Slashdot Log In
Adobe Backs Down
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Mon Jul 23, 2001 06:47 PM
from the well-thats-a-step-in-the-right-direction dept.
from the well-thats-a-step-in-the-right-direction dept.
bruthasj writes "Adobe is going to pull out of prosecuting Dmitry, according to this." I'm glad to see that justice was served after screwing this guy over. Of course the real point was made: "We have the power. Don't reverse engineer our toys" since the guy is still in Jail, and this is "The United States Vs" and not "Adobe Vs".
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Adobe Backs Down
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 210 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Let me clarify... (Score:4)
What he's saying is that the damage is done. Adobe pulling out at this point is meaningless. Therefore they should still be held responsible and the protests should continue.
What to do? COUNTERSUE FOR WRONGFUL ARREST! (Score:4)
Dimitry should countersue to "make an example of Adobe" to other corporations. The message being "wrongfully fucking with people will cost you bigtime dollars".
Boycott America- Not Worth The Risk Of Visiting (Score:3)
I'd say it was his fault.
It was his fault for visiting a country with a repressive regime.
As an agnostic, if I visited the Iran, I would expect to be punished.
As a programmer who practices reverse engineering, if I visted the USA, I would expect to be punished.
I don't see what the big deal is. I just have to refuse to go to the USA until they repeal the DCMA. There are a whole host of third world countries with daft laws to prosecute foriegners. The USA is just another to add to this list.
Heck, I heard from a friend that they still practice the death penalty over there! What do you expect from those types of countries? Duh.
Unfortunately I work for a UK software house that has a large US oil conglomerate as a customer; I have previously had to travel to the US on business, and I am expected to travel there again soon. I'll just have to say no.
Even if it means loosing my job, it simply isn't worth going to the US to risk the chance of being imprisoned.
--
Don't turn a "blind" eye to this angle (Score:5)
The Fight isn't over yet... (Score:5)
1. Dmitry is still in jail.
2. The DMCA is still on the books.
3. The EFF [eff.org] still needs your help.
Let's keep this momentum going!
Time to wake up in Europe (Score:4)
Unfortunately the fight will go on, one very important round will be in Europe. The new copyright directive is at least as bad as DMCA. Therefore it's essential that everyone in Europe will be fighting on the national level to prevent the worst possible outcome (the problem is that unfortunately the directive doesn't give too much space for the national implementations) Still the questions like the level of copyright crimes in criminal law is up to the national states. The Sklyarov arrest should be a "good" case to use as warning example what too far reaching jurisdiction can cause.
The game has just started - stay informed and be active!
V.
My DeCSS archive:
Re:4. Is Alan Cox still not going to US convention (Score:3)
Indeed. Check out their Press Release:
I.e., "we'll do it again, and again, just not when you're looking."
So... we keep looking.
- - - - -
Not Good Enough! (Score:5)
Re:Does this mean we aren't protesting anymore? (Score:5)
Re:Thank you Adobe... but (Score:4)
Oh, and don't forget to accept the terms of the license agreement before installing it.
Re:Don't turn a "blind" eye to this angle (Score:3)
However, this "read-aloud" right has to be set by the publisher or it the eBook reader won't pass the data through to the OS engine. And because cut-and-paste is restricted, a blind person can't just copy the text to a different program (like WordPad or SimpleText) and access the engine through that.
So basically, even though Adobe and the publisher contribute zero effort towards producing a feature (all the work is done by Apple/MS) they feel they still should get to decide when and how you use that feature. And I would bet money that the default option for the eBook encoder is to deny all rights. So basically, unless the publisher goes out of his or her way to enable the read-aloud right then blind people who download eBooks will be unable to listen to them or use their own accessibility tools to do so!
I have always thought that the best bet we have to get rid of the DMCA is to find one blind/deaf person who is unable to access content and then sue to have the DMCA overturned on the grounds that it violates the ADA. Fight fire with fire, fight one law with another law.
Consider the premise of the movie Memento. What if there are people out there who do not have the physical ability to remember as well as you or I? It is a content producer's wet dream for that use would have to pay for the same enjoyment over and over again. But is a pay-per-view billing scheme really fair to these people? Shouldn't their disability give them the right to record ANY content so they can view it at a later date?
- JoeShmoe
NO - Free Dmitri FIRST (Score:5)
If you feel strongly about what they're doing (as I do), then join or make a donation (I did).
There's no need for Dmitri or anyone else to rot in jail while the legal maneuvering continues. We don't need to martyr anyone (esp. not foreign nationals) - we need the law overturned.
-Renard
Re:That's like MSFT saying it won't ship free brow (Score:5)
30 cents says he won't grant rights for an E-Book.
Worst thing that could have happened. (Score:5)
While this still may go to trial at the US government level, it seems it won't have as much affect on making citizens realize what is happening.
Re:4. Is Alan Cox still not going to US convention (Score:3)
As for missing the point about this being a human issue, I do not. I asked if anyone was helping his wife. She and his family are largely ignored in most of these posts. I have not seen any place where I could send them kind words or money or any other form of support.
