If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Adobe backs off on Russian H4x0r   (dailynews.yahoo.com) divider line 20
    More: News  
•       •       •

1721 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jul 2001 at 1:19 AM (13 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



20 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2001-07-24 01:41:36 AM
Adoe got what they wanted - putting fear of arrest and incarceration into anyone who can reverse engineer or break the encryption of their products. Adobe can back off all they want now because its a criminal case not a civil case. Adobe certainly cannot say no to a court-order when the government needs their testimony to win the case.

Still bad guys.
 
2001-07-24 01:42:00 AM
Woo hoo..!

~~~ throws hat in air ~~~
 
2001-07-24 02:17:53 AM
Fu<k the DMCA.
 
2001-07-24 05:44:54 AM
Hum. It's a conspiracy. Adobe didn't give in to pressure from the public (a.k.a. "sheeple". Baaaa.), but from their peers. They don't want the DMCA to be tested on too clear a case, because the precedent set would not be in their favour. (That's their FUD. This is mine.)

(should I go play on /. now?)
 
2001-07-24 06:13:03 AM
And anyway - Hey! I thought this was supposed to be Fark, and not News!
 
2001-07-24 08:51:56 AM
i agree mme.mersault. if i buy the product i should be allowed to do whatever i please to it. after all i spent *my* money for it. stupid corportations and government that are trying to make it illegal for me to do whatever i want to stuff i buy ;0
 
2001-07-24 09:33:32 AM
Perversely, one could say that the entertainment industry judiciously applies an assumption of guilt to Joe Average Consumer.

- "Woo. Cool CD. Can I burn a copy?"
- "Well, no. That would constitute theft, my friend."
- "Egad - you're right. Thank you for showing me the light. I shall venture forth and purchase a legal copy."

(Note: the conversation above is fictional, and most certainly never took place)
 
2001-07-24 10:24:09 AM
Blah, you can't apply that logic to all products, I can buy a gun, but not shoot you with it, I can buy a refrigerator, but not store your body parts in it. Companies are realizing that the old way of copyrighting software is now even more worthless than in the past, until they figure out something better, crap like this is the result.
 
2001-07-24 10:37:23 AM
Well of course!!
Adobe has as big of a monopoly as Microsoft every had

They over-reacted with this hacker thing, and forgot that they should be keeping a low profile!
 
2001-07-24 10:41:52 AM
Labberdasher,

That sounds like great dialogue for a Chick Tract(TM). Of course, he would still have to go to hell, unless you changed the last line to:

"Egad - you're right. Thank you for showing me the light. I shall venture forth and purchase a legal copy. Praise Jeebus! (TM)"
 
2001-07-24 11:20:18 AM
WinnipegDragon - wow... I am honoured. I thought Jack's particular brand of loving vitriol was a place sane men dared not wander. And here I am - right in the middle of it. Cool.
 
2001-07-24 12:00:05 PM
scraping: yes i realize that. sorry for not being specific but i was refering to software/hardware products.

if i buy lets say a new vcr. there should be no stupid laws that make it illegal for me to take it apart and modify it if i so desire. same goes for software. i pay $$$ for it so i can OWN it. now if i want to look into the code and see how shiat-e- the software is that should also be allowed since it is mine.

of course selling the modded software/hardware would break the law. but if i wanted to do it for my personal use there should not be any laws that stop me from doing so.
 
2001-07-24 12:18:19 PM
Ah, but you don't own software - you own a licence to use it. And before anyone asks, yes, I do disagree with this.
 
2001-07-24 12:31:25 PM
I was kinda hoping our "legal" system could ruin this guy's life as he fought it to the supreme court where the DMCA would be ruled unconstitutional thereby letting the rest of us warez0r to our hearts' content.
 
2001-07-24 01:05:21 PM
Sklyarov, 26, was arrested in Las Vegas after he spoke at a major hacker convention and is being held there without bail pending his transfer to San Jose, California.

Wow! A hacker convention!
 
2001-07-24 01:19:47 PM
i would hope this goes to trial, the DMCA needs to go down. i dont wish anything bad for this guy, but we need the dmca to break, and soon.

and i get my news from fark too, heh, it usually has the stuff that matters, unlike some of /. :P
 
2001-07-24 09:35:27 PM
Dear FARK'ers,

Your criticism of the DMCA could place this valued law at risk of being repealed! This could be used to defeat Adobe's "Captain Midnight" decoder ring based protection scheme by allowing reverse engineering, consumer awareness, and other such evil attacks against this blessed nation's corporate intellectual property. Therefore you are all in clear violation of the DMCA! The FBI will be arriving shortly to inform you of your rights.

Welcome to the land of the free folks!
 
2001-07-24 10:50:14 PM
Hey, I just remembered that some folks tried to use the DMCA's "You can't break encryption" thing to get around Napster's filters with Pig Latin. Atwhay everay appenedhay otay athay?
 
2001-07-24 11:50:01 PM
Naw, the law only applies to screwing individuals - not other corporations - into the ground. It's in and of itself a circumvention device therefore illegal.

Funny how all the politicians who shout how great capitalism is love to make protectionist laws for large corps who suddenly discover their product has no value on the "free" market. Record companies are frightened they can't make heaps of money selling pieces of plastic anymore? A truly capitalist society would let 'em die like the dinosaurs they are - musicians would find other (perhaps better) ways to make money - like using MP3's to promote live concerts, but all the RIAA leeches would have to find something else to suck on.

Corporations should able to protect their product with any hair brained scheme they like, but competitors should also be just as free to sell ways to unprotect them. If you can't turn a profit because you're selling an easily duplicated item, well then you should be selling something else. That's capitalism.

Copyright has gone form a way to protect authors from plagiarism to protection racket for corporate profits. It was never intended to target how individuals used something. You normally can't profit from selling something people can get for free (like air for example), but thanks to our government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations we'll create an artificial scarcity by making it illegal to breathe!

If this was 1901 instead of 2001 we'd have candle and gas companies trying to outlaw the use of electricity because it damages their copyright on home lighting!
 
2001-07-26 11:52:26 PM
That Russian Dude is still in jail.

That is wrong. Let him out.
Sure he was "stealing" but he did it well.

Something feels very wrong here....


-------------

Smell my finger?

~ Pinky ~
 
Displayed 20 of 20 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report