Starting to go back over censorware hearing testimony
Ah memories ... More about this later:
MR. FINKELSTEIN: I'm sorry. This is just such a wonderful reply.
You say, you criticized me for not publishing details of decryption? Well, the last people who published details of their decryption for the world to see got a $75,000 lawsuit for their trouble, and that $75,000 lawsuit took place right downtown from me. So there were no fancy Internet jurisdiction issues even, when you consider that case.
Therefore, could you consider perhaps why I might be a little hesitant to publish details, given that the last people who did it got a lawsuit for it? In fact, the only reason I came out and said that I had decrypted the database was in order to try to preserve this exemption.
I keep trying to convey, this isn't my job. Nobody is paying me to come here. I took the money out of my own pocket to actually pay the plane fare back here.
David Burt is paid by the company to do this. Win or lose, he goes home after this and he gets paid and he gets a salary. If I am looking at a massive lawsuit, $75,000 -- I looked at the amount -- for publishing something versus keeping my mouth shut about how I acquired it, I think the incentive there is to keep my mouth shut about it.
By Seth Finkelstein | posted in censorware , dmca | on April 22, 2003 11:58 PM (Infothought permalink) | Followups
