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: <4256A149.4020206@sdf.lonestar.org>
Date: Fri Apr  8 16:20:53 2005
From: bkfsec at sdf.lonestar.org (bkfsec)
Subject: Re: Case ID 51560370 - Notice of
	Claimed	Infringement

Thomas Sutpen wrote:

>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...
>
>  
>
It's not illegal if you're either the original copyright holder, or are 
provided a license by the original copyright holder.

It's also really the act of distribution that is the "crime" (ahem, it's 
actually a tort violation)...

                -Barry