linux-kernel - Yes I am an attorney. - Re: [DNG] Identity of OP (Software written by contractors and the 'work for hire') concept

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 01 Aug 2017 12:48:30 +0000
From:   nisus@...chan.it
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Yes I am an attorney. - Re: [DNG] Identity of OP (Software written by
 contractors and the 'work for hire') concept

Yes I am a licensed attorney.
No I am not going to give you my registration number nor am I going to 
show you my bar card.

I'm sure you will keep on libeling me...
All my legal analysis has been correct however, you might ponder why 
that is so...

Rick Moen and Adam Borowski: I am a licensed attorney. My legal analysis 
of the GRSecurity situation is correct. I am telling you to cease 
libeling me by spreading false rumors.

You seem to think because it is your belief that I oppose you on some 
un-related social issue that it is just *impossible* for me to have 
passed an exam at some point.

Others think it impossible, for a similar reason, for me to be a 
programmer, or a 3d video-game level architect, or a texture artist, or 
a pixel artist, hobby musician, etc etc.

They are wrong, so are you. I am all these things. From programmer, to 
artist, to attorney.

> (in response to:)
> Author: Rick Moen
> Date: 2017-07-29 19:43 UTC
> To: dng
> Subject: Re: [DNG] Software written by contractors and the 'work for 
> hire' concept
> Quoting Adam Borowski (kilobyte@???):
> 
> [falsely claiming to be an attorney:]>
> 
>> Isn't this illegal in the US?
> 
> A false statement that one is an attorney isn't (as far as I know).
> 
> Giving legal advice without being a licensed attorney in the
applicable jurisdiction is, that being a violation of one's state
Unauthorized[1] Practice of Law statute.
> 
> There's an important fine point, though, about what is and isn't giving
> legal advice. To be in violation, one must be performing acts reserved
> to attorneys in consultation with clients or prospective clients about
> their specific legal situations. (Discussing this matter further would
> veer too far off-topic, IMO, so I'm keeping it short. Please talk to me
> offlist if you wish.)
> 
> [1] I'd normally write 'unauthorised', but it's a proper noun. ;->
> http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/misc.html#english