I pointed out that a company who had a vested interest in having this man imprisoned did just that, and are now safely out of the limelight. Responsibility for what occurred can be best applied by the company that had him kidnapped. However, Adobe has safely insulated themselves from having to do that now. The EFF can't touch them anymore. And before anyone might decide to apply the idea of callousness to the activities of a business enterprise, please remember that the ONLY responsiblity a company has is to it's stockholders. Human considerations in that equation are secondary.
As for Sklyarov, the federal government may hold him indefinitely, without charging him. My point wasn't about whether EFF made the "right choice" or not. The EFF blinked, and every other corporation looking to screw people like Sklyarov were watching. Callousness? Think of every person like Sklyarov out there who might get detained now, and think about how those other corporations will use Adobe's bait-n-switch tactic in the future...
As for my own lack of illusions about Adobe or the FBI, I never look at the activities of others except through a lense of their own self-interest. Where I cannot do that, I look at history. My apologies if that outlook seems calloused, but my callouses come through hard work and experience. As for Sklyarov, I think his boss, who has FBI ties, will do more for Sklyarov's release than the EFF.
mrgoat
4. Is Alan Cox still not going to US conventions? (Score:5)
1. While they look like the "nice guys", the person that Adobe wanted punished is still being punished, and Adobe can wash its hands, say "what nice people we are", and walk off almost untouched by all of this.
2. Adobe proved that EFF has no teeth and can be made to back down at the drop of a hat. note to EFF organizing staff: when involved in hostage negotiations, NEVER grant concessions. The Sklyarov incident is a hostage negotiation- he is a foreign national kidnapped at the behest of Adobe by the US Govt., under the guise of enforcing a bad law. Now that Adobe let themselves off the hook and has walked scott-free from the negotiating table, who are you going to target now? Strategically, by "calling off the protest", EFF showed that:
a. They have no real control over the protests. Protestors still showed up, and would have shown up, and by "calling off the protest" the EFF only weakened its position. And Skylarov's.
b. Put themselves in a bad negotiating position- either Adobe could have said- you, EFF, are liars, there are still protestors outside; or they could have said- obviously, you aren't representing the protestors, why should we speak with you.
c. Adobe demonstrated their strength by getting EFF to capitulate, and then Adobe walked away from the entire matter. Efforts to organize effective protests both present and in the future was quashed (or damaged by Adobe), and since EFF has been shown not to be holding the right cards, and Adobe has proven to other corporations just exactly how to stand behind the DMCA while covering their own asses to the public.
3. The EFF's position with the feds may be compromised at this point. By declaring themselves to have control over protests, they have made themselves targets for federal investigation, possibly via the RICO Act (but, IANAL, and I hope to god something on that order of damage doesn't happen to EFF...they have my contribution money). However, EFF will have to watch its back even more so from now on...all it takes is one agent provocateur.
4. I didn't misread about Skylarov being in jail still? What the fuck is everyone celebrating for? Is anyone asking his wife if she needs a place to stay, or any money while her husband is in jail? Just kind of curious...I don't see anyone who is actually affected by this incident winning anything here...except maybe Adobe.
mrgoat
Re:Thank you Adobe... but (Score:4)
The American electorate is a giant slumbering while the pygmies tie it down with strands of gold. *Sigh*
Now the real furball begins (Score:5)
The pressure on Adobe applied by the EFF and the community at large of fair-minded technical people has yeiled results. This is proof positive that what we do and think can have an effect. Let's make sure we follow through and see Dmitry aquited, freed and exhonerated.
Let's also not forget that this represents a step in the right direction towards the repeal of the DMCA. The moments after a victory are the most vulnerable moments of any movment. It's very easy to forget about the long-term goals after acomplishing something important. Let's make sure that this success does not distract us from doing what we know is right.
--
A Common Theme (Score:3)
This doesn't help. (Score:5)
Re:4. Is Alan Cox still not going to US convention (Score:5)
You seem to misunderstand the point of this whole exercise. A human being, through no fault of his own, has been imprisoned against his will. The responsibility of all involved isn't just to make a point about how dumb the DMCA is. Their responsibility is to get this guy back to his home and family as quickly as possible. With Adobe backing down from their complaint, it becomes much more likely that he'll be released relatively quickly.
Sklyarov isn't some pawn the EFF can use to make their point about US Constitutional law. He's a human being, and therefore *any* lawyer trying to speak on his behalf on this case should first and foremost be trying to get him released. If a lawyer pretending to represent Sklyarov's interests allows him to remain in jail in order to advance the constitutional part of the argument, that lawyer should be disbarred for malpractice.
In other words, the EFF made the right choice in backing down from their criticism of Adobe once Adobe rescinded their complaint.
There's a time and a place for everything. The DMCA is already getting its day in court with cases that don't directly affect somebody's physical freedom. Hopefully the criminal provisions of the act will either be struck down by those cases or through a case that doesn't remove a working man as the breadwinner of a family. Your suggestion that the EFF should not have allowed Adobe to back down so easily ignores the human element of this case.
