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q
--
Kevin Nathanson, Adobe Product Mgr. (Score:2)
CNN says the guy is being transferred to Santa Clara County, so Adobe can have its way with him.
Re:If tables were reversed? (Score:2)
Re:use gv instead of Acrobat :-) (Score:2)
xpdf supports hyperlinks, but doesn't yet appear to support bookmarks.
Re:How can we help? (Score:3)
Re:The time has come to boycott Adobe. (Score:2)
Re:Hit them where it hurts--stock price (Score:2)
- People may cease to require its product/service
- A superior technology emerges
- (Patents not withstanding) Someone else may produce a better or cheaper version
So a corporation should always be prepared for any investments to either be unsucessful from the start or for revenue from an investment to decrease or cease.Copyright Owner's Permission (Score:4)
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:4)
You can find your congresscritter at Congress.Org [congress.org] and inserting your zip code into the proper fields. When you do this, be sure to include your name, address and zip code in the letter.
Alternatively, you could send the following (NB, I haven't checked for spelling mistakes):
Dear (Senator/Representative) N.
... activity which would otherwise be protected under the First Amendment and the traditions of academic freedom. It is apparent that the DMCA must be changed or perhaps repealed.
I am writing today to express my displeasure concerning the way the FBI has conducted itself in regards to Dmitry Sklyarov and Elcomsoft.
Mr. Sklyarov gave a talk at a computer security conference on the security weaknesses of Adobe's eBook product, which were apparently easily discovered and exploited. Instead of thanking Mr. Sklyarov for his work, Adobe complained to the FBI and Mr. Sklyarov was detained for violating the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
I believe that copyright holders must have methods to secure their works. But as is obvious thanks to Elcomsoft's work, the protection afforded by Adobe's eBook products is easily overcome. There is no doubt that THOUSANDS of people have been taking advantage of this, silently, and thus ripping off legitimate copyright holders. Elcomsoft has only vocalized what was already occuring.
This is not the first time that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act has been abused like this, and it won't be the last. In its short life we have seen many security consultants and even college and university professors threatened with prosecution under DMCA for exposing weaknesses in computer security
I look foreward to your position on this issue.
Sincerely, (name, address including zip)
Re:Copyright Owner's Permission (Score:2)
Actually, this is not true. Only authoring houses and software/hardware manufacturers need to be licensed to use CSS. Individual copyright owners have no license with the DVDCCA, and are not contractually restricted.
I actually sent email to the DVDCCA email address, asking them if, as a copyright holder interested in publishing a DVD, I needed to sign a license with the DVDCCA. The reply (from John Hoy!) said that no, all I needed to do was request CSS encryption when I sent my master to the authoring facility.
So, one could make a VERY strong case that any individual who has published a CSS encrypted DVD has the legal authority to authorize anyone and everyone to decrypt the DVD containing their own copyrighted material by any and all means, including DeCSS.
Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:5)
Now the publication of a tool to circumvent the security of PDF documents, that's another story. Does anywone know which he was arrested for?
Yours truly,
Mr. X
...stupid stupid FBI...
Re:Copyright Owner's Permission (Score:2)
Excellent point, dude!
The actual language of DMCA doesn't actually explicitly specify whose authorization is needed, but up to now everyone has inferred that it must be the copyright owner. IMHO, that's one of the problems with the DeCSS case: AFAIK only the MPAA companies happen to make CSS-protected DVDs, so so far, no one other than MPAA has been in a position to authorize descrambling of any CSS-protected DVD. But with Adobe Acrobat (or any other authoring tool that, unlike CSS, is available to the public), this is not necessarily the case.
OTOH, there's another possibility. In the case of CSS, we know that DVD CCA licenses CSS information with a lot of restrictions; I think you actually have to sign a piece of paper to get them to work with you. It is possible that the Adobe tool that creates these scrambled documents, may have a term in its license, that states that the user of the tool may not give permission to anyone else to descramble the documents created with the tool. If that is indeed the case (I haven't read the license to check this), then maybe this is actually an example of someone being arrested for violating the terms of a contract rather than violating DMCA. Which then brings up the obvious question of whether or not the victim ever actually agreed to be bound by this contract.
