[I subscribe to bugtraq but haven't seen Glenn's message appear. It did go out to vuln-dev, and someone forwarded the message to me. I'm not on vuln-dev; feel free to forward this to the list.]
"Wolf, Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >In light of the fact that 2600 was successfully sued over merely linking to >DeCSS source code under the DMCA (and losing a subsequent appeal), and >especially since News.com mentioned that fact in their article, I'm >absolutely AMAZED that they would do just that, linking directly to exploit >code in three separate places in the article!!! Oh, and HP is apparently a >corporate sponsor of News.com (by the ad banners that pop up on their site). >I wonder how THIS will play out... I'm the author of the CNET News.com article, though I do not speak for my employer. Three points: * 2600 was sued for *posting* the DeCSS.exe utility, not for linking to it: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20000114_ny_mpaa_complaint.html >Defendant Eric Corley a/k/a Emmanuel Goldstein also posted DeCSS on his >Internet web site... * The judge in the case crafted a rule limiting but not banning linking: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/20000830_ny_amended_opinion.pdf >there may be no injunction against, nor liability for, linking to a site >containing circumvention technology, the offering of which is unlawful >under the DMCA, absent clear and convincing evidence that [lots of details] * When I was at Wired News, we joined an amicus brief in the 2600 case that said journalists should have the right to link to controversial material such as DeCSS.exe: http://www.politechbot.com/docs/linking-amicus.012601.html -Declan