The real enemy. (Score:5)
Adobe's a member of the BSA.
The BSA has an interesting statement on the DMCA here. [bsa.org] This is a response to a Library of Congress rule available here. [loc.gov]
Members of the BSA include Adobe, [adobe.com] Apple Computer, [apple.com] Autodesk, [autodesk.com] Bentley Systems, [bentley.com] CNC Software/Mastercam, [mastercam.com] Compaq, [compaq.com] Corel Corporation, [corel.com] IBM, [ibm.com] Intel, [intel.com] Intuit, [intuit.com] Lotus Development, [lotus.com] Macromedia, [macromedia.com] Microsoft, [microsoft.com] Network Associates, [networkassociates.com] Novell, [novell.com] Sybase, [sybase.com] Symantec, [symantec.com] and Walker Digital; [walkerdigital.com] i.e. most of /.'s favourite hate companies, plus some extras.
These are the guys to line up against. They've been around since the '80s. I suspect that Adobe's lawyers are all BSA stooges. Certainly Adobe's PR department doesn't seem to be toeing the BSA line.
civil action via hostage-taking? (Score:4)
So let me get this straight--Adobe worked their connections to get a competing company's employee arrested, and now will pretend to back off now that the competitor has taken their product off the market? This is scary, and the EFF should be ashamed letting themselves be used as a figleaf this way. Sklyarov won't be released anytime soon, and this whole episode basically amounted to a hostage-taking.
(Yes, Elcomsoft isn't really a competitor to Adobe, except that one use of their product could reduce ebook sales)
That's like MSFT saying it won't ship free browser (Score:5)
So even if Adobe doesn't officially back the charges, they've already given the feds all the data to prosecute him, they'll almost certainly provide witnesses (oh, sure, "we can't ignore a court order") to help put him in prison, and no matter how good his defense is, he's stuck in the US and not at liberty.
The only good thing is that he can now write a book and guarantee a best seller, so he'll have some money eventually. Unless he's convicted, of course, as then the proceeds will be used for more such actions by the feds.
Re:Thank you Adobe... but (Score:4)
"Oh look! Here on my desk I have a bag of money from Sony and Warner Brothers. I also have this letter from Joe Shmoe in my district back in Georgia. Look at all this money."
Like it or not, this is the reason why there is a 2nd Amendment...
Sooner or later, if the government continues to listen more to the corporate minority, rather than the working majority, SOMETHING unpleasant is going to happen. That is, if hte American People ever grow a spine.
We're nowhere near that point yet, but unjsut, UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws like the DMCA are a step towards absolute corporate government.
If we continue on the path the late `90's started, I shudder to think what kind of America my children might inherit... Sad. I'm of Gen X, the FIRST generation to leave the country less free than when we were born.
Re:civil action via hostage-taking? (Score:5)
This is hostage taking. The DMCA is an immoral, unethical, unjust law, that IS no law at all accoring to my Roman Catholic upbringing. And Adobe became Pilate by them being the DIRECT cause of Dimitry's unjust incarceration. They are FAR from exonerated by making a symbolic statement... The charges still stand, and he's still being held against his will.
"(Yes, Elcomsoft isn't really a competitor to Adobe, except that one use of their product could reduce ebook sales)"
That's my major moral objection to the DMCA... It's basically a law that makes threatening corporate profts a FELONY... It's fortunate there was no DMCA in the time of the "Emperor Has No Clothes" fable, else the shyster "tailor" who made the Emperor's splendid invisible clothes would sue the child for a DMCA violation.
Re:This doesn't help. (Score:3)
Image usually doesn't influence the Supreme Court that much. Remember when Jerry Falwell sued Larry Flynt over an allegedly defamitory cartoon in Hustler magazine? Falwell had prevailed in an appeals court before the Supreme Court took the case. The Court reversed the decision and sided with Flynt on First Amendment grounds, and Chief Justice Rehnquist, a conservative by all accounts, wrote the opinion. So if Larry Flynt, who is definitely not the most popular guy in the country, can win, I think 2600 has a shot. I think the Court likes these kinds of cases because they know it's all too easy for an unpopular individual or organization to be prosecuted. Yes, they screw things up sometimes, but they get it right a remarkable amount of times, certainly more often than the political prostitutes we have in Congress.
Re:That's like MSFT saying it won't ship free brow (Score:4)
Agreed. What have Adobe (and interested others) learned from this?
That last point is the one that sticks in my throat the most. Adobe have won this one, in every possible way.
What I want to know is exactly who in Adobe pressed for this prosecution, and exactly what Adobe has done to them, considering that they now say that it was a mistake.
A man is in jail, Adobe says that's wrong. OK, show us the accountability.
He should counter sue! (Score:4)
If nothing else, they will compromise outside of court to avoid the bad PR.
--
Two witches watched two watches.
if it actually comes to trial (Score:4)
"Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?"
"V qb."
--
Slashdot: When News Breaks, We Give You The Pieces