Re: Comment on DMCA, Security, and Vuln Reporting]

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 14:35:23 PDT

  • Next message: skybuck2000at_private: "Re: Re[2]: Possible cable modem denial of service ?"

    [Again, I'm not on vuln-dev, so feel free to forward.]
    
    You either misconstrue or mischaracterize the argument outlined in the 
    amicus brief.
    
    Our goal was not to prohibit others from linking; it was to say that these 
    are the reasons journalists should be able to link. Other people offered 
    other arguments, and for the record I believe in an expansive definition of 
    the term "journalist."
    
    -Declan
    
    
    At 05:13 PM 8/1/2002 -0400, Tim McKenzie wrote:
    
    > > * When I was at Wired News, we joined an amicus brief in the 2600 case
    >that
    > > said journalists should have the right to link to controversial material
    > > such as DeCSS.exe:
    > > http://www.politechbot.com/docs/linking-amicus.012601.html
    > >
    >
    >I may not be a lawyer.. however, I fail to see how a news agency should have
    >any more leniency than a private individual or security organization.
    >Especially in the case of a security related website, the end goal is the
    >same: To notify people en mass about an issue. If I were a lawyer and I  had
    >to defend a case like the 2600 one, I would definitely use this as an
    >argument. However, there is even a more pressing point.
    >
    >Should companies be sued for providing blank tapes, CDR's, DVDR's etc? They
    >provide the medium for spreading copyrighted material. I fail to see how
    >this is greatly different than the case of 2600 having a copy of the utility
    >on their website. Just because I own a blank tape, doesn't mean I'm going to
    >use it to copy all my rented movies. Likewise, having a copy of a rather
    >interesting program to analyze for research doesn't make me a pirate of
    >copyrighted DVDs nor does it mean I encourage the behavior. I believe, as
    >others have mentioned, that the problem lies in the people who make the
    >final decisions in cases like this and their lack of experience in the IT
    >industry. I believe that we are entitled to a jury of our "peers," which
    >could be described as equals. If I ever got caught up in a similar case, I
    >for one would have my lawyer ensure that my case is tried by a court that
    >understands how information technology works. Might be a lost cause, but I
    >would call it a cause worth fighting for.
    >
    >-TJM
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Aug 02 2002 - 00:58:45 PDT