Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:49:01 -0600 | From | "D. Stimits" <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.2.20pre10 |
| |
Tom Sightler wrote: > > > > Not forgotten, just trying to understand relevance. How do these cases, > > > which all revolve around breaking commercial products and cause damage > to > > > the corporations that push them, apply to security in the open source > Linux > > > kernel to which the public is given all rights. > > > > For me, DeCSS is an application that has a purpose for watching DVD:s > > when I boot my G4 into Linux instead of MacOS. > > For me too, but in other people's opinion it's a tool for pirates (I don't > share this opinion, however, I can see how some people, who don't understand > the difference, might have this opinion). However, I don't think that a > security exploit in an open sourced OS is likely to be a "curcumvention > device" to even clueless people. > > > And even those that actually use DeCSS only to gain their "copyright" > > (that is, provide you with your right to copy what you have purchased, > > for backup-purposes, for instance) or indeed those that illegaly copy > > DVDs, seldom do so to break commercial products and cause damage to the > > corporations that push them. > > Agreed, but's that's how these corporations (or coporate representatives) > managed to get these cases to court. However, I fail to see who is going to > be the prosecutor in the case of a security exploit against the open source > Linux kernel. In every one of these cases, DeCSS, SDI, and eBook, the > encryption that was hacked was put in place by the companies specifically to > protect the copyrighted work. The Linux kernel provides general access > controls and does not meet the following DMCA requirement to be a copyright > protection system: > > "(B) a technological measure "effectively controls access to a work" if the > measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application > of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the > copyright owner, to gain access to the work." > > The part that is missing is the "authority of the copyright owner" portion. > In the case of CSS, SDI, and eBook, the copyright owners all specifically > allow access to the information only when using authorized means of viewing > the work. Last I checked no copyright owner has said that ACL's are an > authorized means.
SSSCA grants all this. SSSCA would have enormous impact here. If SSSCA passes, look out. http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/10/19/1546246&mode=thread
D. Stimits, stimits@idcomm.com
> > This is my main argument why I think Alan is safe to post security related > information in changelogs. I just don't think there is any way for someone > to interpret this law to mean that posting that information is illegal. Of > course, if he still doesn't want to I respect that opinion as well, but I'm > sure willing to do it. > > > As for the Sklyarov-case, I'm pretty sure he'd been arrested even if his > > program had been an open source program under the GPL, freely > > distributed etc. > > I would tend to agree, because Adobe initially filed the complaint for > damages he could have been arrested under the civil action. However, once > Adobe agreed to drop the issue (I'm not sure they did, but it is my > understanding that they have) it didn't matter much, because they are not > required to pursue the criminal portion, the government alone can pursue it > from there. > > BTW, I'm not trying to argue that the cases which use the DMCA are valid in > any way, I'm totally againts all of them as they definately impose on my > fair use rights, which is why I have never purchased an eBook, don't own a > DVD player (actually not 100% true, I have a DVD player in my laptop and > have used it for loading software and playing around with DVD playback under > Linux using some borrowed DVD's), and don't own music with any SDI > watermarks (that I know of). If companies don't want to grant me fair use, > I don't want their products. > > Later, > Tom > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |