RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah silva [mailto:nsilva@atari-source.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 7:55 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.
> 
> 
> > rip, it takes X minutes of computer time, Y minutes of my 
> time -- that's
> > a real historical cost basis.  If someone accidentally 
> leaves open the
> > file sharing port on Win9X (that is the default), or 
> mistakenly shares
> > (through honest user error) their MP3 folder and the RIAA hacks in a
> > deletes them, $5K should add up fast.
> 
> Yes, but, if having a public web site is giving permission 
> for users to
> access it, then having an open drive share with public write 
> permission
> seems to me to be giving permission for peeople to
> read/write/delete.  (even if it is due to user ignorence).   
> I can't call
> accessing an open share "hacking".
>  

Maybe, but I'm not sure.  The entire _purpose_ of a web
server is public access.  An FTP server, it might be argued,
is really for selective access (unless "anonymous" or "guest"
logins are enabled).  And a shared disk is almost certainly
_intended_ for private access, and if the security is accidentally
misconfigured the public access was accidental.

The _intent_ of each of these sharing methods would have to be
considered.


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

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