1996 Economic Espionage Act and DirectTV 324
Pharmboy writes "The Register reports a 19 year old will plead guilty to the
1996 Economic Espionage Act for giving away DirectTV secrets, even though they admit he did not pirate the service or profit from the theft." See our original story on this case.
DirecTV Secrets (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you all for coming here today
The bidding for these DIRECTV SECRETS
Will begin at
ONE MILLION DOLLARS
MUAH HA HA HA
No, spice network is extra.
DirecTV Secrets (Score:2, Funny)
Secret 2: The history channel is concerned with the history of hitler, the occult, UFOs and the secrets of the pyramids only
Secret 3: You're fat
Secret 4: There's still nothing on
Re:DirecTV Secrets (Score:2)
No, that's the science channel!
*sigh*... remember when the "science" channels showed science?
What the fuck's next, Discovery? You gonna give that douchebag from the cold-reading "crossing over" some air time too?
Re:DirecTV Secrets (Score:2, Funny)
But they all share the same history. (i.e. Hitler being sent back in time by Nazi sorcerers, and building the pyramids with the help of aliens in UFOs)
hmmmm... (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, fuck it, I'm a liberal and I'll blast Bush anyway for an isolated case of judicial abuse! It doesn't have to make sense!!!
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Passed is one thing. Used/Abused, another (Score:2)
Blatantly misused as a sledgehammer to try and "shock and awe" the satellite TV community now.
If it still don't make sense, then you're not paying attention. Of course, I'm still not sure what blash is.
How is this misuse? (Score:4, Insightful)
I fully expected to read the article and find out that the kid had just cleverly reverse-engineered stuff as a hobby, making him a poor persecuted martyr. I really did.
But, that perception was WRONG. This kid had access to sensitive trade secrets. I see absolutely nothing defensible that he did. I would love if someone would explain to me how it should be perfectly OK to steal trade secrets and publish them. I suggest starting with the always persuasive "patents, copyrights, and secrets want to be FREE" argument.
So I'm waiting for the "misuse" argument. To me, the fact that they only went after a kid who really is a thief gives them credibility.
Honestly, I would love to hear from someone who actually read the article and feels otherwise.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:4, Interesting)
No no, back up. In Clinton's days these laws were a lot like marijuana statutes. They were very rarely enforced, and when they were it ammounted to a slap on the wrist.
Now that George W. Orwell and friends are in charge, these laws have been convoluted into a completely different picture. Now any kind of intellectual curiousity is treated like a "bad taillight" in which a cop can harrass you for being what you are. Intellectuals, the middle-class, and computer professionals are the last demographic republicans want to hear from.
The internet is a threat to any regime whose existence depends on the falsification of information. The funny thing is, so many Slashdotters here claim to be republican. They're either scared shitless over losing thier jobs, so they say "hiel hitler!" I don't need healthcare, I like working 70 hrs a week, I like living with my parents. Or they are the
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
What is worse saying "I'll pretend to believe this and do nothing about it" or "I'll follow the laws that are on the books regardless."?
As far as the rest, I hate to break it to you but the Federal Government was not supposed to guarantee anything close to free healthcare and mandated work weeks and wages. The US was not founded with the idea that "everyone is free because we will give everyone everything they need" it was fou
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
The point: The Nanny State needs to wither away. Cutting off it's money supply is a start. The number of times feeble attempts to turn 'Tax Cuts' into a bad thing in 'intellectual' circle
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3)
A large number of my peers seem to think that making mortgage payments with credit cards is a good idea. Tax cuts against a budget shortfall are nearly equivalent (we're not going to have as much money next year, so let's spend what we do have _right now_), and ultimately will lead to the same place.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Informative)
In short, costs are fixed or rising, unless legislative heads start spinning and major programs get major funding cuts.
If the economy manages a reasonable growth rate, there's no harm in these slight increases in funding. If government can spent more more efficiently, that's no problem. If we grow
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
"Nobel Laureates, 450 other economists fault tax cuts plan" [claretianpubs.org]
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Show me one case of someone dying because of lack of healthcare..just one.
