Jon Johansen on ABC World News Tonight 413
Egil Kvaleberg writes "According to the newspaper
VG [in Norwegian], a film crew is apparently on its way to Jon Johansen to shoot some footage
which most likely will appear in tonight's edition of ABC's World News Tonight. The DVD-case has created a bit of a stir, and some important principles that it raises have already been raised in the Storting (Norwegian parliament).
The EFF has offered Jon and his
father support by offering to pay for a lawyer." If you miss the story on ABC, don't worry. Jon will be Slashdot's featured interview guest next week - and we don't confine our guests' answers to "sound bite" length.
Re:Vested Interests and honest journalists. (Score:2)
My media addiction has been in remission lately, but from what I have read/watch, the media have been all but ignoring the case until recently. However, Jon's arrest seems to be warming things up a bit.
In general, we're seeing a familiar pattern: a hot topic on
You can view ABC news online at this site [go.com]. I don't see anything about the case there right now.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
Judge or Jury? (Score:2)
If/when Jon's case comes to court, will it be heard before a Jury?
Re:ABC is owned by Disney who is prosecuting the g (Score:1)
Since when is journalism about thruth, unbiased reporting?
Surely it died with the advertisers..
Ever read the NY Times? Seen the articles where they accuse themselves? quite hilarious, if it wasnt so scary.
Hugs SlashDread
Re:Not theft? (Score:1)
Kevin Mitnick did compromise systems. jon didn't: nobody's arguing with that.
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:1)
Why Do people persist in stating this! Almost everyone needs DeCSS to make an illegal copy!
Perhaps we are falling into an error. Yes, almost any would would need to use deCSS to make a copy on to hard disk. But that's not illegal...
Yes, almost anyone would need deCSS to snip a clip and share it with thier friends.... but that's not illegal...
Yes, almost anyone would need cdCSS to place a copy of the movie on hard disk (or cdrom, or DVDRAM, or what have you), but that isn't illegal.
It's only illegal if you do it and it isn't for personal use, comment, or review, or you don't destroy all copies when you dispose of the original. (IANAL)
Can you agree with me that VHS tapes are easy to copy? Can you agree that most of us don't rent a move and rip a copy of it?
No sir, the question here isn't is it impossible to use it illegally , but is it more likely to be used legally.
I know quite a few people that go and buy the newest movies. These folks all know each other. Some even go buy several copies of the same movie so only one person has to go to the store.
These same folks could very easily rip copies of these movies on tape, but they don't. Why? Could it be because they are honest? Could it be they like having the original tape? Could it be that it's too much trouble?
Moderate this up please! (Score:3)
This is one of the best explanations of the case at hand that I've read yet. It uses some very good analogies. This should be front and center for everyone to read.
Re:Not theft? (Score:2)
Wrong! Jon did not "break into other people's systems", he reverse engineered an application ON HIS OWN PC! Good grief man, at least try to follow the story!
What difference does it make why they do it? (Score:2)
I can understand why many people fear many things, but that doesn't mean I want to see those things banned. I'm terribly sorry if they feel that piracy is going to cause grievous harm to their industry. I'm all in favor of them prosecuting true copyright violators. I simply won't stand idly by and let them take away my rights to make my own damn copies of DVDs that I have legitimately bought, or to use them with the OS of my choice, or in any other way that I am legitimately allowed to under copyright law. I don't care how afraid they are. They knew the risks, but they decided that they could make a substantial (or more likely unbelievably huge) profit with DVDs. Business ventures are always a risk, but I'm not going to give up my rights just so that they can reap more profits and not have to worry about the risks.
Re:it’s going mainstream now!! (Score:2)
Let's prove to the outside world that DeCSS has "gone mainstream".
Join my list of people holding copies of DeCSS.
If you hold a copy of DeCSS, email the following info on the subject line to e_lehman@mit.edu [mailto]:
Append a * if and only if you would like to express interest in a mass, simultaneous web-posting of DeCSS at some future date, should the MPAA prove relentless.
If the list grows to thousands, this negates the MPAA lawsuit in practical terms. Go ahead, sue 3 guys: there are thousands more where they came from.
Furthermore, we can make an important point that everyone-- not just geeks-- should understand in this case and for the future: bulldog lawyers, lobbyist-written laws, and PR goons can't prevent decent people from distributing decent stuff via the net.
Not worth your time to defend freedom of speech on the net? Take a look at Option B [cnn.com].
The individual liberties that will exist on the net for decades to come are being hashed out NOW. A lot of posters are clearly struggling to fairly balance copyright, trade secret, and patent issues against free speech on the net. This is certainly commendable, but anyone think the MPAA will temper their position one iota out of deference to free speech? I don't think so. This is a major, precendent-setting case, so let's win.
Mass Media's Effect (Score:4)
Jordan
Lawsuit? (Score:2)
Re:Justice vs. piracy (Score:2)
Hah, I almost laughed out loud when I read that. Are you really so dense? The files are being compressed down to VCD, and then ether burned or transferred online. Were you unaware of the existence of dvd-copy.com [dvd-copy.com] Take a look, and stop being so unbelievably blind.
No, I do not support the DVD-CCA, but I don't support idiotic doublethink ether.
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
CSS patents (Score:2)
What for though??? (Score:3)
In our reality, the media is all-too-often apt to side with the large corporation. Hackers/Crackers are bad, right?!? Why do we have reason to believe that he'll be cast in something other than negative light?
Now that Jon has been labelled "hacker", what's to keep the media from trying to label him as such, and treat him with the standard treatment of "hackers"? (Typical media sensationalism included)
I hope that I'm wrong, I really do. But I did see the 60 Minutes Mitnick interview, and while it was fairly impartial, I was really POd when the interviewer kept insisting that what Kevin was doing was theft. (No, in my opinion, it wasn't theft.)