I think the truth is that the vagueness of the whole "without authorization" clause of DMCA is going to cause a lot of problems. The common interpretation is that it is the copyright owner, but the true intent of the people who purchased this law, was something else. They wanted authorization to not come from the copyright owner, but from the .. uh .. "owner" (inventor? patent
owner/licensee? something else?) of whatever "technological measure" was used
to protect the work in question. If anyone ever creates a CSS-protected
DVD without getting a CSS license from DVD CCA, then MPAA is going to
have the same problem.
Look for this point to be addressed in future patches to DMCA.
---
Re:Copyright Owner's Permission (Score:3)
Agreed. If the "without authorization" refers to the copyright owner (and so far, everyone thinks that it does), then anyone who uses DMCA to prevent people from making compatable readers, also has to be damned careful to somehow keep anyone from making compatable writers as well. And DMCA (nor any other law that I've heard of) has nothing to prevent this from happening, unless the scrambling algorithm uses a patent.
And if they allow others to use their "authorized" writer (as is the case with Adobe and CSS-protected DVD manufacturers), it has to be under a special license that contains verbage to work around this DMCA hole. For example, in Adobe's case, they would have to offer the writing software only under a license (which means, in most people's opinion's, that it could not be sold through middlemen (retail stores, mail order stores, etc) in non-UCITA states, but rather, only available directly from Adobe with a contract signed prior to software being made available) where the purchaser of the software would have to agree to something like this:
I suspect that Adobe's software does not have anything like that in its EULA, and I also suspect that people are able to purchase and use Adobe's software without agreeing to whatever EULA they have, anyway.(I also suspect that even the CSS license doesn't have this covered adequately, but I don't know for sure, since none of the CSS-protected DVDs that I've bought, came with any statement that explains under what circumstances/equipment I am authorized to watch the movie.)
---
Re:DMCA = Legitimization of a Corporate Police Sta (Score:2)
Copyright violations can also be a criminal violation.
---------------------------------------------
Re:You CAN'T buy Adobe products! (Score:2)
In my experience, there's a sentence or paragraph along those lines in most licences these days. One thing I installed a while back (I forget what exactly) even laid claim to the manuals in the licence.
I don't think that sort of thing would stand up in court if it ever went that far, but it's a demonstration of how far some people are trying to push this sort of "you've only bought the right to use it, and you're lucky we gave you that much" thing.
Cheers,
Tim
Re:Yes, DMCA = Legitimization of a Corp Police Sta (Score:2)
Re:You CAN'T buy Adobe products! (Score:2)
At several Federal Court decisions (see Novell v. NTC [harvard.edu]) has held that the sale of media containing software is the sale of a copy under the UCC to which the First Sale doctrine of Copyright Law applies. Quoting that decision:
So, yes, Virginia, you do buy a copy of a copyrighted work when you buy software. Any language to the contrary in the license agreement is unenforcable as a matter of law. (Except perhaps in UCITA states.)
Dear Adobe: (Score:5)
Please become an Acrobat and stick your PDF up your own ass using some good Live Motion. Then see how fast you can Type on Call for you Illustrator. Then with it in you ass please go to the local Photoshop and laydown on the Page Maker untill you Indesign. At this point you will need Type Management and have no Postscript to bail yourself out.
Incredible (Score:5)
Instead of being arrested, he should be given a cut of the money the goverment fines adobe and its security partners for. The REAL criminals in cases like this where the money grubbing BS is exposed are often the companies themselves.
And I can count the number of times the DMCA has been used against real criminals on the palm of my hand. Never.