Here's a story for you.
My father just build a new home, and he hired two dutch brothers to do some of the carpentry work. They had been in the US about 6 months, and were here to work, have fun etc.
One of the guys was using a circular saw and it caught an edge, which whipped the saw down and nearly cut this guy's thumb off. He was taken to the hospital, and treated. He's now been working 3 years, and all of his money go
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
The money for socialized healthcare comes from
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
It's called "taking responsibility". You should look into it.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
One of the guys was using a circular saw and it caught an edge, which whipped the saw down and nearly cut this guy's thumb off. He was taken to the hospital, and treated. He's now been working 3 years, and all of his money goes toward food, rent...and paying his hospital debt.
OK, your father hired a contractor who obviously didn't have the right insurance cover. The contractor screwed up, causing expensive damage not covered by his insurance, and is now having to pay for fixing the damage. Seems fair.
Still think this is a civilized country?
Yes: this guy is paying for his own mistake, instead of the government forcing others to cover for him. My one criticism here is that they really should have been required to carry appropriate insurance, but that's very difficult to enforce - why didn't your father check that, by the way?
Supposing, instead of a thumb, that saw had cut a water main, ruining the house. Would you expect other people to foot the bill for fixing that, too?
(Also, I'd point out nothing bad came of that, despite his stupidity: he was treated (despite not having insurance or the money to pay for it) - now he's working to make up for it. Nothing wrong with that.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
It would actually be possible to achieve a similar result - at least with respect to non-residents - in the US. Thinking about it, I rather like that idea. Anyway, someone should have explained to these two Dutch men that the US is not part of the Netherlands, and hence trying to deal with the US sytem rather than the Dutch
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
These are the last demographic that *anyone* wants to hear from.
Look around you: most Americans could give a shit about the Constitution or personal rights. Most Americans rejoice when their elected representatives pass laws blatantly violating the Constitution, because it makes them feel like they have some measure of power over their neighbors. They'll trade liberty for the illusion of
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
What's the point of "rapid industrial growth" if noone can afford to buy anything? I think we'll all agree that domestic spending is the keystone of our economy. So how do unemployed, underemployed, and indepted people contribute? Henry Ford was smart enough to pay his workers w
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
The vast majority of these tax cuts go to the rich. The poor see almost nothing, as do the middle class. These are the segments of the population that buy diapers, and cars, and microwaves, and refrigerators. How many refrigerators does a rich guy need? One, ok maybe two. The size of his cut could buy 1000 refrigerators...but it'll end up going toward a vacation in Geneva instead.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
*ahem*Enron*ahem*
Re:hmmmm... (Score:3, Informative)
there's a great, short read written by barbara ehrenreich called nickel and dimed [amazon.com] . she's a reporter who wrote about her experience of going "undercover" for months as a member of the working poor.
i think a lot of people hold the view you stated above. and it certainly has some truth to it. but ehrenreich presents strong empirical evidence to the contrary and as matter of intellectual honesty, it's worth checking it out to see if you
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
So all those millions of people who work hard than you ever will, and all those people who're smarter than you are (and in comparison to which you're nothing more than a drooling idiot), are flawed in some fundamental manner which dictates that they'll never be as successful as you are.
So what is your supposed superiority based on? The favor of God?
Calvinist trash-talk is always good for a laugh, as the Calvinists themselves are so pathetic in their arrogance.
I am both hard-working and smart, but
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Nobody here is claiming superiority. On the contrary, I am saying that wealthy people are NOT superior, and in most cases they are not doing anything that poor people couldn't do themselves.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
That's the fundamental difference.
Liberals are whiners and conservatives aren't.
Conservatives are hard workers who have done a lot to change their station in life and work their way up the ladder, whereas liberals are a bunch of whiners who have never worked for anything hard in their lives and should just quit their whining and accept their position in life and never try to change anything about it.
And this is why the latest Conservative president just happens to be the son of the last Conservati
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Life is fair. (Score:2)
People are unfair. Life, the universe, this planet, and God if you believe in that, have given us everything we could ever need to not only survive, but be happy and prosperous too.