Re:Can DeCSS be protected free speech? (Score:2)
Local news misrepresentation (Score:3)
All comments and advice will be weighed equally and smartly. Thanx in advance.
Josh V. of LAFix.org
Re:Why is this here? (Score:2)
Damn. Bastard orderlies gave me the wrong medication.
Most embarassing. My humblest apologies.
Translation of the Verldens Gang article (Score:2)
Computer-Jon on US television
Now the American broadcast news too have caught interest in the sensational action of the Economic Crimes Division against Jon Johansen (16). Today ABC News is in Vestfold to interview the Norwegian computer genius.
The feature is planned to air on World News Tonight, (comparison with a Norwegian show), aired across the entire USA.
"We want to meet him at his school to shoot him in the surroundings there, and at home in front of the computer, where we will interview him about his view on things. Of course we will link this to the current trials in the US, where the film industry want to remove links to Johansen's program", says Norwegian Svien Mikkelsen of ABC News.
"Could be something big"
"We will also interview Jon Bing, and perhaps someone from the Economic Crimes Division. Currently we are the first of the major networks with this news", Mikkelsen says.
He works at the London office of ABC, and was the one to bring the matter to the attention of the editors in New York from the Norwegian media.
"This could be something big, even if computer news are traditionally seen more as fringe stuff. It's also possible for the feature to air in the weekend edition", Mikkelsen says.
It was on Monday the Economic Crimes Division raided the home of Johansen, after the americam film giants has reported him for crimes against penal and copyright law. They claim that Johansen has cracked codes on DVD movies and constructed a program which can be used for unlawful copying of movies.
Johanses claims that the purpose of the program is to allow playing DVD movies on PCs with the Linux operating system, and that it's both lawful and (user friendly | beneficial to users).
Not Alone
In the wake of the enormous attention this matter has recieved it has also been brought forth that Jon Johansen didn't perform the actual cracking. But he informed Verldens Gang of that himself in an interview in November last year:
"It is annoying that the media prints "15-year-old cracks code". I didn't do this alone, but in cooperation with others, a Dutch and a German. You're not getting the names, but we call ourselves MoRE," Jon said that time.
The German is alleged to have performed the actual cracking, and constructed the DeCSS program that Johansen put on his home page.
no, you are plain wrong (Score:2)
You mean, you think that you can play a completly encrypted video file, with no keys whatsoever? Windows players use the keys on the Key tracks to decrypt the video. no key tracks, no video. I cant' belive this got marked as informative.
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
OOPS (Score:2)
In regards to Mitnik: my thoughts are best summed with a quote from Heavy Metal:
What Story? (Score:2)
This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.
Re:Transcript from Stortinget. (Score:2)
enough, and to see if the current application of these laws is sufficient in this context.
Until now, the Internet has been very democratic, but the forces that want to put the Internet under
strong commercial control and traditional power structures are strong, and this has to be avoided.
Wow, I didn't know there were
I would love to see a movement in the U.S. to do this very thing. I'd also like to see the public get involved. You find very few people in the general public who are sympathetic to the legislative needs of big business, esp. media/entertainment companies, outside of Congress that is.
Re:NO, Defendant's lawyers spilled the code! (Score:2)
Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected
A lack of news on ABC news (Score:2)
Of course, the Simpsons are more informative than ABC news, so I'm not saying much...
-----
Want to reply? Don't know HTML? No problem. [virtualsurreality.com]
Re:Says who? (Score:2)
Do you honestly think that DeCSS is going to stimulate piracy significantly? If so, how? Why would someone who didn't copy DVDs before suddenly decide to start just because DeCSS came out? Honestly, that doesn't make any sense to me. How can you advocate outlawing a technology (DeCSS) because it provides one more way for people to do something they could already have done using other means? And what of the original claim that piracy will be what DeCSS "will really be used for"? How do you support that?
-r
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:2)
If I were on trial under a bad law here in Maryland, I might well try to point out to the jury that the state constitution [state.md.us] declares them "Judges of Law, as well as of fact" and argue why the law is bad.
Re:They (MPAA?) tried this before with VHS (Score:2)
It's called Macrovision [repairfaq.org] and it's still in use today --- a nastier version is in use in DVDs. As for the 'descramblers' they are still around, check at SIMA [simacorp.com].
---
Things for the interview (Score:4)
How secret could it be if several million people get it beamed to their TV's with the evening news?
Re:What Story? (Score:2)
Methinks they may have pulled the story. In a way that's a good thing, because ABC/diz-nee are afraid that the truth will hurt them.
Re:Vested Interests and honest journalists. (Score:4)
Disney owns ABC. If I'm not misaken they're a member of the DVD consortium. Doesn't mean they won't do an unbiased interview -- MSNBC has had some pretty fair reporting on the Microsoft antitrust case.
impractical? (Score:3)
css-auth is what lets you play DVDs in Linux right off the disk, and is a derivative of DeCSS (or at least uses the same ideas).
Really, the amount of doublethink on this board is shocking. We all know why DeCSS was made, and yet we persist in believing what we want.
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
where the fight will be (Score:2)
I'm a baaaaaaad boy (Score:2)
Anyway, what I'm scared of is, about four months ago, I took it apart and started tinkering with it. Really neat! (Ever since junior high, I've always wondered how they worked.) I bet I could buy some more locks and study them and become a decent locksmith or safecracker.
This is illegal, isn't it? I'm gonna go to jail for it, anen't I? If they can arrest that nice kid in Norway for tinkering with his DVDs, then I'm toast! OH GOD I DONT WANNA GO TO JAIL!!!
~svoboda
A Modest Proposal (Score:2)
Can't wait to see the piece (Score:2)
Will they get any choice comments from the EFF for their piece? Maybe showing a DVD playing under Linux? How about someone saying that watching a DVD you bought with the player you want is not piracy? We can only hope.
