RE: are we CRIMINALS?
--On Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:29 PM -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: He disobeyed a court order. That makes him a criminal. Only if the court in question has jurisdiction over him. The US courts found in favor of an anti-trust lawsuit against DeBeers around 20 years ago I think it was and the DeBeers family finally decided it was too much of a nuisance to avoid travelling into the US so they settled for some paltry 300 million this year (if you have ever bought a diamond and you still have the receipt you can get some settlement money) Did the US court have jurisdiction over a corporation that has no footprint in the US? They thought they did. DeBeers didn't. What do you think? Doesn't matter. In the US, they were in violation of the law. How would you like it if some kangaroo court in Iran issued a judgement against you? Would you consider yourself a criminal? In Iran? Yes. Whether what he was trying to do was "right" or not is irrelevant. Absolutely untrue. It is at the heart of the issue. Absolutely not. Right or wrong is irrelevant in a court of law. Once the court told him to stop, he should have stopped. No. Once ALL AVENUES of appeal are exhausted AND a judgement was found against him, only then if he disobeys the final court order then can he be considered a criminal. If you get a TRO *during* a trial, and you violate the terms of the TRO, then you are a criminal by definition. The outcome of the case is irrelevant. And good people often forget that courts are nothing more than another arm of the government, and quite often the solutions that come out of them are a result of political negotiation and compromise - exactly the same way that the legislative arm solves problems. They *should* never be. You should read some history, there's been a lot of bad law that has been overturned. It never would have happened if people like Rosa Parks hadn't "committed criminal acts" from your viewpoint, and ignored court-supported orders and laws. I totally agree, however, Rosa Parks *did* violate the law and *was* a criminal by definition. You cannot sit there and say that just because someone is a criminal they are bad. I never said anything about bad. It isn't a moral judgement. It's a legal one. Nor can you say that just because someone is not a criminal that they are good. Look no further than the current occupant of the White House for that. What is criminal in a good society is defined by what is "wrong" No, what is criminal in a good society is when you violate the law. Whether or not the law is "good" is irrelevant. Sadly, that does not always happen. If you buy a DVD and make a copy for your own use according to DMCA you are a criminal. However if you buy a videotape of the same movie and make a copy for your own use you are not a criminal. Clearly, both actions are morally "right" They are almost the same action in fact. But one is illegal the other isn't. Can't you see here that the problem isn't the action but the law? Of course, however, if you copy the DVD you have violated the law and by definition you are a criminal. Now, you may decide your actions are right, but you need to do that with the full knowledge that you *could* be found in violation of the law and you *could* go to jail. To violate the law and then whine that it's unfair is childish. In this lawsuit, the worst you can say is that both parties, the spammer and the spamfighter, are in the wrong. But I fail to see how the spammer can be "right" and the spamfighter is "wrong" Didn't say he was wrong. Just in violation of the law. You can, if you wish, argue the spammer is "legal" and the spamfigher is "illegal" But, this simply illustrates that the law is bad - and for many people it is a moral duty to violate bad law. And I for one, am very glad that they feel this way. Again, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that *so long as* you are fully willing to suffer the consequences. As with Rosa Parks, you may succeed in illustrating how unfair the law is and getting it changed, but you won't do it without paying a personal price. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior Information Security Analyst The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: are we CRIMINALS?