I almost feel like this *opportunity* you speak of, is one where they too can become embezzling, lying assholes and enjoy wealth at someone else's expense. Wow, who could pass that up?
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Greed and laziness are inseparable from the human character. Capitalism, at least, pits them against each other: to satisfy your innate greed, you must put aside your innate laziness. Communism allows both to coexist and compound the detriment to society.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2, Interesting)
the rich pay more taxes than anyone else (greater than 50% in some cases). let's see you cough that up. accross the board tax cuts affect everyone equally.
Re:hmmmm... (Score:2)
Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:5, Insightful)
But, he put out information for anyone to read that he knew others could profit from illegally. And they did. Regardless of wheter or not he meant for people to use it illegally, he knew it was illegal to release the information. Therefore, he should go to jail. End of story.
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:5, Funny)
It isn't quite as simple as you make out. It is true that he has released information in an illegal manner. And he did so knowing that others might use the information to profit illegally. But he shouldn't go to jail for that. Let's burn him! I'll start the chant! Burn him! Burn him! Come on everyone, join in! Burn him! Burn him!...
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
Johanssen didn't steal trade secrets (Score:5, Insightful)
This moron the story talks about STOLE confidential documents from his uncle's law firm.
Honestly, who cares about this kid? His uncle's law firm is going to get nailed to the cross for his shenanigans. Not only are they going to get sued into oblivion, but you can bet that said uncle loses just about 100% of his business based upon this bit...
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
No they didn't, at least not yet. According to the article:
"Only a small percentage of the stolen data made its way to public websites, and none of it has yet inspired a successful hack against the cards."
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
That still doesn't change the fact that he actually stole documents from DirecTV's law firm. There's a fucking huge gulf between reverse-engineering a secret protocol and stealing documents.
You're Right, But /. Crew Rides a Fantasy Bus (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, spoiled consumerist brats who are trying to camouflage wholesale theft with bogus ideology.
Re:You're Right, But /. Crew Rides a Fantasy Bus (Score:3, Interesting)
I Own My Thoughts in Perpetuity (Score:2)
Completely bogus, and sophomoric. Just because you can see something, why would you think it belongs to you?
If I have a thought, that thought belongs to me. If I then choose to make a record of that thought on some kind of medium -- paper, tape, magnetic storage, etc. -- the thought and the symbolic recording of it remain under my exclusive ownership.
I may choos
Re:You're Right, But /. Crew Rides a Fantasy Bus (Score:2)
I'm not sure what that means, except that you're suggesting that we should have an endless and free supply of every kind of thought ever recorded in any form of media.
That seems to me to be a technological issue. Something akin to Star Trek's replicator.
That's simply another form of publishing and distribution. But it is someone's thoughts that are being copied and distributed, and they retain ownership of those thoughts forever. They retain the right to benef
Re:You're Right, But /. Crew Rides a Fantasy Bus (Score:2)
The notion that I own my thoughts is so fundamental that any notion that a legislative body could mandate otherwise is nonsense.
If you think it is important to take on the RIAA so you can get free copies of 75-year-old Mickey Mouse cartoons, have at it.
Nice Try, But It's Worth Squat (Score:2)
Bucko, your text is worth squat until someone offers you something for it in exchange.
Putting a price tag on something doesn't decide what it's worth.
Re:Nice Try, But It's Worth Squat (Score:2)
So you think just because you don't want to exchange anything for it you should be able to view it for free?
Get off the fantasy bus, your sophmoric idealism is typical of slashdotters. Those "price tags" as you call them represent real money that you stole from my family.
YOU ARE STEALING. Pure and Simple.
By the way, the value of this text is $200,000 due to rampant piracy of my previous work.
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2, Interesting)
From the article:
It seems at least for now, nobody has really made any money off the stolen data. However, it does seem clear that he did commit "corporate espionage" by releasing these docu
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:2)
No actually, the law generally covers people who PROFIT from espionage. He did not. What I thought was odd, as stated in my submission that was heavily truncated, was the fact that they choose THIS law to prosecute under, rather tha
Re:Oh (Score:2)
But on to my edited point: Are DAs and companies nervous about trying to prosecute under the DMCA? Obviously the MPA
How To Not Get Arrested (Score:2)
By that logic, writing a book, "How To Not Get Arrested" would contingently make a person responsible for every crime commited that prosecuters are unable to find criminals attached to.
