Posted on 02/19/2009 1:30:25 PM PST by Chet 99
In the past we've discussed two separate laws. The DMCA requires financial gain to be criminal. Copyright law in general no longer requires financial gain to be criminal, but you have to meet a certain level of distribution for it to be criminal.
But you're right, I used "criminal" in this case when I should have said "illegal." Still, what you did was against the law.
and most of all your deplorable defenses of ACTUAL criminals
They were playing around with how to get a Mac to run on regular PC hardware, bypassing the DRM in the system. You were playing around with how to rip a DVD, bypassing the DRM in the system. The main difference is that you did it in this country where it is illegal (that's actually iffy, but the tools to do it are), and they did it in a country where doing it, and creating/distributing/possessing/using the tools to do it is legal. BTW, it is legal in most countries where the government isn't owned by the copyright cartel.
As usual, thanks for admitting it this time.
Copyright law in general no longer requires financial gain to be criminal, but you have to meet a certain level of distribution for it to be criminal.
So are you finally ready to admit the Russian hackers who created/distributed the OSX hack you've been defending for years are likely criminals? My prediction is no, you won't. You should however, you already previously admitted you lied about the the US DoD using software written by Russian hackers as a distraction/defense, and just admitted your outlandish hypocrisy today in calling me a criminal for a comparatively tame offense.
In fact, for the benefit of all you should try to completely come clean, admit it all and quit acting as if I'm the criminal, when in fact the record shows you're the one who's been defending them while unfairly attacking me. I don't expect it, you'd probably rather continue doing what you're doing, but if that's your choice just expect I'll keep busting you at it, like we just saw again here today.
Well meet another actual criminal.
The list goes on and on and on. And ALL of these things are part and parcel of every tech's job, either in fixing machines, or in building the tools with which to fix the machines.
And I have consulted with enough IT departments, and enough IT departments are using my stuff for me to know that IT turns a conveniently blind eye to copyright when they need to get out of a jamb.
And BTW, that file decryptor that you probably used to save your duma$$ boss's butt was probably illegally designed by one of those Russians you are railing on, and I probably know him by name. The best low level work on the planet is coming out of the Russians and the Czechs, and we are all better for it. If it wasn't for the Open community, their work would remain unpublished and we would not know what they know.
You're almost as deluded as antiRepublicrat. Russian hackers are not our friends, no matter how devoted you are to defending them consciously or subconsciously. Ever hear of the Russian Business Network (RBN)? More of your friends you know by name perhaps? How about the Russian thugs and/or military that launched cyberattacks on Estonia, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan? BTW, what you admitted doing yourself wasn't "criminal", but defending Russian hackers is downright deplorable.
No, because you have given no evidence that they could be. The reasoning is the same as why calling you criminal was wrong. But at least what they did wasn't illegal in their country, as opposed to what you did.
You should however, you already previously admitted you lied about the the US DoD using software written by Russian hackers
It was an American hacker, as I told you (not as you discovered, as you claimed).
calling me a criminal for a comparatively tame offense.
That American hacker has never been known to have committed any offense. He is a white-hat hacker, well-respected in the community for his network security tools.
When will you get it into your head that Russia just produces some very smart computer people. As with hackers in the US, some use their talents for good, some for bad. I don’t see anyone here defending the bad ones, but you lump the good ones in with them.
Oh I'm very aware of that, but just because they're "smart computer people" doesn't make them worthy of your idolization, especially when they're criminals.
I don’t see anyone here defending the bad ones
ROFL, you've been defending them for years, everything from repeatedly claiming the US DoD uses software written by them which you knew was a lie, to trotting out the "180 day rule for criminal prosecution" countless times, and everything in between.
Thanks for the ideas!
Hackers are hackers, no matter their nationality. They come with black hats and white hats. It is typical for folks not to make that distinction.
To suggest that every Russian hacker is evil is as insane a statement as saying every American hacker is evil. Do some work for their government? Sure. Do some work for business consortiums and mafias? Sure. That doesn't mean they ALL do.
And if they did, so what? What gain is there for them to publish their work to the Open Source community? It makes FAR more sense for them to retain the information and use it for exploitation than it does to open the information to the world.