Maybe I'll even turn the TV on, if indeed they are actually going to run this story.
kabloie
Bleem! (Score:2)
The judge, of course, would have none of it, which is why you can now buy Bleem! in your local Babbage's.
Oh, and lest you think there was something wrong with Sony's initial patent, there wasn't. They managed to successfully shut down Virtual Game Station (by a different company, for the Mac) because they used patent information. Not that patents apply to DVDs, since DVD CCA was more worried about illegal piracy than legal emulation, they didn't patent it but relied on keeping it a trade secret. You see, people can get in to look at patents, like Tengen did with Nintendo's patents so they could make NES cartridges. Tengen were eventually stopped because they had stolen Nintendo's patents, but they couldn't have been if they had "clean room" reverse engineered the cartridges. Then they could merrily have gone on making NES cartridges, while sticking their tongues out at Nintendo's lawyers. Trade secrets, however, aren't as well protected by the law:
I should note that now DeCSS is common knowledge, but I'm not even sure how strong a protection this would've allowed in any event.who will it stop? (Score:2)
What they wanted to stop was your 15 year old warez puppies from posting VOBs in IRC. Think about it, Do you 'pay' for your illicit MP3s? What the MPAA is trying to do here is stop people from sharing with there friends perfect digital copies. The net only requires one original to get passed all over the world (there was most likely only one copy of the matrix originally leaked as VCD, but thousands of people have it)
If one warez person can make a copy and pass it to his friends, then there will be no stopping it. Just like DeCSS itself.
This isn't to say that I agree with the strong-arm tactics of the MPAA, In any way. In fact it makes me very angry. But I do understand why they are afraid
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
Re:Vested Interests and honest journalists. (Score:2)
I haven't had time in the last days to read what abcnews.com had to report on this case, and specially what kind of spin they put on it. Can anybody who has read their coverage give an opinion? How biased/clueless was it?
I wonder... (Score:2)
Wouldn't that be hilarious?
(camera slowly scans over the source)
Concerned Reporter's Voice:
CNN got it right... (Score:2)
The URL:http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/ptech/01/25/dvd.
It's one of the better articles on the matter by mainstream press right now - if you need to direct a PHB towards an article to correct any generalizations or alterations they may make on a personal basis about this case (because they don't understand the big picture from the small painting they're seeing from other media sources) then this CNN article is pretty good...
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:5)
What people have claimed is that fair use of DVD is the same as fair use of any other copyright material. That there is nothing special about it just *because* it is DVD, rather than, say, VHS. The claim is that you have no MORE rights in purchasing a DVD, but no LESS either!
I could sell you a book, but I've written it in code. I'll sell you a secret decoder ring as well.
If you can read the book *without* buying the secret decoder ring I can't stop you.
Noone here, ( with the one exception as noted above), is saying that you should be able to decode it, print decoded copies and sell them, but fair use gives you the right to read it if you are capable.
The only fly in the ointment with regard to DVD is the secret decoder ring. The DVD CCA's position is that they are the only people in the world allowed to hand out decoder rings. That's the only issue at stake here.
Note also that noone, *not even the DVD CCA* has made any charges that *possession* of the secret decoder ring is illegal, only distributing it.
Think about that one for a minute.
To make the issue a little LESS clear, what if I published a book in electronic form, but in Swahili knowing that most of the people in the world can't read Swahili? I'll also sell you a piece of software that perfectly translates the book into English. Note that I *havn't* placed you under any license. I have SOLD you the book, you have all the legal rights that book that ownership grants you.
Is it illegal for you to read it in Swahili? How about this, is it illegal to *read it to someone else in English?* Is it illegal to write your own program to translate it?
The only difference between this situation and the DVD issue is that CSS is made up language. How does that change the legal situation above?
How about this analogy. I sell you a book, only I've locked it in a safe. The physical book is now your property and so is the safe *BUT,* I'll only sell you the combination for an extra fee?
Are you legally allowed to read the book? If not, why not? Are you legally allowed to crack the combination? Disassemble the lock and see how it works, bearing in mind that the builder willfully and by choice declined to patent the mechinism? Can you then tell your friend how the lock works? If not, why not?
Despite what some people have insinuated here, or even claimed outright, you do *NOT* have license rights that are in any way analogous to software license rights with regards to the *contents* of a DVD, that is, the movie itself. The DVD CCA has not claimed this, and you'll find that your printed restrictions are *identical* to those you'll find on a VHS tape. Your rights under these restrictions are perfectly well defined under law and are the SAME as those for a VHS tape. The only license issue here is the descrambling code. That is a trade secret.
Here's another famous trade secret, the formula for Coca-Cola. But wait, did you know that many companies have analized Coke and you can buy chemically identical brands of cola right off the shelf? If you *don't* know this it's because Coke dosn't want you to know * and can't do anything about it.* They have NO legal protection from people doing this. Is DeCSS different? If so, why?
Noone here is suggesting contravening those laws. They are suggesting that you have the same rights to view and copy a DVD that you do a VHS tape and that that right is already spelled out by law. That's all.
Note that not even the DVD CCA has *ever* claimed you don't have the right to make copies of a DVD you have purchased! Why not? Becasue they know darn well the law says you DO!
Interesting that, isn't it? I could walk right into the courthouse with a DVD I could prove I owned, copy it right in front of the DVD CCA lawyers, and walk out. They couldn't do a damn thing.
If, instead of walking out, I then *gave* that copy to someone in the gallery I'd be in deep doo doo. THAT is illegal. That is pirating. *Not making the copy!*
How could I make a copy? Well, I could spend several thousand dollars and buy a commercial quality press, off the shelf. Perfectly legal.
I could do somthing a lot easier though. How about this. I get a legal copy of a DVD software decoder, install it in my Windows partition, and rip the decrypted files to my hd or a VHS tape. The DVD CCA still can't do a thing about it because I STILL havn't broken any law.