"His book was just too good," Dick Hertz, the chief prosecuter for Anyl County explained. "The book outlines things that the average criminal doesn't know, like how police conduct investigations and what crimes we're most interested in prosecuting to further our political careers. He even has an appendix dedicated on how to
Re:Story submitter missing the point, per norm (Score:3, Interesting)
He knew it was wrong. He wanted to impress his h4x0r buddies.
And he already plead guilty as part of a plea bargain. So it's his word against his.
Put him in jail (Score:5, Insightful)
And let's be clear -- this WAS an act of corporate espionage. He knowingly stole trade secrets from his work and posted them online. Put him in jail, and any hippies who think what he did was right, you can go join him.
Re:Put him in jail (Score:2)
DirecTV hacking is fairly big in Canada. From the Register article:
Theft is theft (Score:5, Insightful)
But is it espionage? (Score:2)
Certainly he deserves to be in trouble. That doesn't mean that every crime involving a similar action necessarily applies.
Theft is... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem isn't that he's getting prosecuted for theft. If he were I'm all for that, he probably stole those CDR's, wasted hours of his employers time, etc. But he's being prosecuted for profiting from the copying, when he clearly did not. He wasn't paid for releasing the information, he probably even lost money on the whole thing. I personally think there should be some legal punishment for what he did, he certainly betrayed a trust and we should discourage this type of damage. There may be a legal punishment for all I know. But, he has been prosecuted for something everyone knows he didn't do, that worries me greatly.
RTFA:Theft is... (Score:2)
At last, someone does something naughty (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps he should get some kind of special award from the industry. Like the RIAA Platinum IP Theft Award. "See- we're not paranoid! There really are criminals out there! We need all the protection we can get!"
No different than stealling cc#'s (Score:5, Insightful)
No different than stealling cc#'s ... BUT it is (Score:2)
It's also not a trade secret if ANYONE outside the company or its suppliers knows the information. In this case, they did.
Apple often gets in trouble this way. It's their own employees that leak the information out a lot of times. The whole website MacWhispers has been created on the basis of "manufacturing partner tips" - that's economic espionage and Apple should shut that site down. MacWhispers is and does profit off this information. Apple C
It was obviously a legitimate trade secret (Score:3, Insightful)
Rubbish. That information was not in the public domain - didn't you read the article? DirectTV went to extraordinary lengths to protect it, and being part of the sealed records of a court case doesn't mitigate that, otherwise every company who had a technical secret would be sued by their competitors.
The author of this story blurb makes it sound like he was arrested by G-Men for rev
Re:It was obviously a legitimate trade secret (Score:2)
Bullshit. Their measures were wholly inadequate. Just look at the evidence: some snot-nosed 19-year-old brat whose mama should've bitchslapped some manners into him managed to walk right out of the office with CDs full of privileged technical data.
Frankly, I don't see this as a crime, but then I don't believe in this crap about 'intellectual property' either. If a company has trade secrets it's up to that company - not the government - to protect th
Re:It was obviously a legitimate trade secret (Score:2)
In any case, your argument makes no sense. By your logic, if you locked your house up, but I was able to circumvent it reasonably easily, then your possessions are in the public domain and I'm free to walk out with them. "Shit happens". It's up to you to protect your property, not the police and the courts.
Although I suppose you know this already, and I'm taking the bait.
Kids are wacky (Score:5, Funny)
What were the secrets? (Score:5, Funny)
To: CEO of DirectTV
From: Quality Assurance Engineer
Re: Our service
CEO,
I regret to inform you that our product is inferior, and should not be purchased. I pray no one gets wind of this discovery.
~QA
Excellent (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm all for this.
This case should not be confused with an independent person doing a "clean room" reverse engineering of the technology. This person was in a position of trust and violated that trust by stealing something that didn't belong to him.
