Re: [Full-Disclosure] Hacking into private files, my credit card purchases, personal correspondence or anything that is mine is trespassing and criminal.
From: VeNoMouS (venom_at_gen-x.co.nz)
To: "Jesse Valentin" <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:57:45 +1300
Is it just me , or are these converstations a waste of time for this mailing list, almost makes you want to unsubscribe.
Arent these type of convos better for irc where you can all have a group hug?? No this isnt a flame, im just wondering wtf has happened to the list is all, it started out good, now its full of talkive bitches that dont know what personal email is for.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jesse Valentin
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Hacking into private files, my credit card purchases, personal correspondence or anything that is mine is trespassing and criminal.
Thanks for the info. (You're right it is odd.. :-)
The "sophisticated" legal system never ceases to amuse me. You made me laugh with your statement - "they're fraudulantly using something they know they should be paying for".
See in my eyes, this is stealing... plain and simple regardless of whether or not you're talking bits and bytes and regardless of how many Harvard Law Graduates disagree with me.
To illustrate my point check out this website: http://www.goerie.com/nie_civilrights/civil_rights_timeline__1619_-_.html
One law in particular is the following passed in 1735:
"South Carolina passes laws requiring slaves to wear clothing identifying them as slaves; newly freed slaves must leave the state within six months or risk re-enslavement."
Now to us today living in the modern world, this law is recognized as being barbaric and foolish, and yet educated legislators of that time viewed this as a valid law and "civilized behavior".
My point is that just because something isn't recognized as incorrect by a "legal entity" this doesn't necessarily indicate that the conclusion is sound.
Thanks again though Barry, I do appreciate you submitting that information and I totally understand where you're coming from.
Barry Fitzgerald <email@example.com> wrote:
Hey there Jesse,
From a legal perspective (IANAL, but this was explained to me by a
copyright attorney) Vince is correct.
Stealing, or theft, both legally and philosophically is the act of
depriving the rightful owner of an item of use of that item. Your
argument below is using the loose association of terms found in common
language. The misuse of those terms wandered into common language
through poor attribution and through emotional manipulation.
Distributing copyrighted works is a tort violation and not theft. It's a
civil matter that is handled by laws centered around business and
scientific regulation, not a criminal matter (though that may change
soon, and that change would be catastrophic. Legislation like the INDUCE
act would have a chilling effect on the world of science and free
The ac! t of descrambling a cable signal is an act of fraud, not of theft.
The person using the service isn't "stealing" anything - they're
fraudulantly using something they know they should be paying for. Note
that the rules for this are different for services than they are for
products. That's why people who "steal cable" can go to jail. It's not
because they're actually stealing anything. It's just hard for people to
understand how fraud works and much easier for them to understand the
concept of "stealing".
It is illegal, but it's not actually theft. Odd that way.
Jesse Valentin wrote:
> Hey Vince,
> With all due respect, while I find your argument interesting I think
> it's a case of "mental gymnastics".
> You mention that descrambling is "copyright violation". According to
> the Merriam Webster dictionary the term Copyright is defined as:
> the EXCL! USIVE legal right to reproduce, publish, and sell the matter
> and form (as of a literary, musical, or artistic work).
> If we are talking about the "exclusive right" to sell cable television
> as a service, then anyone who "violates" this right would be
> committing . ah what is that term, - piracy?
> The Merriam Webster dictionary goes on to define the word "piracy" as:
> "an act of robbery on the high seas; /also/ *:* an act resembling such
> As we know "robbery" is.. yes you guessed it. stealing.
> Interesting how that term "stealing" keeps popping up, huh? J
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.