Ok, let's go to one further layer of abstraction. I've got my computer with a DVD drive, I've got my DVD, I've got a legal software decoder, only NOW I use LiVid with CSS-auth on my Linux partition to rip the file. Have I done anything wrong? If so, why? I'll bet this one would make the DVD CCA lawyers squirm a bit, but STILL not give them grounds to touch me.
If I was allowed to crack the lock on the safe with the book in it, why can't I just crack the lock on the DVD and skip purchasing the licensed software decoder?
That's the only issue at debate here. Not whether I have right to "use it however I want."
You're criminalizing kitchen knife manufacturers (Score:2)
No dear AC, just because DeCSS *can* be used for bad purposes doesn't mean that it is bad in itself. Owners of Linux, *BSD and other free O/Ss need DeCSS in order to play the DVDs which they have purchased, and that's all there is to it. If other people want to use the same product for other questionable purposes then go and molest them, not those who merely want to watch their own DVDs on their own computers.
Re:Says who? (Score:2)
Let me be clear. Giving control over DVD to an oligopoly (for that's what the DVD consortium is) will allow them basically to destroy fair use rights for any information distributed by DVD. We cannot afford to allow free use rights to wither and die, not even for something as trivial as the crap that Hollywood turns out. If we allow it here we set a precedent that will open the door to ending fair use rights everywhere. In my mind, to overcome the evil of allowing CSS to remain closed the consortium must show that an evil of equal or greater magnitude would result from allowing DeCSS to open it up. In particular, I would like to see some proof that DVD sales have dropped measurably since the release of DeCSS. If they have not, then I have to conclude that the piracy that DeCSS has enabled is not significant, certainly not a threat to the industry, and, therefore, not a valid excuse to allow the consortium to maintain its stranglehold on the format.
-r
lmited worldview? (Score:2)
It just pisses me off that so many uninformed morons are posting here 90% of whom don't even know what DeCSS even does!
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
You are wrong by omission (Score:3)
Then of course, there are the big-time commercial pirates, who make bit for bit copies en mass without ever decrypting the disk, and sell them to consumers who have no trouble playing them in their DVD Forum Approved players.
CSS is not about preventing piracy, it is about preventing playability, and hence open competition. The DVD Forum is interested in maintaining an illegal monopoly, nothing more.
DVD lawyers "spill" secret code (Score:5)
A digital rights licensing group seeking to ban the controversial DVD decryption program known as DeCSS has shut down yet another potential distributor: a California state courthouse.
Read the full article here. [cnet.com]
My favorite quote: "If they didn't file it under seal, they could be seen to have given up the their (trade secret) rights."
Gosh, I hope so!
Re:Criminal-worshipping and slashdot (Score:5)
But there are certainly people I respect who have broken the law. In fact, given the scope of the law these days, I don't think I know anyone who's not a criminal - from the underage drinkers to the pot smokers to the CD tapers to the unauthorized software copiers to the sex criminals (take a look at some of the state laws), I doubt there's anyone in this country over the age of 18 who hasn't broken at least one federal, state, or local ordinance.
Then, of course, you've got your famous lawbreakers like MLK and Gandhi...there's nothing sacred about the law, or necessarily immoral in breaking it. Those who think otherwise would have made fine fugitive-slave catchers.
No, they are not. They could not, for example, choose to licence their DVDs only for viewing by blond-haired Christians on Tuesday nights when the moon is waning, and expect the state to enforce their claims.Intellectual property is an artificial creation of the state meant to promote progress in the arts and sciences. When it becomes destructive of those ends - when it prevents the spread of ideas rather then encouraging their development - no rights, legal or ethical, apply.
So long as the rest of us were also free to ignore all claims of copyright or restricted licence, fine by me. The GPL is made for a world where copyright and licencing are used to restrict our freedom to use and modify software - remove that impediment, and there's no more need for the GPL.Re:impractical? (Score:2)
hrm... The copy of DeCSS I got of signal_11's mirror contains 4 files. a readme, an exe, and two DLLs: one for win9x, and one for win2k. No source here (and its not in the readme, I checked). AFAIK, DeCSS was orgionaly posted as binary, then source (under GPL).
But it dosn't matter. You still can't use a windows program in linux, even if it is in source form, Idiot.
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
Positive Freedom, and Productive Social Investment (Score:2)
I'll be sure to aircheck it... (Score:2)
Moderate down if you wish, but this was meant to be OT and slightly humorous. I already have negative karma, so it won't really hurt.
_______
Scott Jones
Newscast Director / ABC19 WKPT
Game Show Fan / C64 Coder
That won't compile (Score:2)
But it dosn't matter, The program was initaly a windows program. Just beacuse I dissagree with the 'comon knowlage' dosn't mean I'm a troll. I think what the MPAA is trying to is a bad thing, and I hope they fail. But you braindead idiots arn't helping anything
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
This is risky (Score:2)
Right now I would seem that the media could hinge either way although they are always more inclined to go in the direction of the scandal (which at the moment is in the 'prosecution' favour)
What I would say at the moment (and Jon, if you are reading) take care and think very carefully about what you say before you say it....
BTW Good luck to Jon with becoming a TV celeb!
Stand by John (Score:2)
Too bad everyone already has the DeCSS code. Not only that, but DVD's were being pirated the before DeCSS even came out. How you ask? It's really quite easy with a DVD player that has analoge outputs anda video capture card. These people don't seem to understand the fact that they already lost;
DVD's and everything else they ever release will always be pirated
Since all we want is to watch their movies on our Linux box, it is imperative that we villanize these scapegoat-hungry purveyors of digital media. Tell your friends, tell your family, tell TIME magazine, tell anyone who will listen! A teenager's life is at stake.