Luckly, slashdot's got a bunch of folks who actually make tech decisions. Let's try and wipe out these security plugins, and make it crystal clear to Adobe that they should be spending more time improving their products rather than going after the guy who blew the whistle on their BS. Call them today, again in a week, again in a month.
USA extending its law beyond its borders (Score:5)
There was a time when the West condemned the Communists governments for heavy-handed treatment of those who committed "economic crimes against the state", holding up the free market model as an example (including its civil courts as a resolution mechanism).
Who needs to wait for a world government -- its already here -- just open a corporation, make the right size contributions to your favourite party and you too will be "given" the right to be heard.
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:2)
Re:yes (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:2)
I-95 right by me and to the south travels through cities, with on and off ramps, and is 65mph, 104.6kph. North of me, or on the other major road (the Florida Turnpike), the limit is 70mph, 112.6kph. Traffic usually does about 85mph, 136.7kph, and there are plenty of places in the US where 85 is the posted limit.
I only ever see 55 as the limit on highways in construction zones, and it's a temporary limit then.
--
Evan
Re:off topic (Score:2)
A cop challenging you to a race in an unmarked car.. that *might* be grounds for entrapment. Then again, they may argue you would have done it anyway.
Entrapment is when, like, some undercover agent tries to get you to come rob a bank with him, you agree, the he arrests you for bank robbery.
Re:Entrapment? (Score:4)
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:2)
1. Why do you believe that Adobe's rights have been violated?
2. What do you believe the average consumers rights concerning use of a companies IP is?
3a. Where is the line between you as a consumers rights, and Adobe and a companies rights?
3b. Which are more important?
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:2)
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:2)
2. What do you believe the average consumers rights concerning use of a companies IP is?
What is granted as the legally binding terms of sale/license. That one was easy.
Yes, but don't you believe that there is a certain inalienable right to the freedom of speach to be able to talk about any problems you find in a product. Now I do believe that you can give up such a right through NDAs and whatnot, but firstly I don't believe that NDAs can be on shrinkwrap license agreements, and especially in more recent cases where there was no NDA but the law of the land. In effect the government is mandating that we have an automatic NDA about any encypted product we may buy.
48 hours (Score:2)
yes (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:2)
If the guy developed the software in the US, it should be protected. If he gave a talk about it, it is protected. If he published it IN RUSSIA, then it is up to the Russian authorities to determine if he broke the law.
Of course, it should be no surprise. If the UK can demand that the US eliminate the 2nd amendment, and the US can demand Columbia etc. stop sending drugs into the US, what's to say that it's not okay to arrest people for breaking US laws in other countries? The logic almost follows, and in this instance, given the supra-national corporation (and although Adobe ain't much, I'm sure some developing nations would absolutely love that much cash) that is at the heart of this matter, this is likely to become more common.
Bleh. Mod me -1, a ranting, poorly written diatribe.
Re:DMCA = Legitimization of a Corporate Police Sta (Score:2)
Now, I don't have too much of a problem with that when there are two different aggrieved parties. Or when something clearly causes both a civil tort and breaks a rational, criminal law (this latter to differentiate from the DMCA).
What is new and dangerous is precisely what you have pointed out: corporate enforcement. In this instance, the Adobe Corp. was the only company to potentially suffer a loss. Criminal law is supposed to protect society. The DMCA does not achieve this effect. It protects (in this instance) one specific member of society. The case will likely be tried very similarly as one that Adobe would bring themselves, with only two differences: a change in evidentiary standard (which is so wildly open to speculation on the part of judges and juries as to be inconsequential, and therefore a totally moot difference) and the possibility of jail-time. Ooh. There's the biggie.
Copy a CD, go to jail (after all, you've kept Britney from getting another boob job).
Now, it's time for everyone who said "maybe we were too hard on Adobe for the Killustrator thing" to change your mind again. Adobe sucks. They always have. They always will.