It's irrelevant that he did not profit from this. The cost to DirecTV is the same whether he used the information himself or passed it on to someone else who did.
Why is this in YRO again? What rights online does this concern?
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Impacts?
Giving away a hack to a TV box: Lost revenues for a satellite company.
Giving away high tech secrets: Future possibility of incoming with a payload carried by our own technology.
Which is really a worse outcome?
Re:Irony (Score:2)
Yep, we definitely need a law against stupid... (Score:4, Funny)
I'll agree that the law's a poor fit, and this young kid's whole life is toasted bad, but I feel sorry for him about like I feel sorry for the guy who tried pissin' on a 100,000 volt line knocked down in a storm.
He shouldn't go to jail (Score:5, Informative)
This was a case of *civil* law. Criminal law shouldn't be involved. He violated his employer's trust, which is a civil matter.
Do you know why they didn't pursue it in civil court? I would imagine that it is because they weren't damaged by his actions. (Because their system was good enough that people couldn't break it even with the information that he leaked.) They would therefore be unable to land a serious verdict, so they went the criminal way. And the US government went along with it, as it does.
Mod parent up! (Score:2)
I would do, but I'm out of points.
The parent post captures the interesting aspect of the case -- i.e. that a crime that could be only weakly punished by civil law (because only marginal damage was done) was simply reinterpreted as a national security issue, and hey presto! a strong punishment.
Not that the kid wasn't a twit, you understand.
Re:He shouldn't go to jail (Score:2)
Compared to DMCA... more scary? (Score:2, Interesting)
From my (brief) reading of the Act, there are two interesting things to consider:
First, it is weaker than the DMCA in that it requires "theft" whereas the DMCA prohibits the "breaking and entering" part of defeating copy protection.
Second, it appears stronger than the DMCA because acts can fall under its scope even if somebody is outside the U.S. Check out Section 1837... This chapter also applies to conduct occurring outside the United States if-- An act in furtherance of the offense was committed in th
Well.. (Score:2)
I'll tell you economic espionage (Score:3, Interesting)
The Worldcom executives
Those pump and dump wallstreet brokers from the 90s.
These guys do far more damage than this kid ever did to our economy yet they will get far less severe punishment. What this kid did was wrong but I don't these others should be let off any easier.
Confession?? (Score:3, Interesting)
From the article:
"These weren't just instructions like, 'do this and do that.' He was putting up the actual changes to make to the card -- specific code bytes that needed to be changed," says Zwillinger. "People say you should be able to log onto the Internet and say anything. But if you go on the Internet and admit to misconduct, that's called a confession."IANAL, but my sister is, and her three rules are:
Never confess.Never confess!
NEVER CONFESS !!Her fourth rule is: Since it's illegal to lie to a policeman, if you're caught red-handed say nothing. Refuse to answer questions, demand an attorney, but never confess. A confession makes things soooo easy for the prosecutor.
So how is posting something to the Internet, not under oath and without Miranda rights, considered a confession?Re:Confession?? (Score:2)
This bozo sounds like a typical id10t. He knew what he was doing. He understood that his actions would harm his employer and co-workers (if you can't charge for PPV movies, you stop showing them).
If I take a brick and smash your car windows with it, you're likely to be pissed. Rightfully so.
What difference does it make that I was only curious what noise the glass would make when it shattered? or that I was pointing out a "
Re:Confession?? (Score:2)
Of course, a jury would be a lot more likely to weigh a videotaped confession in front of police and lawyers than they would an oral description of a confession by a cellmate.
It's funny how a word or phrase can end up meaning something to one group that it doesn't mean to another. "insult" to
Intriguing (Score:4, Interesting)
Read any article on the RIAA cracking down on P2P services and you will get a much more mixed set of opinions.
Is this really that different from downloading music for which you have not paid? True, he 'stole' trade secrets, while MP3 are a product. However, either way, the issue is with the loss of income from the company.
Just something to consider...
(on a side note, I include myself in the 'double standard' group)
Perhaps it's not that simple, though... (Score:4, Interesting)
That said, lets look at the laws.