Hello! That was a Dumb Journalist talking! (Score:2)
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:2)
If you can read the book *without* buying the secret decoder ring I can't stop you.
But look at the DMCA again. If I figure out a way to build my own secret decoder ring, and I make it available to the public, I've broken the law (the DMCA). I've provided to the public a device whose primary purpose is to defeat the technological protection of a copyrighted work.
Everyone should go read the transcript of the New York injunction hearing. I found it very enlightening... and it made me realize just what the DMCA is going to look like in practice. What I consider "fair use", and what the law now allows, are diverging.
--
This'll be interesting (Score:5)
On the other hand, don't expect journalists to be honest, impartial witnesses. That's what they are =SUPPOSED= to be, but "supposed to" and "are" are very different. (For a start, "are" is much shorter. :)
Those from the UK might remember Martin Bell, the former war correspondant for the BBC, how he got involved in the Bosnian/Serb conflict by rescuing an orphan from the horrors, and how he later trounced Neil Hamilton, a conservative MP, over parliamentary abuse & gross misconduct. Such people are rare, but they do exist.
We should NOT be hasty and prejudge the ABC crew as dishonest or slaves to the paymaster. Nor should we assume they are saints, out to save the day from the Evil Media Empire. They're human, and like any human, will respond to their own sets of values AT THE TIME. We would be treating them with no more respect than the police treated Jon Johanson if we were to believe otherwise. We aren't in their minds. We don't know what angle the producer wants. We don't know what the journalists know or think they know. We don't know how they'll react when they get there. We don't know ANYTHING. And from that, some posters here can magically deduce, from thin air, exactly what the story'll be like? Give -them- a break!
Now, if the story is factually wrong, demonises innocent people, and/or goes on a witch-hunt, feel free to throw boiling oil. Here, have a lit brand to start the fires. ---*. But, if -we- are to have any integrity, that should apply even if the witch-hunt is against media moguls. If a person is innocent, they're innocent, and it doesn't matter what "side" of the fence they're on.
Re:The irony. (Score:2)
Interesting. A search for "Digital video disk" at the USPTO [uspto.gov] turned up Patent 5,883,958 [uspto.gov].
However this patent does not describe the CSS scrambling algorithm itself. It only talks about the key management system surrounding it, and gives DES as an example of a scrambling algorithm that could be used for the data. This sill allows them to use another trade-secret algorithm, which is what they did.
Possibly the best thing to do at this point is to repeat the reverse engineering of CSS while paying careful attention to the trade secret and RE laws. Then publish that, along with a trail of evidence to show how the RE was done. However there is no getting around the fact that DeCSS, or any similar program, will still be in violation of this patent.
Paul.
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:2)
I'm no lawyer...but I don't think the DMCA invalidates Fair Use...and I'm pretty sure the courts will ensure that that is the case, notwithstanding the N.Y. judge's apparent distaste for consumer rights.
New XFMail home page [slappy.org]
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:2)
Disney does own ABC, but who owns NBC, CBS, UPN, etc..
The AOL-TIME/WARNER and now EMI mergers includes CNN. How is that going to effect real indepth coverage on the whole DVD issue.
I think we have two issues going on here
1) Reverse engineering/Trade Secrets
2) Fair Use/Copywrite/Digital Millenium Act use of DVD products
I hope the rest of the consumers get the word of what the usage restrictions for DVD really are for the home units. Can you imagine what people will think when they find out they can't leave a movie at grandma's house so she can watch it?
Mass Media Affected (Score:2)
I hope that the defense does not try to make any arguments along those lines, because it will totally get blown away.
Sequential media (i.e. tape) is down to around the same cost as DVD movies (a little over $2 per gigabyte) now. It is already practical (in terms of dollars) to do it if you don't mind a somewhat cheezy solution which lacks the advantages of random access. Considering that VHS still isn't dead yet, I think sequential media is good enough for most movie viewing purposes.
And that's just today. The cost per gigabyte keep falling. 5 years ago, 100M Zip/Syquest drives were "cool". $15 for 100M disk = $150 per Gig. Nowdays you can get removable random access storage at about one tenth that price, using an Orb drive [castlewood.com]. 30 Gig removable disks (enough to hold 6 movies) for $20 apiece is totally conceivable within 5 years. That's just how things go.
Please don't try the impracticality argument. It will just give The Enemy a free strawman victory.
---
Norwegian petition in support of Jon (Score:5)
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:2)
Hacking what Jon has done so that one can copy DVD's on home equipment is completely impractical. The place where DVD's would be illegally copied, would be on larger industrial equipment which do not have the CSS hurdle to begin with and therefore don't need Jon's code.
We are most definetely not lying to ourselves!
Re:Positive Freedom, and Productive Social Investm (Score:2)
The result is well known. The Law of the Crowd. Anyone who tries to rise up will be pushed down by the members of the community. That is what Soviet Union has come into: great ideals and a huge social swamp. For a US patriot it is rather interesting to read you...
Executive summaries for ABC: DeCSS rights a wrong (Score:2)
DVD piracy already existed in the far east long before DeCSS. DeCSS has nothing to do with that.
DeCSS was developed to allow the rightful owners of DVDs to play them on their Linux and BSD systems. Look, here is my Linux computer: it has a DVD drive built in, and here is a DVD that I bought, yet the MPAA deny me the right to play my DVD in my computer. That's wrong, and DeCSS overcomes that wrong.
What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:5)
* Behold legally bought PC: (point to PC, and wave receipt)
* Behold legally bought DVD Player: (point to player, and wave receipt)
* Behold legally bought Operating system (point to (say) redhat box, and wave receipt)
* Behold legally bought DVD: (point to DVD, and wave receipt)
(wave court order) This is an attempt to stop a person playing a legally bought DVD on a legally bought player using a legally bought operating system on a legally bought computer.