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Schmehl > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:08 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: RE: are we CRIMINALS? > > > --On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 21:57:22 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Schmehl > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:25 AM > >> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > >> Subject: Re: are we CRIMINALS? > >> > >> > >> --On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 13:03:27 +0100 Wojciech Puchar > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 > >> > > >> > jest first step to criminalize unix at all > >> > ___ > >> > >> We aren't criminals, but *he* is. > >> > > > > Paul, you do realize that Sierra is a known newsgroup spammer and > > that the lawsuit in question was just filed against a spamfighter > > by a spammer? > > > > Yes. > > > Also, that the "judgement" that is in the post is actually > > a prepared order, written by Plaintiff's counsel, it wasn't > > written by the judge. > > > > Yes. > > > This case is sitting in the appellate courts somewhere, gathering > > dust. Nobody has paid anything to anybody, except to the lawyers. > > Sierra makes their money selling to morons what Google gives > > out for free. > > > > Please, unless your willing to do the research, don't waste > > time commenting. > > > > He disobeyed a court order. That makes him a criminal. Only if the court in question has jurisdiction over him. The US courts found in favor of an anti-trust lawsuit against DeBeers around 20 years ago I think it was and the DeBeers family finally decided it was too much of a nuisance to avoid travelling into the US so they settled for some paltry 300 million this year (if you have ever bought a diamond and you still have the receipt you can get some settlement money) Did the US court have jurisdiction over a corporation that has no footprint in the US? They thought they did. DeBeers didn't. What do you think? How would you like it if some kangaroo court in Iran issued a judgement against you? Would you consider yourself a criminal? > Whether > what he was > trying to do was "right" or not is irrelevant. Absolutely untrue. It is at the heart of the issue. Once the court > told him to > stop, he should have stopped. > No. Once ALL AVENUES of appeal are exhausted AND a judgement was found against him, only then if he disobeys the final court order then can he be considered a criminal. As such happened with Microsoft during the anti-trust trial, etc. Until then, this is nothing more than a civil dispute between a spamfighter and a spammer. And as the spamfigher in question undoubtedly has no assets to his name, what is really going on here is a complicated political dance whereby the spammer is manipulating the courts in an attempt to bluster a threat against the spamfighter, and the spamfighter is manipulating the courts in an attempt to cost the spammer money in lawyer fees. A great many of these suits disappear when one or the other of the parties gets tired of paying the court costs and lawyers fees. > And yes, I know full well that bad people take advantage of our > courts every > day. > And good people often forget that courts are nothing more than another arm of the government, and quite often the solutions that come out of them are a result of political negotiation and compromise - exactly the same way that the legislative arm solves problems. You should read some history, there's been a lot of bad law that has been overturned. It never would have happened if people like Rosa Parks hadn't "committed criminal acts" from your viewpoint, and ignored court-supported orders and laws. You cannot sit there and say that just because someone is a criminal they are bad. Nor can you say that just because someone is not a criminal that they are good. Look no further than the current occupant of the White House for that. What is criminal in a good society is defined by what is "wrong" Sadly, that does not always happen. If you buy a DVD and make a copy for your own use according to DMCA you are a criminal. However if you buy a videotape of the same movie and make a copy for your own use you are not a criminal. Clearly, both actions are morally "right" They are almost the same actio
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
> He disobeyed a court order. That makes him a criminal. Whether > what he was trying to do was "right" or not is irrelevant. Once the > court told him to stop, he should have stopped. I happen to know David Ritz, and it would be extraordinarily out of character for him to have violated a court order. I don't know the exact sequence of alleged events since most of the court papers are sealed, but I do know that for part of the time he was in a coma in the hospital. As others have noted, the judge accepted the plaintiff's claims at face value, even though there are strong reasons to doubt his veracity. This is a travesty of justice, nothing more, nothing less. R's, John PS: It doesn't have much to do with FreeBSD, either. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: are we CRIMINALS?
--On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 21:57:22 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Schmehl Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:25 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: are we CRIMINALS? --On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 13:03:27 +0100 Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 > > jest first step to criminalize unix at all > ___ We aren't criminals, but *he* is. Paul, you do realize that Sierra is a known newsgroup spammer and that the lawsuit in question was just filed against a spamfighter by a spammer? Yes. Also, that the "judgement" that is in the post is actually a prepared order, written by Plaintiff's counsel, it wasn't written by the judge. Yes. This case is sitting in the appellate courts somewhere, gathering dust. Nobody has paid anything to anybody, except to the lawyers. Sierra makes their money selling to morons what Google gives out for free. Please, unless your willing to do the research, don't waste time commenting. He disobeyed a court order. That makes him a criminal. Whether what he was trying to do was "right" or not is irrelevant. Once the court told him to stop, he should have stopped. And yes, I know full well that bad people take advantage of our courts every day. -- Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior Information Security Analyst The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: are we CRIMINALS?
