full-disclosure - Re: Case ID 51560370 - Notice of Claimed Infringement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d4322ab8050406204870baf855@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu Apr  7 04:48:25 2005
From: sutpen at gmail.com (Thomas Sutpen)
Subject: Re: Case ID 51560370 - Notice of Claimed
	Infringement

On Apr 5, 2005 5:01 AM, Ag. System Administrator <sysadmin@...nt.co.il> wrote:
> More nice will be if this .iso file is just 451,486k of /dev/random junk.
> Any proves that this file __IS__ Sybase Powerbuilder 9 Enterprise.iso?
> MD5? Something?

The question that would begged to be asked is how they verified it. 
If they were to download copyrighted software from somebody sharing
copyrighted software, does this not also constitute a crime?  Is it
not true that downloading illegally shared software is itself illegal?
 I'm not a lawyer, of course, but it's been my observation that the
legal system doesn't often smile on those breaking the law to prove
that others are breaking the law, unless it's in a Hollywood movie, no
pun intended.

Perhaps copyright makes some sort of concession for this.  But it
makes one wonder...