Re:More importantly. . . (Score:2)
Is Russia US-jurisdiction? (Score:2)
If it is argued that the crime was commited on the Internet, and thus _everywhere_, what do I have to do to make sure my work is legit? Block access to my servers for ALL countries where the action is illegal?
Does this mean that I after publishing something on the Internet I may get arrested the next time I go to [insert name of country here] because the published material was illegal in that country?
What would the US think if an american reporter published information regarded as blasphemy in Iran, got arrested there while visiting the country?
Re:Adobe responsible for the arrest? (Score:2)
The complaint can be found here [usaondca.com] and the US DOJ press release about the case is here [usaondca.com]
BTW (Score:3)
it was the FBI and the article says that he was detained, it makes no mention of an actual 'arrest'.. there's a big difference, they can detain you without any real reason, but they can only do it for so long.
jeebus cripes...
...dave
Adobe responsible for the arrest? (Score:4)
last i checked they were a software company, not a government agency.
could we please clarify what government agency actually made the arrest and on what basis?
...dave
Re:pure horseshit (Score:3)
2) What are the Bill of Rights and Consitution for? Toilet paper lately. 4th amendment has been gone for years - "war on Drugs" exception. 10th is ignored, 2nd is under attacik... and just TRY to use the 5th... see how far that gets you...
Re:Mirrored copy (Score:4)
Snail Mail... (Score:3)
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/contact.html
San Jose Corporate Headquarters
Adobe Systems Incorporated
345 Park Avenue
San Jose, California 95110-2704
USA
-grendel drago
I hope (Score:3)
It looks like they knew this would happen (Score:4)
"I should say that it will not work," Katalov explained on comp.text.pdf. "We'll just move our site to another ISP, in another country (where there is no Digitial Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA)). And/or make our software available for free, under the GNU license."
Re:READ THE POSTING (Score:3)
and how valid is the DMCA in russia? it's perfectly legit software, the DMCA is a yank law, not a russian law.
why do americans seem to think that the laws they make also go for other countries?
//rdj
DMCA gives companies right to seize property (Score:3)
Pretty creepy!
Here [directv.com] is the press release about the first such case:
http://www.directv.com/press/pressdel/0,1112,41
Mirrored copy (Score:5)
I have a copy mirrored here [fibrespeed.net] (in Canada).
cf. FibreSpeed [fibrespeed.net]
Re:DMCA = Legitimization of a Corporate Police Sta (Score:5)
For example: knowing how to make a cable TV descrambler was never illegal -- using one to get free cable was.
READ THE ARTICLE (Score:4)
The reason for the arrest has been cited as being the Advanced eBook Processor and his speech at DefCon 9.
----
Re:The time has come to boycott Adobe. (Score:4)
adobe = adoobey
acrobat = acr0wfat
Illustrator = Illustrangler
kinda ironic (Score:4)
...that the news article on 'Hacking for human rights ' mentions that
"Hackers in the United States and other countries where abuses are infrequent should not be complacent" ....
Mind you it's worth checking Amnesty International [amnesty-usa.org] to see their comments on human rights in the USA.
Re:Don't Forget.... (Score:3)
The best way I've found to contact your elected officials is via Microsoft's FIN ("Freedom To Innovate Network"). They'll print out and snail mail the correspondence for you. Since they promise to mail, it would be a fedral offense for them to read this mail, figure it wasn't in MS's best interest, and throw it in
You have to agree to sign up for passport
You can send mail once per day per official.
Make sure to un-check the box that says they can read it -- you don't want MS to know what you're using them for
http://www.freetoinnovate.com/contact/default.a
Re:USA extending its law beyond its borders (Score:3)
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:4)
To Whom it may concern,
As a user of your products I have become very offended today. I feel like your company is trying to insult my intellegence. Your company has choosen to enforce the DMCA by arresting Dmitry Sklyarov.
By arresting Dmitry you are sending a message that you will allow your product to continue using substandard security. You should be applauding Dmitry for showing that your software needs improvement. As a user of eBook I am happy that Dmitry has shown that the security can be broken. Do you actually think your customers want you to hide these problems so only the bad guys can get our data?
