Vladimir Katalov Takes The Stand In The ElcomSoft Trial (Part 2 of 2)

2 Replies

Here’s part two of my account of Vladimir Katalov on the witness stand.
You’ll notice that there are more links now within the text. I’ve decided to start integrating the various documents and evidence I’ve been collecting since last year (since July 17, 2001) about the dispute between Adobe and ElcomSoft.
Where the documents are still available in their original location online, I link to them there, with a link my version as a backup. However, some of the emails and message board postings have been removed since last year, so I’m really glad I saved my own copies of them.
I will sprinkle links to the evidence accordingly, as they come up. I’m also in the process of creating an “online evidence” page with everything itemized for easy reference.
I’ll also be going back to my earlier posts and adding links to evidence wherever they fit in.
Two more witnesses (Alexander Katalov and the RegNow! employee) and then off to the Final Arguments…

Continue reading →

ElcomSoft Jury Continues To Examine The Evidence

Leave a reply

ElcomSoft Jury Asks for Law Text
By Joanna Glasner for Wired News.

Jurors deliberating in the first trial in which a company stands accused of criminal violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act did not reach a verdict Friday. They did, however, seek further clarifications regarding the law they are being asked to apply.
The jury asked U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Whyte for a full copy of the DMCA to assist in their decision-making. But he declined to provide a copy of the document, which is over 100 pages long.
Instead, Whyte said he would answer specific questions jurors had about portions of the law they must consider in determining ElcomSoft’s guilt or innocence. The government brought its case against the Russian software firm for creating and selling a program that illegally removes encryption on Adobe eBooks.

Continue reading →

Vladimir Katalov Takes The Stand in the ElcomSoft Trial (Part 1 of 2)

Leave a reply

I’ll be keeping these installments coming over the course of the day.
Next installment – the Prosecution’s cross on Vladimir Katalov, Alexander Katalov’s testimony and the testimony from the RegNow! employee (Today – Saturday). The Final Arguments Synopsis will go up tomorrow (Sunday) afternoon sometime.
That’s the plan stan!

Continue reading →

ElcomSoft: The Rest of Dmitry’s Testimony

Leave a reply

I’ve decided to go through this stuff in the order that it took place, rather than jumping ahead and discussing the Final Arguments. If I’m lucky, the Jury won’t come up with a decision till Monday, and I can string you along all weekend as I catch up on my notes up until the end of the Final Arguments. And then we can all hear the verdict on Monday morning and it will all be so dramatic.
If we get a verdict today, it will undoubtedly affect my telling of the story. (So that’s just another reason I hope we don’t get a verdict today.)
I also hope that the Jury is really thinking about these issues, and is taking as much time necessary before hopefully coming to the right decision.
So here’s the rest of Dmitry Sklyarov’s testimony, and then I’ll move on to the other witnesses for the Defense (Vladimir Katalov, Alexander Katalov and an employee from RegNow!).

Continue reading →

ElcomSoft On Trial: Dmitry’s Cross-Examination By The Prosecution

Here’s my next round of notes from the ElcomSoft trial.
I haven’t heard anything yet about a decision from the Jury.
You’ll know as soon as I do!

“If I was an unscrupulous student, would I be able to use the AEBPR program to make copies (of the course materials) and give them to the other members of the class?”
“Yes.” Dmitry replied. “But it would be illegal to distribute them. You would be distributing them yourself. The program doesn’t do it.”
Dmitry volunteered that an unscrupulous student could also open up the Ebook and take screen grabs of its pages and distribute them, or even print the pages out and make copies of them, and distribute those, illegally, to everyone in the class, if one were so inclined.
Frewing made a point of having Dmitry clarify that it would probably be cheaper and take less time for the unscrupulous student to spend the $99 on the AEBPR program and email them to do students from his home than to perform any of the other options Dmitry had mentioned.
“Yes.” Dmitry conceded. “It might be cheaper.”