It's called the Economic Espionage Act. The fact that it's wording can be made to fit this crime since Canadians will benefit from it doesn't speak to it's intent.
Interviewer: "Congressman, this law that your working on, the one that can only be used with approval from the Justice Department for curbing Espionage, is it designed to be applied to 19 year kids who steal secrets from the Entertainment Industry?"
The congressfolk involved would not have their work so trivialized. Protecting DirectTV from Canadians was not the intent of that law. They obviously left it overly-broad to relieve the justice department of the need to prove that it was benefiting a particular person or agency. If, for instance, we were at war with France and I was found sneaking GPS decryption secrets (to improve the accuracy of GPS guided cheese-bombs) across the French border, I could be convicted under this act without any particular recipient being proven. But it's worth noting: We are not at war with Canada.
The congressfolk in question probably felt comfortable leaving the terminology overbroad because of the barrier imposed by limiting it to cases approved by the Justice Department for it's use, "...a limitation that was lifted in March, 2002." Which seems to be when it became popular to assume we are always at war. Being popular does not make it right.
DirecTV's lawyer claims, "I imagine most people who steal get paid for it, or somehow profit by it... but it's the theft that's the crime. There's no more appropriate statute to use in this case."
Yes. There is. Newsflash lawyerboy: Theft is already illegal. So there are many many more appropriate statues available. Theft of trade secrets has been a crime for some time and in other cases companies have gotten away with suing for years worth of R&D that were lost due to the secrets getting out, and those penalties were certainly non-trivial.
The victory here has nothing to do with plugging a leak that lets those Evil Canadians (who apparently aren't worth the bother to provide service to) watch free T.V. The victory has everything to do with attaching Espionage to Entertainment theft. This is an ugly connection. When well established, it will allow the unprecedented monitoring capabilities of the federal government to be applied to any Digital Rights circumvention.
And it would seem this has already occurred to them:
"But Marc Zwillinger, the chief litigator in DirecTV's war on piracy, says Ump25's posts aren't much different from posting a DVD descrambling program to the Internet, which has been ruled illegal in the past."
Now, or sometime in the near future, if you watch DVDs using Linux, you're not only violating the DMCA, since you trafficked in illegal copies of decss with "foreign powers" you're also a spy. If there are millions of spys among us, does that not make it easy to justify giving the Justice Department even broader interception and monitoring capabilities?
I don't use drugs; I don't hire prostitutes; I don't dump my employers secrets out on the Internet for public consumption. And I never will.
If chosen for jury duty, I will enter an unswaying not-guilty vote for anyone on trial for:
Possession of Cannabis.
Prostitution.
Espionage with countries with which we are not at war.
Not to protect my right to commit these crimes, but because the cost to our society for having laws like these is too great.
This is not your rights online. (Score:5, Insightful)
he used his position within DirecTV to gain access to secret, confidential information, and leaked it to someone. What that someone did, or whether or not he benfitted is immaterial. He violated NDA from DirecTV, and violated that law.
Just like if someone posted a source code module from Windows 2003, the secret recipie of Mickey D's Secret Sauce, or anything else confidential.
I agree with your bottom line but... (Score:4, Interesting)
I do agree that this IS NOT a freedom of speech issue or a constitutional one though...
Save the children (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:What else can you do? (Score:5, Informative)
According to court records, the student began smuggling digitized copies of the papers out of the law firm on CD ROMs, and e-mailing them pseudonymously to the underground.
He stole DTV trade secrets he was privy to while working for his uncle.
It doesnt matter that he didnt profit from it. That just makes him an idiot, not an innocent.
"Yes, your honor. I broke into that mans house and stole his TV. But I gave it away to one of the cool kids at school, I didnt sell it for money."
It doesnt work that way. This kid deserves to get what's coming to him.
Don't do the crime if you cant do the time.
The real tragedy is that his uncle, who no doubt signed a pile of NDAs, will be sued into oblivion and lose his business, and his life will be completely screwed up, because he did his nephew the favor of giving him a job.