Ever hear of the Russian Business Network (RBN)? More of your friends you know by name perhaps? How about the Russian thugs and/or military that launched cyberattacks on Estonia, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan?
LOL!! Yeahh, right. And I suppose Kaspersky is eeeevil too, because it is Russian. Better stick with Norton.
Would you like me to start naming off some home grown Black Hats? There's a list as long as your arm. Same with French, English, Brazilian, Japanese, Indian, and etcetera. And you know what? NONE of them are participating in the open source initiative. You will find *none* of them published anywhere but warez sites, same as the Russians.
BTW, what you admitted doing yourself wasn't "criminal", [...]
Oh, yes, indeed, it is. Every bit as much a federal crime as de-constructing any copyright protected material under the DMCA.
[...] but defending Russian hackers is downright deplorable.
Whatever. Your ire is really misplaced, and you are seriously misinformed. If you would take the time to learn, you would find that many of the good guys (white hats) in virus, hard drive dynamics, encryption, and other areas come right out of Russia and the Eastern European countries.
I didn't say they are smart computer people, I said they produce some smart computer people. And those who have exceptional talent deserve respect. Of course for you they're from Russia, so they're bad.
ROFL, you've been defending them for years
When? The guys who got OS X on a PC? That's not bad, that's tinkering and enabling fair use (and IMHO invoking the interoperability exception of the DMCA), the same fair use you took advantage of in ripping a DVD.
And as you've been told multiple times, the Fyodor thing was simply a test that you failed and I told you the answer when you didn't get it, and the 180 day rule is the law. So are you all pro law are not? You break it yourself and denigrate the 180 day rule, yet represent yourself as mister law-abiding himself.
Obviously you'd still defend them no matter how evil they are, that's what.
LOL!! Yeahh, right.
You think the cyberattacks by Russians on the governments of other countris is comical? Tells us a lot about you doesn't it.
Yeahh, right. And I suppose Kaspersky is eeeevil too, because it is Russian. Better stick with Norton.
I wouldn't load any Russian software on my computer, and wouldn't miss anything worthwhile either. Kaspersky's website got hacked the other day too, obviously they're not as smart as you like to believe.
Plus Natalia Kasperskaya isn't bad looking for a CEO/mathematician.
I think he just doesn't realize that talent can be used for good or bad. Take nmap by Fyodor, a notorious black-hat hacker tool, but also one of the best tools to secure your own network. BTW, I know for a fact that the government at one time used hacker tools written by the hacker groups Cult of the Dead Cow and L0pht (of "we can bring down the Internet in 30 minutes" fame), based in -- WAIT FOR IT -- Texas and Massachusetts respectively.
Moo.
_ _
((___))
[ x x ]
\ /
(' ')
(U)
These guys are doing more to fight Chinese Internet censorship than anyone else, but they're doing it through means that are probably illegal in China. But they also write tools notoriously used by black-hatters and script kiddies.
If they want my respect they need to shut down the RBN, and quit waging cyberwar against neighboring countries that don't deserve it. Meanwhile you give them a complete pass for their evil deeds (making up lies along the way) and whine I don't respect them enough.
The guys who got OS X on a PC? That's not bad, that's tinkering and enabling fair use
It's being argued in a US court right now in the case of Apple vs. Psystar, of course we know who you're rooting for in that one too, the guys who illegally circumvented Apple's copyright. Who else?
Back spouting that lie again I see, even though you've admitted you know he isn't actually a Russian, you just like to claim it whenever you're defending criminal Russian hackers.
I'm done exposing you both as sympathizers/enablers/worshipers of criminal Russian hackers for today, nothing good will come of it from here, although hopefully others will read the transcript and realize folks like you do exist.
You might have already. Microsoft has a large presence in Russia, and it is probable that many Microsoft products have code developed there. It's also probable that the plethora of open source software in your Mac contains Russian code. Aside from that, Russia is the third favorite software development outsourcer in the world, so you'll never know when your software is Russian.