Continue reading →

Danny O’Brien’s Coverage of ElcomSoft From Monday

Leave a reply

In reading through just now it sounds very much like the final argument synopsis I’m typing up.
Danny’s able to figure it all out from Monday’s testimony with Dmitry 🙂
Here are some of his main points:

The Defence
* … claimed Elcomsoft produced the software to expose weaknesses in e-book products.
* … asserted Elcomsoft deliberately kept the price of software high to reduce the damage to ebook publishers. (The claim here is that $100 was enough to dissuade casual copiers of books, but allowed them to release the software into general use.)
* … said that the software in the case – the Advanced Ebook Processor, is essentially the same as the Advanced PDF password recovery program, which Adobe appears to have no complaint with.
* … and that Elcomsoft (and Sklyarov) intended the software to be used for non-infringing uses: backup copies, blind users, fair use, etc. (The backup provision is the most important here. Under Russian law, any computer user can make one backup copy – something they claim would not be possible with a standard Adobe ebook.)
The Prosecution
* …pointed out that Dmitry didn’t write a program that exclusively produce copies in accordance with fair use (ie allow you to cut and paste just a few pages, output only in braille, etc.)
* …asked why, if they wanted to draw attention to the flaws in Adobe’s ebook, why Dmitry hadn’t released his exploit on Bugtraq. (This is a fascinating attack, given that it seems to imply that it would be *better* for Elcomsoft to release flaws on Bugtraq. Given that many people believe that releasing such circumvention code on Bugtraq is a breach of the DMCA itself, this seems kind of a weird condemnation. The point wasn’t examined in detail by either prosecution or defence. Dmitry said that Elcomsoft didn’t want to damage ebook publishers by publically releasing the exploit.)
* …said that by reverse-engineering Adobe’s ebook reader, Sklyarov had breached Adobe’s download license. Dmitry pointed out that reverse-engeering for compatibility reasons was legal in Russia, so that part of the license didn’t apply.

Continue reading →

Send An Anti-TIA Letter To Somebody Who Might Care

Leave a reply

I just send a letter to Orrin G. Hatch (Judiciary Comittee Chair) via the EFF’s Action Center asking him as chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, to permit either the Technology and Terrorism Subcommittee or the
full Judiciary Committee to hold oversight hearings on Total Information Awareness. A copy was also sent to my Representative, Nancy Pelosi.
I timed it and it took me less than a minute. (Including having them send me a new password.)
Very Cool. (I’d like a round of applause please for Ren Bucholtz, EFF Activisit.)
Think I’ll go back and send another one. (This time asking to cut TIA funding.)
(This could be habit forming.)

Just Got Back From the ElcomSoft Final Arguments

Leave a reply

This is just a little informational post to let those interested know that I just got back from the last day of the trial and I’ll have a brief synopsis of the day’s events up soon (within the hour) before getting back to finishing up my extended coverage.
(update: 3:00pm. I’m fried guys. I was up till 2am editing my Trent Lott Daily Show piece, and then I had to be in court this morning at 8:00 am. So I am fr-ied!)
The Jury is planning to deliberate today and tomorrow morning — so we might have a verdict before I “get there” with my narrative account of it — but I’m trying to catch up!
Next update late tonight or early am. Juicy stuff!
Then I will go back and finish the long versions of the witness cross-examinations. Promise.

Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott Is A Racist And Proud Of It

4 Replies

Pretty big accusation, huh? Here’s my proof:

“What I want to tell you…Ladies and Gentlemen…That there’s not enough troops in the Army…to force the southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigger race into our theatres, into our swimming pools, into our homes and into our churches.”
— Strom Thurman, 1948.
“When Strom Thurman ran for president, we voted for him! We’re proud of it! And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all of these problems over all of these years either.”
— Trent Lott, December, 2002.
“If we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are today.”
— Trent Lott, 1980.

Strom Thurman, Racist. Trent Lott, Thurman Supporter
(Right mouse click and “save” to download and play the file off of your hard drive.)
Another history lesson, courtesy of the most excellent Daily Show!
Strom Thurman in 1948:

Trent Lott in 1980: