RE: [dvd-discuss] Skylarov indicted for trafficing and conspiracy .

[Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

If not, then the excessive nature of the charges could
be used by defense to help gain an acquittal.  I mean,
if the prosecution kept it direct & to the point it might
be harder to defend against, but as somebody else commented
we've got 3 levels of indirection here...

-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kroll, Dave [mailto:Dave_Kroll@cargilldow.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:43 AM
> To: 'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'
> Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Skylarov indicted for trafficing and
> conspiracy .
> 
> 
> Maybe the overzealous indictment is so that they have some 
> room to plea
> bargain down?
> 
> David Kroll
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	John Young [mailto:jya@pipeline.com] 
> Sent:	Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:09 AM
> To:	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject:	Re: [dvd-discuss] Skylarov indicted for trafficing and
> conspiracy.
> 
> This is from the US Attorney's Office press release yesterday:
> 
>   http://cryptome.org/dmitry-doj-hit.htm
> 
> -----
> 
> The United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of 
> California announced that Elcom Ltd. (also known as Elcomsoft 
> Co. Ltd.) and Dmitry Sklyarov, 27, both of Moscow, Russia, were 
> indicted today by a federal grand jury in San Jose, California on 
> five counts of copyright violations.
> 
> The defendants were each indicted on one count of conspiracy 
> to traffic in technology primarily designed to circumvent, and 
> marketed for use in circumventing, technology that protects a 
> right of a copyright owner, in violation of Title 18, United States 
> Code, Section 371; two counts of trafficking in technology 
> primarily designed to circumvent technology that protects a 
> right of a copyright owner, in violation of Title 17, United States 
> Code, Section 1201(b)(1)(A); and two counts of trafficking in 
> technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that 
> protects a right of a copyright owner, in violation of Title 17, 
> United States Code, Section 1201(b)(1)(C). . . .
> 
> The maximum statutory penalties for each count in violation 
> of Title 17, United States Code, Sections 1201 (b)(1)(A) and 
> 1201 (b)(1)(C) are five years imprisonment for an individual 
> and a fine of $500,000 for an individual or corporation. The 
> maximum penalties for a violation of Title 18, United States 
> Code, Section 371, are five years imprisonment and a fine 
> of $250,000 for an individual, and a fine of $500,000 for a 
> corporation. However, any sentence following conviction 
> would be dictated by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, 
> which take into account a number of factors, and would 
> be imposed in the discretion of the Court. An indictment 
> simply contains allegations against an individual or 
> corporation and, as with all defendants, Elcom and Mr. 
> Sklyarov must be presumed innocent unless and until 
> convicted."
> 
> -----
>