WOuld one of our presidential peoples care to comment on ...

[maskedmelon]

He broke the law and is responsible for his actions. Whether he agreed with the law or the practices of publishers of academic papers is irrelevant.

He could have worked within the law to establish an alternative non-profit publishing service for academic papers. Instead he chose to take a short cut and take something from someone else, because he felt he (and others) had a right to it.

Had he not taken the easy route, he would probably still be alive and might have lived to realize his dream of freer access to knowledge.

[maerilith]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He broke the law and is responsible for his actions. Whether he agreed with the law or the practices of publishers of academic papers is irrelevant.

He could have worked within the law to establish an alternative non-profit publishing service for academic papers. Instead he chose to take a short cut and take something from someone else, because he felt he (and others) had a right to it.

Had he not taken the easy route, he would probably still be alive and might have lived to realize his dream of freer access to knowledge.

this is seriously not how the copywrite on these papers works, it's not like a public library of sorts could be made under the current law - they aren't protected speech and they aren't selling the papers, their only selling "licenses to view them" (smart but evil, and circumventing the letter of the law)

this kid was 10x smarter than most people and knew it, he did the best he could, which was act outside the laws which aren't going to change because people like you want to ignore the LETTER OF THE THE LAW and the RAMIFCATIONS of the laws as they are improperly enforced to the 19th degree

He was also held on trumped up charges, not just simply civil penalties for "sharing written works"

He didn't sell OR make profit on anything

He was put to the firing squad and saw his life ruined and was threatened by illuminati scumlords (or the enemies of the illuminati, who knows, the statue of liberty is pretty) but you know...

Also it was a high ranking judicial person (i can't remember their name, but like way up the totem pole) in the supreme courts/judicial branch that wanted Aarons balls on a grill. He was being pressured by people who really didn't have the right or authority to execute the prosecution the way they did, but did anyway because they COULD "technically" because the "law allowed it" because they are FRIENDS with elsiviere CEOs and corrupt as fucking hell

shits pretty fucked

And before you discount him as criminal scum, the kid was politically active trying to make any change he could outside of breaking the law. It's not like he just smoked some weed and thought it would be cool. He really did care about his ideology that information should be free, especially WHEN FUNDED BY TAXPAYER RESEARCH, STUDENTS, AND GRANTS. (WHICH IT IS NOT)

These papers aren't something Elseviere produced or payed for they are something they con the universities out of in order for the universities to have a chance at staying in business. It's piracy at financial knifepoint.

The actual research is done via charity practically.

If you want to argue... the regulatory side (cars and drivers on roads need regulation) that's a FLAWED model because it's A. not watched over by the government for the benefit of the public, B. it's not a dangerous activity that is a privilege (information and science and culture is a right), and C. it's already payed for

The day "FAIR USE" actually gets enforced under the copywrite laws, the I'll agree to your point of view.

It is not however enforced. Pretty much anything that becomes public domain is instantly re-grabbed by the likes of big corporations (how many versions of an old movie or book do we have were there were some edts, and different character names?) and instantly reformatted and then the big corporate bullies bully anyone who wants to maintain the originals (the lord of the rings books, were resold in order to extend their copywrites) etc... just seriously... research

You're a smart autistic child Masked, you should know better.

TLDR limited copywrite as originally intended, without the loopholes modern tech/society has produced + FAIR USE was a legitimately good idea. but is no longer SERVING THE GREATER GOOD as was INTENDED IN THE LETTER OF THE LAW. GO read dumbfuck.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by maerilith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

this kid was 10x smarter than most people and knew it

Arrogance is not often considered a virtue. It most assuredly played a role in that young man's downfall.

Originally Posted by maerilith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He didn't sell OR make profit on anything

That is irrelevant. He gained unauthorized access to restricted space ( digital, not th broom closet) and appropriated property that was not his own. Prohibition on such conduct is reasonable and respective law is appropriate.

No matter how noble the cause, criminality in its pursuit remains criminality.

If he felt the information should be freely accessible, he could have acquired copies of the papers legally and then given the information away. To him the cause was not worth that great of an investment.

[Pokesan]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He broke the law and is responsible for his actions. Whether he agreed with the law or the practices of publishers of academic papers is irrelevant.

He could have worked within the law to establish an alternative non-profit publishing service for academic papers. Instead he chose to take a short cut and take something from someone else, because he felt he (and others) had a right to it.

