Re: Injunction issued against 'cphack,' disengages porn filter (3/17/2000)
Pardon me for being dense, but since when can a U.S. Federal Judge issue orders to foreign nationals in foreign countries? It can probably prevent them from ever entering the country (assuming they care). /ji PS: Isn't British Columbia a county in Washington State? :-) -- /\ ASCII ribbon | John Ioannidis * Secure Systems Research Department \/campaign| ATT Labs - Research * Florham Park, NJ 07932 /\against | "Intellectuals trying to out-intellectual / \ HTML email. | other intellectuals" (Fritz the Cat)
Re: injunction issued against cphack
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote: The AP reports that a U.S. judge has issued an injunction against the Canadian and Swedish authors of cphack, the program that unlocks and displays the blocked site list from CyberPatrol. The order extends to distribution by others as well, including -- according to the plaintiff's attorney -- all mirror sites. Even without questions of the reach of U.S. law, this is a preposterous ruling. If you add them in, it's insane. Right up there with a grade school class voting on the sex of a hamster, then being surprised by little boy hampsters having babies. (Hey, it ain't Shakespeare, but it has a certain democratic flavor to it.) I've seen conflicting reports on who the injunction affects. Is this a bit of FUD on the part of the attorney, or perhaps a misquote? I was also under the impression you had to be named in an injunction to be bound by it. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35038,00.html -- remove "no_spam_" from Reply-to address
Re: injunction issued against cphack
"Steven M. Bellovin" writes: : In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], "David G. Koontz" writes: : : I've seen conflicting reports on who the injunction affects. : Is this a bit of FUD on the part of the attorney, or perhaps : a misquote? I was also under the impression you had to be named : in an injunction to be bound by it. : : Well, the AP story had a different quote from the attorney, so it may be : reporter perception. : : As for "being named" -- well, back around 1970 or 1972, when injunctions : against students occupying campus buildings were a favorite weapon, I asked : some lawyers about this. I was told that no, you did not have to be named : specifically to be bound by the injunction, and the injunction could legally : be served by someone standing outside the occupied building with a bullhorn.. I helped a client get one of those injunctions that you were talking about, although no students were involved in the particular case. We had to give names to the parties we did not know---names like John Doe One, John Doe Two, etc.---and we had to describe them (as being the persons occupying a certain building). The rule, however, is that an injunction (in an ordinary sort of civil action like this) is binding only on the parties, their agents, employees, and those acting in concert with them. The John Does in my case were parties; in this case the only parties are the two named authors and the two named ISP's. So they, and their agents are the only ones who can be bound by the temporary restraining order. It is also correct that notice of the injunction can be given by any effective means, including bullhorns and internet mail. There is, of course, a real problem of how an injunction can be enforced against parties outside the jurisdiction. On the other hand, one might expect an ISP to take the site down, rather than contest or ignore the injunction. Which probably explains why the Swedish site is down now. -- Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu NOTE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] no longer exists
Re: injunction issued against cphack
I hope I won't be giving anyone any ideas, but can a USA judge order USA ISPs (either explicitely-named ISPs, or all ISPs operating in the USA) to not carry traffic with particular IP addresses? How about congress? How about the President? /ji -- /\ ASCII ribbon | John Ioannidis * Secure Systems Research Department \/campaign| ATT Labs - Research * Florham Park, NJ 07932 /\against | "Intellectuals trying to out-intellectual / \ HTML email. | other intellectuals" (Fritz the Cat)
Re: injunction issued against cphack
At 11:07 3/18/2000 -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote (on whether the TRO applies to non-defendants): Well, the AP story had a different quote from the attorney, so it may be reporter perception. It applies to the four (2 ISP, 2 individual) defendants and those acting in concert with them. It seems a stretch to me to say it covers non-defendants who have never been to Massachusetts and have never even exchanged email with the authors of the cphack utility, which is why I didn't buy the spin in my article I wrote yesterday. But here it is, if you wanna see what they're saying... I'll have more stuff up at http://www.politechbot.com/cyberpatrol/ soon. -Declan From: "Sydney Rubin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:32:27 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 Here's the release we issued at 2:30 today that quotes from the injunction and shows that the restraining order applies to the mirrored sites, as well as the original four defendants -- Skala, Jansson, Scandanvia Online and Islandnet. Use of the words "agents" and "those persons in active concert or participation with them" in the ruling applies to the mirrored sites. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Sydney Rubin Ignition Strategic Communications 202/244-1200 FEDERAL JUDGE GRANTS COMPANY IMMEDIATE INJUNCTION AGAINST HACKERS WHO VIOLATED U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW Judge Agrees Hackers' Actions Likely Violate Intellectual Property Rights of Microsystems Software and Undermine Parents' Ability to Protect Children FRAMINGHAM, MASS. (March 17, 2000) A Federal Judge in Boston today issued a temporary restraining order against two hackers prohibiting them from distributing code that undermines the ability of parents using Cyber Patrol to protect children from inappropriate content online. U.S. District Judge Edward F. Harrington ordered that the "defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys and those persons in active concert or participation with them, shall discontinue publishing defendant's Cyber Patrol bypass code and binaries (known as "CP4break.zip" or "cphack.exe" or any derivative thereof)." The ruling prohibits further distribution over the Internet into the United States of the bypass code and binaries published by the hackers and "mirrored," or copied, on other sites throughout the World Wide Web. "The ruling means that the defendants and those redistributing the defendants' illegal work product will be in violation of a U.S. Federal Court order if they distribute the material into the United States," said Irwin B. Schwartz, a partner in the Boston law firm of Schwartz and Nystrom, LLC, which represents Microsystems. The ruling also granted the company expedited discovery into who had downloaded the illegal material derived from the copyright violations. Microsystems Software, maker of the Internet filtering software Cyber Patrol, filed for the temporary restraining order on Wednesday Massachusetts Federal District Court. The complaint was against two hackers in Canada and Sweden, Matthew Skala and Eddy L.O Jansson, as well as the two Internet Service Providers hosting the hackers' Web sites, Islandnet.Com in Canada and Scandinavia Online AB in Sweden. The complaint alleged the hackers violated copyright law by reverse engineering Cyber Patrol software and then using the illegally-obtained source code to develop an executable program that allows users to bypass the software. The hackers then posted pieces of the Cyber Patrol source code and their executable program on the Internet and publicized their work via e-mailed press releases. The pair also published portions of the proprietary Cyber Patrol list of filtered sites, but this was not part of the complaint filed by the company. Judge Harrington gave the company permission to serve notice of the immediate injunction via email to the defendants and "their agents." The company was serving the electronic notices immediately. Violating a Federal Court Order is punishable by a fine or prison. The willful and knowing violation of U.S. Copyright Law can carry sanctions of up to $100,000 per violation. Defendants receiving the notices are ordered by the court to "preserve inviolate the software and information that makes up all such Web sites, source or object code and documents relating to Cyber Patrol, as well as all records which reflect the identity or number of persons who downloaded CP4break.zip or cphack.exe from the Web sites." Cyber Patrol is the world's most widely-used Internet filtering software. Microsystems' technology is used by America Online for its parental controls and hundreds of thousands of families have purchased Cyber Patrol software to help protect children from Web
injunction issued against cphack
The AP reports that a U.S. judge has issued an injunction against the Canadian and Swedish authors of cphack, the program that unlocks and displays the blocked site list from CyberPatrol. The order extends to distribution by others as well, including -- according to the plaintiff's attorney -- all mirror sites. Even without questions of the reach of U.S. law, this is a preposterous ruling. If you add them in, it's insane.
Injunction issued against 'cphack,' disengages porn filter (3/17/2000)
Pardon me for being dense, but since when can a U.S. Federal Judge issue orders to foreign nationals in foreign countries? Last time I checked, British Columbia was in Canada, not to mention Sweden being on another continet altogether. http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/011258.htm
Re: Injunction issued against 'cphack,' disengages porn filter(3/17/2000)
Was it Dr. Johnson who, when confronted by a man claiming "I can call spirits from the vasty deeps", replied "So too sir can I, but will they answer when you call?" [Not quite. It's Hotspur's retort to Glendower from King Henry IV, Part 1, Act III, Scene I. The exact phrasing was: GLENDOWER I can call spirits from the vasty deep. HOTSPUR Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them? The rhythm of the last line was really neat, which is one reason it is burned into my memory. --Perry, who just couldn't resist.] On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, David Koontz wrote: Pardon me for being dense, but since when can a U.S. Federal Judge issue orders to foreign nationals in foreign countries? Last time I checked, British Columbia was in Canada, not to mention Sweden being on another continet altogether. http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/011258.htm -- A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm --It's warm here.--