Would you want to continue using eBook if you know from now own Adobe will use scare tactics to keep security holes hidden? Put yourselves in your users shoes. I am not going to use eBook from here on out. I will be looking for another product until your views on the matters change. Not only do I feel you should change your decision you must also voice out against the DMCA. From here on out I will never use any products that support the DMCA or any other plan to take away citizens rights.
Thanks for listening,
One more upset customer
Encryption, my ass (Score:3)
"All HTML pages and supplementary files are compressed with deflate algorithm from ZLIB"
"Compressed data are encrypted by XOR-ing each byte with every byte of the string "encrypted", which is the same as XOR with constant byte"
This is totally mindboggling if true. Are we saying that people can XOR their data stream with a *single byte*, advertise it as "virtually 100% burglar-proof" and then get listened to when they complain about evol haxors cracking their encryption?
Re:Copyright Owner's Permission (Score:3)
It gets better. You can claim that *your* protection method is regular PDFs and sue Adobe because Acrobat reader is used without *your* authority.
People, try actually reading the DMCA some time. When you actually understand what all the clauses mean, you'll laugh long and hard. It is mutually-assured destruction for copyright law. *Anybody* can make a program illegal just by writing a work for it and saying 'I don't give you permission.'
use gv instead of Acrobat :-) (Score:4)
Side note: gv works just as well as Acrobat to view PDF files from netscape as a helper app (and PS too, of course). Just add "gv %s" in as the application to handle the file types for PostScript and PDF(edit->preferences->helperapps or something like that). Personally I like gv's navigational structure better anyway.
(Well, /path/to/gv if it isn't in your path, naturally.)
Very rarely I will run across a document that gv just doesn't like but that Acrobat displays fine. This happens maybe once a month, if I'm looking at a fair amount of pdf's.
I think the software dependencies for gv are ghostscript and whatever dependencies it has but I'm not sure. apt-get or rpmfind.net [rpmfind.net] or your ports tree are your friends in that regard.
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Re:Adobe responsible for the arrest? (Score:5)
My guess is Adobe contacted the FBI, told them what the guy did, and had their lawyers politely explain to the Feds how that violates the DMCA. Now if I were to contact the FBI and demand they arrest the guy who DDoS'd my DSL line a few months ago (I do know who it is, and have ample evidence) they'd laugh at me.
Government for the corporations, by the corporations, and of the corporations.
c.
Not to mention consumer protection... (Score:5)
What about consumer protection laws - this is misleading conduct on the behalf of the companies involved.
Ross Anderson on Suppressing Knowledge (Score:3)
Rather worrying - where does this criminalisation of knowledge end?
Ross wrote "Security Engineering" (a mighty tome, should be of interest to many Slashdotters, plenty of info about it on his site).
See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak no Evil (Score:4)
Civil vs Criminal (Score:4)
Re:Hit them where it hurts--stock price (Score:3)
Market economics mean that the value of this companies' technology is not the devlopment costs. Rather, it's the ability to be usefully to end users.
Poor encryption is not useful, and therefore, these companies should loose value.
If Ford make a shoddy car, is it ok for people to tell others, even though it might hurt their stock price?
If XYZ, Inc., invented electronic paper that lost all it's data after one month, but had just started shipping it, shouldn't investors know about their scam?
I think so.
Quick Poll (Score:3)
* Attempted censorship. A thousand people immediately buy the book and/or see the movie.
* DCMA. A thousand people that knew nothing about CSS immediatly download DeCSS and buy a T-Shirt with the code.
* DCMA (again). A thousand people immediatly attempt to download the slashdotted powerpoint show.
Am I missing something regarding the effeciveness of these sorts of laws? (Other than, of course, ruining the lives a few individuals who are made the scapegoats.)
