Legal Question

Originally Posted by reggae

You're guilty till proved innocent.

Isn't that always how the system works?
And one other exception (That no one has noticed yet), is if a program is collecting any personal information (IE Credit card ETC...) you are allowed to circumvent the protection. Maybe Key Loggers?

Heh that's funny Does that mean we can "Circumvent" the protections on Parental "CONTROL" tools?

That'd be hillarious.

But my god... Why in the hell do we woory ourselves about this crap?
But then again... Why Do We Reverse?
That's what I'd like to ask everyone: Why Do You Reverse?
Seems simple. But isn't.

[upb]

hehe, jmi, are you sure that crackmes are not copyrighted?
atleast here in europe the copyright applies automatically to certain works, you dont have to 'request' it...

[JMI]

In the U.S. one can attach a copyright symbol to their work and make it effectively "copyrighted", but that does not happen here automatically. There are also some rules which come into play when people post materials on "public" forums, such as this one, particularily if they have notices which state that materials posted on the Forum become the property of the Board.

Leaving that all aside, I belive a "crackme" author might be considered in the U.S. to have given "implied consent" for "fair use" of the material for its "intended purpose," which in this case would be to figure out how to "crack it." I also believe that the DMCA requires the copyright holder send "notification" of the alleged violation of their copyrighted materials to the operator of the web site and then the website generally can avoid problems by "removing the materials." The website can also send notice to their ISP that they dispute the claim of copyright infringment, agree to accept legal service from the claimant, and then the claimant has 10 days to commence formal litigation in a local Federal Court, or the claim may be invalidated.

This is what happened originally on the Woodmann site, a "reported" claim of coryrighted materials which Woodmann disputed and notified the ISP of his willingness to accept service of process. In otherwords, he "called the bluff" of the ISP and they immediately changed their tune and said there was no DMCA claim but they would be booting us off anyway for "violating their policies, revealed through their unexplained "internal investigation." There really isn't a hell of a lot one can do is the ISP really wants to terminate your contract. So now the server has been moved again, and this time to a country which is not bound by the DMCA. But, again, they could always boot us again, for almost any private reason they wanted to use also. But maybe, this time, the desire for "money" with prevail.

Regards,

[dyn!o]

UPB: JMI wrote "generally not copyrighted" which means (I suppose) that almost none of the crackers issues copyright note on crackmes. Of course, bearing in mind intelectual property law, crackme can be copyrighted, just like any other work.

Anyway, the funny (?) situation with inelectual property copyrights is the endless topic: "...you are allowed to make a single back-up of your software/CD/DVD, etc. ...". A very strange situation occurs if you will ask yourself why you cannot make a backup copy of your game CD, audio CD or film DVD. I have been studying this topic a little wider (theory + practical solutions) so I will tell you one interesting thing: no company can answer this question and they break the law consciously. When I have been talking with few serious corporations and asked the same question, I always hear the same answer: [silence] or "and what would you do?". They break the same law as crackers/pirates do. Of course not in the same sense, but the same law.

Obviously there are smart solutions, like Microsoft did for example, but they compose a topic for another thread.

Regards.