-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 M Harris wrote: > On Tuesday 29 May 2007 00:27, M Harris wrote: > Following the logic of 202c to its ultimate conclusion results in > making the > entire distribution of openSUSE (or any other distro) illegal--- because a > computer system (kernel, ip stack, and utilities) all constitute the standard > tools through which a cyber crime is committed. The ludicrous hyper > interpretation of this section of the German penal code (StGB) must > necessarily lead to the conclusion that the distribution of entire operating > systems and utilities ( not just port scanners like nmap ) are dangerous > because they can be used in the commission of a cyber crime.
If it could be interpreted this way the legislation probably could run foul of EU trade regulations among other things. As I understand it this a principle rather than legislation, and it would be the purpose of the Bunderstag (or another body) to turn the concept into workable legislation. In UK law there is the concept of attempt to supply for the purpose of an illegal act in which case it the intent to supply rather than the object itself that is illegal. > > This is just about as silly as the judge who shocked the Woolwich Crown > Court > in the UK for not knowing what a "web-site" was. > > http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007220614,00.html > I suspect (as you do) that this comment was taken out of context, and really shocked no-one over here. The statement 'I read it in the Sun so it must be true' is a bit of a standing joke in the UK. People usually buy it for only two things (Ok for UK list members more accurately 3 things, two on page 3 and the racing and sports coverage). People rarely buy it to read the news. This report made barely a ripple in the UK Broadsheets. > Clearly technology has presented legal western culture with a serious problem > for aging ( judicial and legislative ) dogs who are apparently not able to > learn new tricks. > Drafting law is in someways like writing code, it needs precise definition. Attempts to make it comprehensible can lead to a semantic mess. I am not too sure what the relationship between the German Judiciary and Legislature is, but in the long term european judiciaries tend to sort out the messes the politicians drop in their laps. > > On the other hand, nmap has been in the community for so long that to > outlaw > its distribution is very analogous to outlawing the distribution of firearms. > If we outlaw the distribution of firearms only criminals will have firearms. In most of Europe possession of firearms is strictly regulated. In the UK it is illegal to own a hand gun (and owning replicas is under review). While there is gun crime, the collateral damage to bystanders is somewhat less than in the US. Though I understand it is not a good idea to take country walks in some parts of Italy and France during the hunting season :-) I think the analogy is not appropriate. > If we outlaw the distribution of security tools like nmap, only crackers will > have nmap. (well, along with the millions of other folks like myself who > already have it) > > <sigh> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGW+uRasN0sSnLmgIRAv9LAKDAKdgrQMj+b3qL1yL1J8fe24UnEgCg5Rsi Pcy3KhbT2bq+Tmd3jxkHqB8= =Qpwr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