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Schmehl > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:25 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: are we CRIMINALS? > > > --On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 13:03:27 +0100 Wojciech Puchar > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 > > > > jest first step to criminalize unix at all > > ___ > > We aren't criminals, but *he* is. > Paul, you do realize that Sierra is a known newsgroup spammer and that the lawsuit in question was just filed against a spamfighter by a spammer? Also, that the "judgement" that is in the post is actually a prepared order, written by Plaintiff's counsel, it wasn't written by the judge. This case is sitting in the appellate courts somewhere, gathering dust. Nobody has paid anything to anybody, except to the lawyers. Sierra makes their money selling to morons what Google gives out for free. Please, unless your willing to do the research, don't waste time commenting. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 03:00:45PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>jest first step to criminalize unix at all > > > >first step? > > > >Many Unix tools are considered illegal by German law since last summer. > > > > could you mail me more about it ? > > it's as stupid as considering knives to be illegal. yes i can kill with > knife, but i don't do this, and need it to slice a bread. > and there are 1000 other ways to kill - without knife You probably think that's an absurd notion that nobody would ever enact, and mean to show how absurd it is to outlaw `host -l` by drawing an analogy with outlawing knives. Such an argument is dependent upon the assumption that the guy listening to you thinks it's absurd to outlaw knives. Before making that assumption, however, you should have a look at laws regarding knives in Scotland. There's no end to the absurdity of law. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] Anonymous: "Eat your crow early, while it's young and tender. Don't wait until it's old and tough." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
While that may seem slightly harsh, at least for a first offense, it does point up the fact that people like Ritz are a blight upon the legitimate computer users community. what about all these idiots in courts and goverments we all pay huge taxes for? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Gerard wrote: While that may seem slightly harsh, at least for a first offense, it does point up the fact that people like Ritz are a blight upon the legitimate computer users community. Agreed. But upon looking at something like this... 4. Ritz frequently accomplished his access to Sierra's computers by concealing his identity via proxies and by accessing the servers via a Unix operating system and using a shell accounts, among other methods. ...I really get the feeling that, besides (justly) convicting Ritz for what he did, they seem under the impression that UNIX as a whole is evil and good for nothing but "hacking" (as most people unfortunately call it). Alphons -- VISTA - Viruses Intruders Spyware Trojans Adware ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
--On Tuesday, January 22, 2008 13:03:27 +0100 Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 jest first step to criminalize unix at all ___ We aren't criminals, but *he* is. -- Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior Information Security Analyst The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:44:37 + "Alphons \"Fonz\" van Werven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gerard wrote: > > > It is not the 'tool' that is being addressed here; but rather, what > > the individual did with it. > > CONCLUSIONS OF LAW > > 1. Ritz's behavior in conducting a zone transfer was unauthorized > within the meaning of the North Dakota Computer Crime Law. That is precisely what I am referring to. Bill Moran makes a rather pointed comment: As far as the cracker, I hope he gets the chair. While that may seem slightly harsh, at least for a first offense, it does point up the fact that people like Ritz are a blight upon the legitimate computer users community. -- Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can rent this space for only $5 a week. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Gerard wrote: It is not the 'tool' that is being addressed here; but rather, what the > individual did with it. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Ritz's behavior in conducting a zone transfer was unauthorized within the meaning of the North Dakota Computer Crime Law. Alphons -- VISTA - Viruses Intruders Spyware Trojans Adware ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
In response to Gerard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:03:27 +0100 (CET) > Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 > > > > jest first step to criminalize unix at all > > No really. This case involved an individual who was accessing and > acquiring information using falsified credentials for an apparent > nefarious purpose. > > If you have a key making machine, does that give you the right to make > a key to my home and then enter it without my permission? It is not the > 'tool' that is being addressed here; but rather, what the individual > did with it. If this individual believed what he was purported to by > doing was legal and above board, then why did he openly commit perjury > and use falsified credentials? Quite frankly, it is criminals like him > who cause other lawful individuals problems. That's exactly the point. You are correct that it's the action, not the tool, that is criminal. However, it's being pushed all over the world to outlaw the _tools_. And this case leaves a lot of ambiguity that hints that the tools themselves are criminal in nature. I think most everyone, me included, is concerned about that possible side-effect. As far as the cracker, I hope he gets the chair. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:03:27 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 > > jest first step to criminalize unix at all No really. This case involved an individual who was accessing and acquiring information using falsified credentials for an apparent nefarious purpose. If you have a key making machine, does that give you the right to make a key to my home and then enter it without my permission? It is not the 'tool' that is being addressed here; but rather, what the individual did with it. If this individual believed what he was purported to by doing was legal and above board, then why did he openly commit perjury and use falsified credentials? Quite frankly, it is criminals like him who cause other lawful individuals problems. -- Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using TSO is like kicking a dead whale down the beach. S. C. Johnson signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Bill Moran wrote: Maybe it's just me, but this whole thing kinda feels like somebody walking around the house naked and then suing an innocent passer-by for seeing them naked. no it is EXACTLY like that! Not quite. Seeing somebody naked because they're stupid enough to run around the house in the nude is no excuse for breaking in and raping said idiot. That being said, imho it's the breaking in and raping that should be punished, not the having your eyes open. Alphons P.S. Sorry for replying to the wrong message, but I lost the original. -- VISTA - Viruses Intruders Spyware Trojans Adware ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Hi check google: http://www.google.com/search?q=illegale+hackertools&btnG=Search&hl=en The problem will be that the repsective articles will all be in German. Wojciech Puchar wrote: jest first step to criminalize unix at all first step? Many Unix tools are considered illegal by German law since last summer. could you mail me more about it ? can you type ls? ;) I do not know if I can still answer this question as using a hacker tool can lead to get a nice place in a lovely prison. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 10:01:49 Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> Orwell should just change title from "1984" to "2010-15" > > > > Maybe it's just me, but this whole thing kinda feels like somebody > > walking around the house naked and then suing an innocent passer-by > > for seeing them naked. > > > > Oh my, this is so ridiculous... > > no it is EXACTLY like that! > Except that I can understand why the problem viewing Windows in the naked metaphor -- it'd be a lot like being sued by Ernest Borgnine for looking at him naked -- I'd be so busy gouging my eyes out that I wouldn't even notice getting served with papers. For the common good, for your sanity, for the good of your possible descendants, DON'T LOOK!!! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
In response to Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >> Orwell should just change title from "1984" to "2010-15" > > > > Maybe it's just me, but this whole thing kinda feels like somebody > > walking around the house naked and then suing an innocent passer-by > > for seeing them naked. > > > > Oh my, this is so ridiculous... > > no it is EXACTLY like that! http://www.potentialtech.com/cms/node/59 -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Living just outside of Fargo, I find this interesting. I guess I better not telnet to service ports to make sure HTTP/SMTP/IMAP/IPOP servers are running. it looks like slowly microsoft is doing their work - to change "internet" to webbrowsing with everything else forbidden. Admininstratively, the Zone transfers should be restricted to secondary of course, i do this, everyone who at least read documentation - do this too. peers. If a person constructed the walls of their house out of glass, how can you complain that the neighbors that are capable of moving their heads of watching you at night? you don't have to tell me (and others). and the question is not if, but WHEN will we all be forced to use just one type of computers, one operating system, one type of given program BY LAW. Poland are not communist country since 1989, but for how long? how about other countries? what i think about such actions is that it's turning back to communism, just not saying this. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Wojciech Puchar wrote: Orwell should just change title from "1984" to "2010-15" Maybe it's just me, but this whole thing kinda feels like somebody walking around the house naked and then suing an innocent passer-by for seeing them naked. Oh my, this is so ridiculous... no it is EXACTLY like that! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
This should go to -chat. Living just outside of Fargo, I find this interesting. I guess I better not telnet to service ports to make sure HTTP/SMTP/IMAP/IPOP servers are running. Admininstratively, the Zone transfers should be restricted to secondary peers. If a person constructed the walls of their house out of glass, how can you complain that the neighbors that are capable of moving their heads of watching you at night? Sounds like the zone transfer is the foundation of the case of the serious charges. I do not have sympathy for someone that attempts or conspires with others to "home invasion" just because the house walls are made of glass and they can see the fine china. please move this to -chat. --Mark Tinguely. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Wojciech Puchar wrote: Orwell should just change title from "1984" to "2010-15" Maybe it's just me, but this whole thing kinda feels like somebody walking around the house naked and then suing an innocent passer-by for seeing them naked. Oh my, this is so ridiculous... Alphons -- VISTA - Viruses Intruders Spyware Trojans Adware ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
jest first step to criminalize unix at all first step? Many Unix tools are considered illegal by German law since last summer. could you mail me more about it ? it's as stupid as considering knives to be illegal. yes i can kill with knife, but i don't do this, and need it to slice a bread. and there are 1000 other ways to kill - without knife Erich can you type ls? ;) things considered impossible 50 years ago, stupid/funny 30 years ago, strange and unlikely 10 years ago, are true now. Orwell should just change title from "1984" to "2010-15" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: are we CRIMINALS?
Hi, Wojciech Puchar wrote: http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 jest first step to criminalize unix at all first step? Many Unix tools are considered illegal by German law since last summer. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
are we CRIMINALS?
http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351 jest first step to criminalize unix at all ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