Re:More importantly. . . (Score:4)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:BTW (Score:5)
Under normal circumstances the authorities cannot detain citizens without arresting them, since doing so is paramount to an arrest. However, this case involves a non-citizen being barred from boarding a plane at an airport, and his detention was merely a temporary condition prior to his arrest.
Re:Entrapment? (Score:5)
The crime here is not cracking the "protection" but sharing the method used to perform the crack. While it is not a crime to describe in detail how to kill someone (if you do it without being inciteful), how to manufacture drugs, how to build a bomb, how to cheat on your wife, how to molest children, it is a crime to discuss methods of cracking anti-consumer "protections" on copyright restricted materials on digital media. This Russian guy broke that blatantly illegal law on US soil (using information he obtained at home in Russia where he may not have been violating any laws). Ergo, he gets arrested.
To quote Bulldog, "This sucks. This is total BS."
Spelling mistakes removed (Score:4)
I am writing today to express my displeasure concerning the way Adobe has conducted itself in regards to Dmitry Sklyarov and Elcomsoft. It would seem that, rather than thanking Mr. Sklyarov for exposing serious flaws in your products, and then correcting them, you have chosen to pursue a course of litigation and intimidation via the misuse of law enforcement.
I believe that copyright holders must have methods to secure their works. But as is obvious thanks to Elcomsoft's work, the protection afforded by Adobe's eBook products is easily overcome. There is no doubt that THOUSANDS of people have been taking advantage of this, silently, and thus ripping off legitimate copyright holders. Elcomsoft has only vocalized what was already occurring.
As an Adobe customer, here is what I want: The pursuit of better products, and not more litigation. We have enough of that already. I fear one day that my children may be imprisoned for pointing out flaws in corporate products, or for engaging in legitimate research of code and computer products. Perhaps, if you have children, they will be too. So I urge Adobe to "back off" as it were and refocus the money that would have been spent on lawyers into developing a more secure and better eBook system.
Thank-you for your time, and I look forward to your reply!
DMCA = Legitimization of a Corporate Police State? (Score:4)
If I were part of a company screwing over someone else's copyright or exploiting their crappy code, my company would be subject to a law suit. I can't imagine we'd all be hauled off in the paddy wagon. But an individual doing this can be jailed?
I'm not being sarcastic [this once]. I seriously don't get this.
[For my money, you should be subject to arrest for giving your conference such an overly-dramatic title. Hacking for human rights, my arse.] [ridiculopathy.com]
But the greater evil here is clear to see. In the graphics world Adobe = Microsoft, a single company holding the reigns on all of the industry's mission-critical tools. Time to get a better text tool for GIMP and get it to the people.
Tell Adobe (Score:5)
Don't just lament how wrong this is. TELL Adobe what you think of them and their actions. But PLEASE, be polite. Messages like "j00 suX0r Adobe!" get thrown in the PLOINK-bin faster than you can blink, and without a second thought. But a well-written message detailing why you are not happy with them, and what they can do about it, would be most helpful. Here are some PR contacts at adobe:
jcristof@adobe.com
dstyerwa@adobe.com
lvacante@adobe.com
ablatchf@adobe.com
skrueger@adobe.com
gbabbit@adobe.com
wsaso@adobe.com
Don't forget to give them a ring on the tele:
(408) 536-6000
And lastly, we have the executive's email addys (I think. I have not verified these addresses, so they may not work. The ones above will for sure though.)
jwarnock@adobe.com
cgeschke@adobe.com
bchizen@adobe.com
snarayen@adobe.com
mdemo@adobe.com
gfreeman@adobe.com
cpouliot@adobe.com
jstephens@adobe.com
ttownsley@adobe.com
mdyrdahl@adobe.com
blamkin@adobe.com
Go out there and tell them! Corporations are run by people, just like us. Sometimes those people do very stupid things and need correction; that is what I plan to do, and everyone who reads this message should do the same.