A total babe, especially between the ears. :)
I have worked with most of the virus research folks, but I LOVE KAV labs. They are very attentive to their whitehats and techs, going way out of their way to make tools available, and really listening to what we need. When I find something tasty, I send it to one of two guys there, and communication back and forth to resolve and document the critter is just excellent. They are always appreciative and responsive. They are absolutely *the BEST*.
talent can be used for good or bad. [...] nmap [...] L0pht
I will also guarantee that L0phtCrack is still used by the government- Not to mention a recommendation by most security firms as well. It is still in my kit, along with another golden oldie "John the Ripper"...
The only reason L0pht is losing ground at all is that after their acquisition (or merger) with @stake, Symantec bought @stake, and discontinued L0phtCrack. Yet another great product destroyed by Symantec. As it is, EVEN YET, L0phtCrack has still got to be one of the best crackers out there. Props to L0pht Heavy Industries: Mudge, DilDog, and Weld Pond particularly, all now heavy hitters in the security industry.
Moo.
.ooM
LOL! Wow! There's a bit of ASCII ART memory... I used to DL the cDc newsletter religiously back in the 14,400 modem days...
Of course I am entirely sympathetic to your point of view, albeit from a different direction. I have to service people's stuff- I have to save their libraries. It may not occur to some folks what an incredible PIA it is to reconstruct a DRM'd music library consisting of 10s of thousands of songs, or what a loss it is to lose a couple TB of DRM'd vids... And how simple it is to prevent that loss simply by ripping the media to a non-DRM'd non-encrypted format in the first place...
Even here, with 11 computers in this house, and 5 mp3 players, trying to keep track of where the copies even went would be an horrific task! Nobody is ripping anybody off. The music is basically saved to the central media server, and is discardable everywhere else, except for the backup to the main server, and the deep blue backup on a USB external.
But trying to level all that with the ridiculous artifice arbitrarily proclaimed and summarily enforced by the industry is just wholly unworkable. I am just *not* going to do it their way. I've got enough real work to do.
Nice misrepresentation. Nice out-of-context quoting. No one is defending evil here, no matter how much you would like to herd us into that position.
You think the cyberattacks by Russians on the governments of other countris is comical? Tells us a lot about you doesn't it.
Not at all. I think your cartoonishly large brush is absolutely hilarious though.
I wouldn't load any Russian software on my computer, and wouldn't miss anything worthwhile either.
Oh yeah, you would. KAV is the undisputed top of the anti-virus heap. Any security forum worth it's salt will overwhelmingly agree.
Kaspersky's website got hacked the other day too, obviously they're not as smart as you like to believe.
So your recommendation is an anti-virus whose website has not been hacked... Which one is that?
I guess you refuse to realize that Russia isn't one big evil hacker collective, that there are actually individuals there as different as individuals here.
It's being argued in a US court right now in the case of Apple vs. Psystar
That's a different set of guys. Keep your players straight. Also keep your laws straight, because Apple made no DRM circumvention claim under the DMCA against Psystar. It is a straight copyright and trademark case.
One one hand Apple is trying to protect an ecosystem that produces quality products, and I appreciate that. On the other hand it shouldn't be Apple's business what hardware you install your legally-purchased software on (all evidence points to Apple got paid for every copy of OS X Psystar shipped). I also think it is wrong that Apple is challenging the First Sale doctrine. It's the difference between the specifics of this case and general principles of consumer rights, abuse of copyright and the constitutional intent of copyright. For me, principles win, so I'll have to suck up any damage to the Mac ecosystem a Psystar win may cause (little, if any IMHO).
I had a hard-core hacker friend at the time who was PISSED when Symantec bought @stake. At least Mudge left before that, but I think Dildog realized too late what crap Symantec had become.
I am just *not* going to do it their way. I've got enough real work to do.
I have no idea how many times I violated EULAs doing administrative duties, where all copies of software were duly purchased. I apparently violated the SQL Server 2000 EULA once by sharing performance data (Microsoft has actually used that clause in an attempt to stop the publication of unflattering performance benchmarks).
It's things like this that push people towards Linux. Licensing? What licensing? Install it wherever and however you want. Need a recovery disk image? Just do it.
And you proved you didn't know, which was the point of the test. Anyway, the sentence "Take nmap by Fyodor, a notorious black-hat hacker tool, but also one of the best tools to secure your own network." is correct. Show me where I lied or retract your claim that I lied.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.