The alleged crime? Theft. Apperently some people wish it to be a crime to use your *own* equipment to play your *own* DVD, without "permission". I ask the viewers to consider which party that the "theft" tag is more appropiate to: A person trying to play legally bought DVD on his system, or, the company that's trying to stop people playing that same legal DVD.
This is the self same company that requires players to have built-in incompatibilties between DVD's. There may be those of you that remember getting videos from the USA, and paying money to convert them to european format. It was "one of those things" you said, different standards grew up. How annoyed would you be if when a new standard came out, with a chance to fix all that, those self same problems were deliberitly included. Forget about getting a gift of a DVD from your aunt in the states - to have the "priveledge" of viewing your birthday present, you'd have to pay more money to do so. And this is the company that call playing your own movies "theft"? "Physician, heal thyself."
IMO, this case is not about pirating, as the water muddiers would like you to believe. It's simply about control, money, and power. Some people want to control what you watch, charge you dearly for the priviledge, and take children to court if you don't like it. That sounds more like Long John Silver tatics than a move to "combat piracy".
This case is alleged to be a breech of copyright laws, but the plaintiffs seem to have forgotten the spirit as well as the words of that law. One of the things copyright law allows, no, actually *protects* is "fair use". Is playing a DVD on your own system "fair use"? I leave that up to our viewers to decide.
This is, A.N. Other, signing off.
--
Re:This'll be interesting (Score:2)
Re:What for though??? (Score:2)
I'm sure he will do his part to try to get the
right impression.
FYI, after the initial flurry, the norwegain press
has reported a surprisingly balanced view. If
there is a bias, my impression is that might be
tending to be pro-Jon.
Major newspapers have even begun to bring quite decent what-is-hackerdom type of articles.
Jon has also used the Linux-connection, and it
seems the press is really starting to grasp it.
Maybe no one will hear me.. (Score:2)
From the C|net article [cnet.com]:
"Court papers are generally considered public documents, available to anyone for the asking."
Isn't the LiViD code under the GPL? Doesn't this make it qualify as a public document, as anyone who asks can get the source? I just don't understand the crazy US legal system
---
Re:The irony. (Score:2)
Assuming that this algorithm is the real CSS one, then trade secret protection does not apply to it, and DeCSS can be distributed as long as it does not include any secret keys, and of course subject to any relevant patent laws.
BTW, IANAL.
Paul.
Simple quote (Score:2)
--
Fair use of database (Score:2)
So if the judge can be convinced that a DVD is just a pile of data and therefore the equivalence of a database, Jon should be pretty safe.
Mmm
mvh
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be one.
SIGN THE PETITION -- let the reporters take note (Score:2)
So, let's give them something at least slightly sensational: the fact that thousands of respected people around the globe are up in arms about the action of the MPAA and the consequent unfair treatment of Jon. Signing up to the PETITION [linpro.no] will help there immensely, because even the old TV media types are aware of the power of the Internet as a competing medium, and you can bet your life that they'll be looking at the signature count to add a factoid to their piece.
Journalists Fact Sheet (Score:3)
And also, the many court cases showing that the development/distribution/use of DeCCS is completely legal due to (among other laws/precedents) the Millenium Copyright Act.Do you remember the TV industry trying to sue Sony because they used their videos (Betamax specifically) to record programmes for future viewing.
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:3)
Anyways its not exactly clear weither such controls are perfectly legal, as they violate a consumers right to free use. But we will all have to wait and let the courts battle it out.
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:4)
"However, motion picture owners have been
reluctant to embrace this exciting new medium until reasonable steps to deter casual home
copying are in place."
This is what most of us know as fair use, such as transferring from one medium to another (as encouraged by Sony in their ads for MiniDisc). This is not intended, nor is it presented as such, as a means to curtail piracy. The pirates will blithely produce copies with no need or use for DeCSS. DeCSS defeats playback protection.
Yes! "Fair Use" is important item for summary (Score:2)
However, we shouldn't pose it as a question. That would require the reporters to think, which is always a bad idea. State it directly: playing your own DVD is fair use, which the MPAA are trying to prevent.
Re:A way to think about it (Score:2)
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:2)
Zone restrictions dubious at best. (Score:4)
Here's a philosophical question for you, based on a real situation. When I was living in Bloomington, IN and shopping for a new car, I found that I could get a much better deal by going to a dealer in Louisville[1]. In other words, Louisville was a "cheap" area for new cars, while Bloomington was an "expensive" area. Suppose the auto manufacturer wanted to force me to buy from the more expensive dealer by forcing me to sign a "license agreement" when I bought the car in Kentucky saying that I would not operate the car in Indiana. Should the manufacturer be allowed to impose this restriction? If so, from whence do you believe they derive the right to tell me where I can or cannot drive a car that I have legally purchased? If not, then how is this situation different from the DVD situation you have described?
Finally, one more philosophical question. You describe the DVD zone restrictions as "entirely immoral". Even presuming them to be legal, why, then, do you defend them? Time was when people protested laws that were unjust, let alone "entirely immoral". What has happened to us? Have we forgotten that the power of those laws derives from our consent?
-r
[1] Note that I am not referring to the difference in state sales tax. Louisville dealers were just cheaper in general, probably owing to having more competition.
Says who? (Score:4)
Still don't believe me? Let's make a wager. If illegal copies of DVDs increase 5-fold from what they were pre-DeCSS before some company markets a no zone-restriction DVD player (which could be implemented in either hardware or software), then you win. If vice-versa, then I win. Naturally, if DeCSS is squashed by the courts, then the wager is off. What do you say? Do we have a bet?
-r
Watch it here ... (Score:2)
http://www.icravetv.com [icravetv.com], then tune to WKBW 7 [icravetv.com].
---
ABC News on DeCSS (Score:2)
The EFF needs you (Score:2)
As you saw, the EFF [eff.org]'s offering legal help. If you think that's worth something, how about skipping over to the EFF site and donating $10 or $20 on your credit card?
