--
-Richard M.
Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 2:31 PM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Hacking requires search warrant -- ruling
Oh...you mean that they are REALLY just privateers that are out to prey upon pirates...AVAST YE SWABBIES THAR BE A INTERNET PIRATE....NO QUARTER
"Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu11/15/2002 02:21 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss
To: <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
cc:
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Hacking requires search warrant -- ruling
Don't be silly. The copyright holders aren't
law enforcement and aren't bound by the limitations
thereof. They're vigilantes, with an letter of
marque from Congress.
--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 1:56 PM
> To: DVD Discuss
> Subject: [dvd-discuss] Hacking requires search warrant -- ruling
>
>
> According to:
>
> http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-965926.html
>
> A judge has ruled that law enforcement cannot (even through an
> non-deputized agent) break into a network attached computer without a
> search warrant. This would seem dampen that possibility of copyright
> holders being able to secure criminal infringement charges from any
> cracking of non-public P2P networks. Private "darknets" (as the
> Microsoft paper referred to them) will be off limits unless a judge is
> shown probable cause.
>
> Public P2P networks will be as vulnerable in terms of the content they
> show without requiring access authority. However, seeding
> digital works
> with viruses to snoop beyond the public "Shares" will require
> a warrant.
>
> Good news if it is upheld.
>
> .002
>
>