Jump to content

The Law


Spook
 Share

Recommended Posts

I need some information on the following

What are the laws on servers containing copywrited content..

For instance, if you guys here at hack5 where to upload an Eminem song and have a link to it publically, is that breaking the law?

If it is, what are the ways around it. There are all kinds of disclaimers floating about which have loop holes in them such as

"If you are from any government society blah blah blah you are not authorised to access content on this server"

Then hey presto, there breaking the law if they go anywhere near your server whether its looking for copywrighted content or not etc

Obviously not as simple as that, but you get my jist

I need everything I can get on how to keep your self in the clear if you have music files or films on a website

I mean look at the likes of youtube.. they have video clips and dont pay any loyalties, how can they do that?

Please help, this isnt for educational purposes I have someone trying to play dirty.

Regards!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need some information on the following

What are the laws on servers containing copywrited content..

For instance, if you guys here at hack5 where to upload an Eminem song and have a link to it publically, is that breaking the law?

Yes, that would be illegal.

If it is, what are the ways around it. There are all kinds of disclaimers floating about which have loop holes in them such as

"If you are from any government society blah blah blah you are not authorised to access content on this server"

You're still breaking the law, regardless of whether government staff can see it or not.

Then hey presto, there breaking the law if they go anywhere near your server whether its looking for copywrighted content or not etc

Obviously not as simple as that, but you get my jist

I need everything I can get on how to keep your self in the clear if you have music files or films on a website

I mean look at the likes of youtube.. they have video clips and dont pay any loyalties, how can they do that?

YouTube can't. Users upload protected content without the knowledge of YouTube or before they have a chance to delete it.

As far as user created content goes, that's totally legal because they have full rights to the video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, what I meant was the person who uploads it has full rights to the video if they made it. Eminem's latest video doesn't count as user created and would be illegal. That's why YouTube has the potential to be sued off the planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that when you upload a movie onto youtube to click "I Agree" somewhere, which if you look at the fine print will say in part that you claim to be the owner of this original work. Now, when a copyright holder comes along, sees his work and goed apeshit, youtube can simply say "well, I'm sorry, I didn't know. That pesky user said he was the owner. But I'll remove the file and we call it even. Hmmkay?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Along the same lines what is the story with the switchblade/hacksaw?  In the US at least I thought its illegal to create this kinda of thing (especially the hacksawtrojan part).  (http://www.sophos.com/security/analyses/trojhacksawa.html)  :-P

The defenses I came up with are that it's poc code and thats its to be used for security auditing only in the form of a disclaimer on the download page (GonZor's Switchblade).  Should a disclaimer be incorporated into the config for first run?  Like Microsofts EULA agreement which basically says that they're never responsible?  (http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2006/09/a_contract_only.html)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Along the same lines what is the story with the switchblade/hacksaw?  In the US at least I thought its illegal to create this kinda of thing (especially the hacksawtrojan part).  (http://www.sophos.com/security/analyses/trojhacksawa.html)  :-P

The defenses I came up with are that it's poc code and thats its to be used for security auditing only in the form of a disclaimer on the download page (GonZor's Switchblade).  Should a disclaimer be incorporated into the config for first run?  Like Microsofts EULA agreement which basically says that they're never responsible?  (http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2006/09/a_contract_only.html)

DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer.

STATEMENT: My interpretation of US law on the topic of malware is that it is not illegal to develop any particular form of software. However, digital vandalism is considered illegal. So if you do create a virus/worm/trojin/etc... you haven't done anything illegal yet. Once you deploy the malware, then you have committed a felony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...So if you do create a virus/worm/trojin/etc... you haven't done anything illegal yet. Once you deploy the malware, then you have committed a felony.

By deploy do you mean distribute (as in the way the switchblade/hacksaw has been amongst the community) or use maliciously (using the switchblade/hacksaw in an unauthorized situation)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...So if you do create a virus/worm/trojin/etc... you haven't done anything illegal yet. Once you deploy the malware, then you have committed a felony.

By deploy do you mean distribute (as in the way the switchblade/hacksaw has been amongst the community) or use maliciously (using the switchblade/hacksaw in an unauthorized situation)

(Sorry for the bad word choice) I meant the actual malicious use of the software. Generally the line is drawn at the point of interacting with someone else's machine in a way they don't want you to. That even goes beyond the use of viruses and can even include browsing a website in a way that the owner doesn't want. The example I got was "intentionally leaving required form fields blank."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was the case of Daniel James Cuthbert who was *convicted* of hacking for essentially doing ../../../ while browing a site.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/11/ts...owup/print.html

So to be honest, if they want to shaft you, all they need to do is give you a trial by your "peers" and given the public's stupidity you'll be fucked. I mean, who hasn't used something in ways other than the creator intended?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...