Hey, I did, and I'm just a weasely little Anonymous Coward!
Hacking & Open Source (Score:2)
"You may say I'm a hacker
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will code as one"
- Daniel, BITEntertainment
Re:Criminal-worshipping and slashdot (Score:2)
DeCSS does nothing to encourage piracy or help DVD pirates. DVDs have been pirated long since before DeCSS came out.
Perhaps you should rethink this subject a bit. A cartel/monopoly wants you to only be able to view their media on their terms at extortion like prices and license fees. Someone creates a process by which you can bypass this. Now who's the thief?
ABC is owned by Disney who is prosecuting the guy. (Score:2)
Am I the only one who sees a conflict of interest here. I don't know how ABC can do a fair story when they are working for disney. This is the problem with the huge media companies. They can control the public opinion.
I think ABC news is usually very fair. But I don't know about this. I think upper level management might be in on this one. This is just too big for their parent company for them to take the other side.
So much for fair news reporting
geach
Re:Fair use of database (Score:2)
It's a legal fine point, but one that is probably sufficient to kill this line of defense.
This coverage is probably a good thing. (Score:3)
You're kidding, right? Television news loves the underdog. And they're happy to trash a large corporation, because it's good for ratings. They'll even compromise journalistic integrity to do so - think of Dateline NBC's coverage of those exploding pickup trucks. A David-Goliath conflict like this one is great for ratings - but it requires that you make David look like the good guy.
Any coverage of this that puts a human face on the people involved is good for those of us who consider reverse engineering a legitimate activity. It's far better for us if they interview him, give him a name and face, than if they just stick to referring to him as a nameless "hacker". A real 16-year-old boy can't be anywhere near as menacing on camera as the mainstream media's vague concept of a "hacker" is.
Of course, they can still try to trash him, make him look like a computer criminal, a kindred spirit to Mitnick. But I doubt they will, because Johansen-as-criminal is not likely to sell with the public. He never broke in to anyone's computer, never stole any individual private information (such as credit card numbers). The idea that what he did was wrong will be jarring to most people's intuitive idea of property, which is that you can do whatever the hell you want with the things that are your property.
Re:Mass Media's Effect (Score:3)
Do I have to build the car so a drunk can't start it? What about the guy off in the woods having a few beers, then a heart attack? Now my car won't start, and he dies trying to get to help.
I'm getting pretty sick of people not wanting to take responsibiliy for thier actions. The "It's not my fault, they made it so I could do it, so it's thier fault!" whine is getting to be pretty common. I tend to beleive that folks have a brain, and that they should use it. Just because something isn't designed to stop you from doing something shouldn't be taken for a sign that it would be a good idea to do that.
The problem here is that so many forget that we do need to take a look at what we build, and see how it fits into socity. We don't have to build something so there is no possibility that it could ever be mis-used, no matter what. That's insane. It's also impossible.
No, the important thing isn't that it could be used for illegal things, but that the most common use is for legal purposes.
I See a Xerox copier used most every day to make copies of protected works. However, almost all of those copies are "FAIR USE". Xerox isn't responsible for the use of one of thier copiers to make illegal copies any more than Jon is responsible if someone used deCSS for an illegal act.
The question is: Is deCSS more likely to be used as a tool to rip off the copyright holder, or is it a tool more likely to be used to excersize "fair use"?
Since no one needs deCSS to rip an illegal copy, but they do need deCSS to view a ligitimate copy, I'd say that deCSS is more likely to be used for legal purposes.
ABC = DISNEY = PLAINTIFF (Score:2)
Keep in mind that ABC is owned by Disney and Disney has chosen to leverage it's power repeatedly (i.e. the Sitcom "Ellen" eas cancelled because she is gay on the show and Disney won't stand for that). In this case, Disney being one of the plaintiff (indirectly maybe) we'll see what happens.
Needless to say I'd feel *slightly* better if NBC or CBS flew over for the interview...
Transcript from Stortinget. (Score:5)
For the Norwegian speaking, read this. [stortinget.no] Search for DVD.
Here is a quick translation.
Erik Solheim (SV): This question is for the Minister of Culture.
When a 16 year old on a small farm in Vestfold is capable of breaking the codes that the big international industry has made to protect DVD-records, then I believe that most people would consider that it is the big international industry that has a problem.
I have a very unpleasant feeling that Økokrim has too much time on their hands (don't have enough to do) when they involve themselves in a case like this.
I am ofcourse not asking the minister of culture or the ministry to overrule Økokrim, but I would like for the minister of culture to tell the parliament if she is going to initiate a review of the laws related to Internet and modern entertainment industry, to see if the laws that ensure freedom of speech and democracy are strong enough, and to see if the current application of these laws is sufficient in this context.
Until now, the Internet has been very democratic, but the forces that want to put the Internet under
strong commercial control and traditional power structures are strong, and this has to be avoided.
Minister Åslaug Marie Haga:
...important case
I am unable to comment on this spesific case as it is being investigated by the police at this point.
This is generally an important area, which we are currently looking at. And not only in Norway, but also in the EU-system. Work is going on in the European Union to develop a directive that covers how we are going to handle "opphavsrett" (IP ownership, etc) in the information (digital)
society.
....have to balance the needs of IP ownership on one side, and the public on the other side.
Erik Solheim:
We all acknowledge that IP ownership has to be maintained, and that this is a central problem (large, important area).
But there are three other areas (matters of concern) that are equally important:
The democratic problem - how to make the technology available and usable for the largest
number of people.
It is in the interest of the consumers to avoid unneccesary monopolies in the new markets (areas) of information technology.
It is also a 3rd world problem - to ensure that this technology is made available to countries outside the core markets of the large industry.