-- russ
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:5)
==
Dear Sir/Madam:
I am writing today to express my displeasure concerning the way Adobe has conducted itself in regards to Dmitry Sklyarov and Elcomsoft. It would seem that, rather than thanking Mr. Sklyarov for exposing serious flaws in your products, and then correcting them, you have chosen to persue a course of litigation and intimidation via the misuse of law enforcement.
I believe that copyright holders must have methods to secure their works. But as is obvious thanks to Elcomsoft's work, the protection afforded by Adobe's eBook products is easily overcome. There is no doubt that THOUSANDS of people have been taking advantage of this, silently, and thus ripping off legitimate copyright holders. Elcomsoft has only vocalized what was already occuring.
As an Adobe customer, here is what I want: The persuit of better products, and not more litigation. We have enough of that already. I fear one day that my children may be imprisioned for pointing out flaws in corporate products, or for engaging in legitimate research of code and computer products. Perhaps, if you have children, they will be too. So I urge Adobe to "back off" as it were and refocus the money that would have been spent on lawyers into developing a more secure and better eBook system.
Thank-you for your time, and I look forward to yout reply!
-- [INSERT NAME]
==
Happy now? You lazy people
-- russ
Hit them where it hurts--stock price (Score:5)
While I don't advocate and don't intend to cause harm to anyone's person or Adobe's physical plant, I would shed no tears if Adobe's HQ burned to the ground, preferably with the decision-maker responsible for this inside.
Re:BTW (Score:3)
Why don't they hold these hacker conferences in a free country, like Canada? See also: OpenBSD
Canada doesn't have Nazi laws like you do.
Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
Section 8
Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.
Section 9
Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.
Section 10
Everyone has the right on arrest or detention
(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.
Another mirror (Score:3)
Last time I threw up a quick mirror in response to a Slashdot story I ended up as a "J.Doe" on the DVDCCA case in California. Not sure how they think Californian law works in the UK, but there you go...
When will these people learn that you can't pout the toothpaste back in the tube? *sigh*
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:Tell Adobe (Score:3)
Last try
1. gfreeman:
2. blamkin [love the userid! ]:
3. ttownsley: (reason: 550 5.1.1 ttownsley@inner-relay-1.adobe.com... User unknown) (expanded from: ttownsley@adobe.com)--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:Absolutely Incredible (Score:4)
The DMCA is a legal crutch for lazy companies that can't be bothered to design truly secure solutions. Or perhaps more honestly, for companies that know that consumers would balk at the inconvenience of using truly secure DVDs, etc., but still want to pretend that they're protecting something.
Parallel case? (Score:4)
Move that case into this post-DMCA case we live in today, and you would likely see the publisher of the magazine thrown in jail for creating an anti-circumvention device, and the PR people saying that this is a great victory for everyone because those evil hacker people were thrown in jail. Of course they'd also neglect to say that this information would probably become much more wide-spread than it otherwise would have been, and that a lot of innocent people would be adversely affected because the manufacturer would have little motivation to fix a glaring security flaw.
The result? The flaws are not fixed and there is the possibility of even more damage. People still know the flaws, but the problem is not fixed.
D - M - C - A
As Stallman said (Score:4)
As Richard Stallman said before:
He was talking about DMCA and the new Free Software laws in other countries.
So, if there's nothing like DMCA in your country, fight for your rights, don't let them cut back your rights!
Don't worry, I'm too busy [to|every]day
confused? (Score:3)
Re:As Stallman said (Score:3)
The Globe and Mail article [globetechnology.com].
The government agency itself [ic.gc.ca].
If tables were reversed? (Score:5)
I don't think that would go over well. Can anyone explain a difference to me? Or would the U.S. accept this arrest without problem?
Re:How can we help? (Score:3)
Right on! Just like it's MY legal right to grow or purchase whatever mind-altering drugs I wan.... Oh wait. No it's not.
Re:Doesn't the DMCA specifically protect this? (Score:4)
Mod parent up! (Score:5)