Re:What else can you do? (Score:2)
This case is yet another example of stupid people doing stupid, criminal things. And people have the audacity to complain when said stupid people get punished.
Re:What else can you do? (Score:2, Informative)
I know Igor personally. I go to school with him. This kid was going to get himself in trouble one way or another. He's not a poster boy for the anti-government IP/tech crowd, EFF or any other group worried about our rights (or at least he shouldn't be, if you follow what I am saying). In the opinion of a lot of people who know Igor, he's lucky to be getting off
Re:What else can you do? (Score:2)
There's no defense for stealing privileged information. This guy isn't a victim, he's a thief, and deserves his punishment.
Re:What else can you do? (Score:2)
I've said too much....
-----------
Important differences from deCSS (Score:2)
The thing that makes cases like this evil is the fact that people will compare it to similar - but different in important ways - cases like deCSS. It just gives the copyright/etc lawyers more reason to attack. This person should be shunned not only by those in power, but also by those working hard to make legitimate products.
Re:robbed a bank (Score:2)
so and so will be prosecuted for theft, or maybe armed robbery, not for "Economic Espionage", whatever that is. In a bank robbery, a bank and its customers lose money. In Economic Espionage, the company is faced with a possible loss of revenue if potential customers use pirate boxes instead of subscribing to their service. The actual loss is gonna be difficult to compute. Especially difficult if the availability of pirate boxes advertises their service to a wider audience and contributed to increased sa
Re:Taking responsibility for his actions (Score:3)
If you were guilty of assault, would you want be be charged with manslaughter because it was easier for the prosecution to nail you, even though nobody actually died?
The mechanism of plea bargaining is unjust. (Score:5, Insightful)
Plea bargaining subverts the criminal justice system, harming the innocent, benefitting the guilty, and enabling corrupt or inept prosecutors and expanded police-state activity.
Plea bargaining allows the government to get convictions on cases where they have insufficient evidence to prove the case - sometimes because the defendant is not guilty. It threatens the defendant with draconian punishment if he fights, but offers him something much milder if he pleads guilty. An innocent defendant knows that if he fights the prosecutors will turn all their resources toward "getting him". He also knows that the system is defective, but it takes a team of experts to catch the defects and deflect them. So he has essentially no chance unless he's as well-funded as, say, O. J. Simpson. Thus he will often plead to a crime he didn't commit.
This is ESPECIALLY true for crimes carrying the death penalty. (One of several reasons the death penalty, regardless of how deserved it might be by the guilty, is bad law.)
The guilty, of course, will generally plea-bargain away the bulk of the penalties (unless they know the state has no case and think they can beat it). Thus the guilty escape the bulk of the punishment for their crimes - both being convicted of a "lesser offense" and recieving a sentence near the light, rather than the heavy, end of the available range. In addition to the unfairness, this also lets them back on the street to commit more crimes sooner (perhaps immediately), and teaches them they can get away with things.
Meanwhile, prosecutors and police save resources. So corrupt or inept officials can apply this unjust system to FAR MORE people than they could without the plea bargaining mechanism. This also encourages them to use it against their personal enemies, out-groups, the poor, people who disagree with their politics, or people with assets worth seizing (but not enough to defend themselves).
Of course police and prosecutors are rewarded for high counts of successful arrests and convictions, but not punished for accusing and prosecuting the innocent (except in rare cases when it's eggregious and part of a pattern of excesses, and one of the cases comes to public attention). So they have strong incentive to accuse all they can get away with and little to avoid persecuting the innocent.
When the police/prosecution can arbitrarily pick anyone and "put them away", and they use this power arbitrarily, it's called a "police state". And that's exactly what the plea bargaining mechanism enables and encourages.
Re:Punishment fits the crime. (Score:2)
a nother cracked sim card is within my grasp.
In YOUR grasp or your roommate's grasp?
Me thinks this guy is referring to himself the whole time...
Dude, if you're so repulsed at "his" behavior, and if this "roommate" is such a moral slime, then don't be surprised that when "he" gets arrested, you'll be the one to take the heat for it..