These concerns have to be considered very important when we determine how much IP should be protected [in the digital world].
I would like to know when the minister is able to return to the parliament with more information concerning these matters.
Åslaug Marie Haga:
The area of democracy, publicity (public access?) and availability is one of the conflict areas in the EU directive that is presently under development.
I find it natural to address the parliament again concerning these matters when the directive has been hashed out more in the EU system.
Can DeCSS be protected free speech? (Score:2)
Could Jon go into court and submit the source code to DeCSS in his own defense and therefore make it public record? What if some enterprising congressman could make it part of the congressional record, so that it would be publicly available and uncensorable?
Again, IANAL, and I'm especially ignorant of Norwegian law, but I would imagine Jon would have an even stronger legal position than the tobacco guy because HE authored the code himself, independently. It's not like he stole secrets from a company, he came up with this on his own.
Re:What you could do: (don't lawyers study logic?) (Score:2)
New York Dolls (Score:2)
Re:DVD lawyers "spill" secret code (Score:2)
As near as I can tell from what's happened so far, and from descriptions of the judge's behavior, he is most definitely not on our side. It didn't seem likely that he could be swayed either, no matter how rational an argument the defence puts up.
Re:ABC = DISNEY = PLAINTIFF (Score:2)
Keep in mind that ABC is owned by Disney and Disney has chosen to leverage it's power repeatedly (i.e. the Sitcom "Ellen" was cancelled because she is gay on the show and Disney won't stand for that).
Get the story right. Ellen wasn't cancelled because she was gay, Ellen was cancelled because she was boring. The fact that she was gay made the show potentially controversial for some advertisers, but if the ratings were there the show would have stayed.
Or have you forgotten that our Southern Baptist Convention friends launched a failed boycott of Disney a couple years ago because Disney, quite possibly the world's largest single employer of gay personnel, was one of the first major corporations to extend "domestic partner" benefits? Not to mention that the mouse apparently flexes its muscles on Sixth Avenue soooo much to protect its "family image" that the ever-controversial "NYPD Blue" returned to ABC a couple weeks ago after the show's producers insisted it would only return in its original time slot. Don't kid yourself -- the Disney people are quite skilled at making "good business decisions" -- and bullying their TV network is generally not one of them.
There is such a thing as "journalistic integrity," and ABC News often exhibits a great deal of it, and the mouse generally gives them a great deal of latitude with it. So let's give them the benefit of the doubt until after we see how the interview goes.
This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.
Re:The tide may be turning ... (Score:2)
As others have pointed out, this is probably what the MPAA really fears: loss of legislative protection for their price-fixing technology.
We should emphasise this aspect of the case in the international media (i.e., internet sites), so that the citizens and legislators of the world will realize that their nations are being econo-fucked by a mercantilist system posturing as an IP protection scheme.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
Re:What you could do: (also in courtroom?) (Score:2)
Stop the new EU copyright directive! (Score:2)
This new directive is bad news for all us Europeans. Unfortunately, Norway is not a proper member of the EU, we're only barely a member of the European common market, so we have no say in how the new directive will be worded, but will just have to incorporate the new directive into Norwegian law.
All you other Europeans, on the other side, you have a right to vote and can protest to your local politicians, your local members of the European Parliament, your government, etc to change this new directive before it comes into effect!!!
I think this [bna.com] is the text of the new directive. You might try to do your own searches.
I'd like to finish my little call for a united european action aganst this new directive with a quote in legalise about the new directive. (Think web-proxies, caches and buffers in routers. Think about copyright costs for ISPs.)
3. The draft definition includes direct and indirect reproduction, whether permanent or temporary, in any manner or form. The first element in the proposal relates to the terms "direct" and indirect" reproduction. Such a formulation can be found both in Article 7 of the Rental Right Directive and in Article 10 of the Rome Convention. This term means reproducing a work or other protected matter directly onto the same or a different medium. The term "indirect" covers reproductions done via an intermediate stage, for example, the recording of a broadcast which itself has been made on the basis of a phonogram. The provision is also intended to make clear that the right is not affected by the distance between the place where an original work is situated and the place where a copy of it is made. The second element (temporary/permanent) is intended to clarify the fact that in the network environment very different types of reproduction might occur which all constitute acts of reproductions within the meaning of this provision. The result of a reproduction may be a tangible permanent copy, like a book, but it may just as well be a non-visible temporary copy of the work in the working memory of a computer. Both temporary and permanent copies have to be covered by the definition of an act of reproduction, since even temporary reproduction may cause serious economic prejudice to the rightholder.
The tide may be turning ... (Score:5)
We'll have to wait and see what ABC has to say (can they get around the Disney affiliation or not). But I think the MPAA may have just shot themselves in the foot.
Outside of the US, local media (espcially public media) takes a dim view of American media interests. (Seeing as those interests usually involve drowning out the locals.) Given what I heard last night about Jon's case (on CBC radio) Canadian Public Broadcasting, at least thinks the MPAA has been heavy handed. Of course, they said that Jon was 14, and that DeCSS was "probably illegal", but they did mention that it was for viewing DVDs on Linux, and not originally intended for piracy. As soon as they start to make an issue about how unecomonical DVD piracy actually is the MPAA will probably lose the public's good opinion.
Looking at the quotes from the Norwegian Parliament, I think the whole issue of "Big American Business Persecuting Local Talent" is starting to hit home. I mean just look at Jon's picture (I don't have a link handy). He's a clean cut kid, hardly the image the public has of a "Dangerous Hacker". He's from "a farm in Vestfold". Now, if he had purple hair and piercings, sadly, the public would hate him. But the public isn't likely to hate a smart, apparently articulate, teenager who hasn't actually caused anyone any harm. They may still think what he did should be outlawed (wrongly in my opinion), but when Big Business tries to put someone who could be your kid in prison - I'd tend to react unfavorably.