Had he not taken the easy route, he would probably still be alive and might have lived to realize his dream of freer access to knowledge.

lol if you really think IP/copyright law can be changed with rational argument

no my friend, it's time for forks and knives

[maerilith]

Originally Posted by Pokesan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

lol if you really think IP/copyright law can be changed with rational argument

no my friend, it's time for forks and knives

maskedmelons top and bottom surgeries were payed by the establishment and they're training and privileged positions in society ensure that maskedmelon will no longer ever be able to take a step back and look at what she's doing to herself and others objectively.

maskedmelon is far to superior to the rest of us to even bother argueing her point outside of "you evil scum are THEIVES" PRIACY IS EVIAUZLZ 111!!! it's like SHOOTING PEOPLE AND Taking# their BABIEZ

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by maerilith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

maskedmelon is far to superior to the rest of us to even bother argueing her point outside of "you evil scum are THEIVES" PRIACY IS EVIAUZLZ 111!!! it's like SHOOTING PEOPLE AND Taking# their BABIEZ

I didn't realize that is how it sounded. I've merely pointed out:

1. He broke laws
2. He could have achieved a better result had he not

I do think theft is wrong though.

[maerilith]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't realize that is how it sounded. I've merely pointed out:

1. He broke laws
2. He could have achieved a better result had he not

I do think theft is wrong though.

Is copywrite infringement theft?

Yes he violated computer systems under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

But it seemed like an appropriate measure to take in my eyes. I agree with pokeson on this one. And not just because pokes white knighting.

Sometimes you have to just ignore the rules and play by your own in order to live and thrive. Sometimes that's the only way to affect better change.

I guess it was a legal move to secede from the British Empire and tell the King we were sovereign... IDK...

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by maerilith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is copywrite infringement theft?

Yes. There are is a sizable amount of latitude within copyright law for fair-use. The problem here is that the material was fraudulently obtained from the get go.

The one problem that I do see with copyright law is established judicial precendt with regard to defense of copyrighted material. If copyright holders do not pursue legal action for known infringements, they risk it falling to public domain.

Do you think we should do away with copyright law altogether or are you just unhappy with copyright holder demographics?

[maerilith]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes. There are is a sizable amount of latitude within copyright law for fair-use. The problem here is that the material was fraudulently obtained from the get go.

The one problem that I do see with copyright law is established judicial precendt with regard to defense of copyrighted material. If copyright holders do not pursue legal action for known infringements, they risk it falling to public domain.

Do you think we should do away with copyright law altogether or are you just unhappy with copyright holder demographics?

No I think we should reform it so that it makes sense is fair, and isn't something that keeps getting extended. Also, I don't think it warrants criminal punishment. Because it is a very ideological difference in opinion as to whether we even need it or not. It's not been scientifically proven as necessary for the advancement of society nor the greater good.

Violating copywrite is not like stealing a car. Plus we already have protections in place for brands and trademarks that aren't related to copywrite. Also patents are a very different thing.

I think at most monetary damages could be sought, but if someone doesn't even have anything to give monetarily i think that's a pretty good case that they didn't steal anything.

Now people like that guy running megaco.nz is profiting and hurting people, while not theft, that's more like fraud and could be prosecuted under counterfeiting and trademark infringements.

I just generally disagree with the whole concept of written works as the property of any individual or group once published. The state granted monopoly we give them, shouldn't last for more than the life cycle of the product. Generally revenue on books and research isn't valuable past the original 14 year mark proposed.

Further works and trademarks in characters and specific story elements (stopping people from profiting on a brand... like "Han Solo" in a sense is probably reasonable.

But definitely not in the case of the research Aaron obtained and released freely for the general benefit of society.

Besides, Aaron was facing upwards of 40yrs in prison for breaking and entering a computer system, not the actual copywrite infringement. It's just that the "demographic" in this case really had enough weight and power to prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of his intent and the results (which weren't all that bad).

Also, he did little more than log in under his username and ftp/copy the files elsewhere it wasn't even really hacking in the sense that the system was violated, he just violated the trust of his password/username and his license to only view the material and not share it publicly.

There was no exploitation or damage done to any networks or servers. Or virus's, or Trojans installed, or packet sniffing, etc... Nor did he like download and release the password hash of everyone on Elseviere's network.

What is really sad and probably why this never made it to trial (*tinfoil conspiracy hat*) is that this would have been one of the greatest cases of the century if he hadn't "committed suicide". But because he did, most of this was as neatly and cleanly swept up under the rug and ignored as an issue because it was never debated in a political and social forum were reform could be called for or take place.

The mainstream media focus left what he did and why he did, to whether it was his fault or not he killed himself (lol [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] )

Not only that, but the fact that people want "anonymous" to pick this up is going to mostly discredit it further. It would have been really great if he had his day in court [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think he was intelligent enough, and affiliated enough with learned people to have made some very persuasive arguments. Whether he was found guilty or not.