| Cryptome In |
JANUARY 2000 |
+ File at Cryptome.org |
copyright-com.htm + The Copyright Corporations January 23, 2000
digi-copy.htm + Digital Copying Specification January 23, 2000
bernstein-bxa.htm + Bernstein Asks BXA to Clarify Crypto Regs Janaury 23, 2000
dvd-mpaa-3-dr.htm + Defendants Reply in MPAA v. 3, New York Janaury 22, 2000
dvd-hoy-reply.htm + DVD CCA: Reply Declaration of John J. Hoy January 22, 2000
Caution: It may be illegal for California and New York residents to download the file above.
Before downloading read the contents below. Have lawyer on hand. Or say fuck it and enjoy
the forbidden fruit of intellectual censorship. Rest of world is free to grab it, for now.
bio-doom.htm + Biology of Doom: US Secret Germ Warfare Project January 22, 2000
dvd-mpaa-3-pi.htm + MPAA Preliminary Injunction Against DeCSS January 21, 2000
stasi-no.htm + Norwegian Reporter Charged as Stasi Spy January 21, 2000
nro011900.txt + National Reconnaissance Office Privacy Program January 19, 2000
echelon-uk2.htm + European legal aid agreement nears conclusion January 19, 2000
istac011800.txt + BXA InfoSec Advisory Panel Meeting January 19, 2000
usss011800.txt + Jail Time for Meth and Identity Theft January 19, 2000
O f f s i t e ( M o r e )
CCA PI DVD CCA Gets California Injunction /SL January 21, 2000
EFF Up EFF Vows to Fight MPAA DVD Case January 21, 2000
BXA Says BXA Answers to Crypto Regs Questions /AG January 21, 2000
PGP-FR French PGP 6.5.1 /A January 21, 2000
EU DigSig EU Digital Signature Directive /SK/AH January 21, 2000
Nuke Terror Osama Bin Laden and Nuclear Terrorism /RK January 21, 2000
DVDay (OK, Slow) Report on DVD-DeCSS Hearing /DM January 19, 2000
"We appreciate US Federal Judge Kaplan, the International Intellectual Property Association and the Department of Commerce linking an unbroken chain from exemplary corporate profit making to national economic security, and in that innovative way justify limitation on freedom of expression for the sake of stockholder and corporate officer betterment and the well-being of political office holders who must return to the job market afterwards (as with the MPAA's Jack Valenti and unbroken links of others). Hail to the Copyright Industries for their redefinition of where the top places are begging. Now how about the interests of the persons who created the goods in the first place -- those who thrive on freedom of expression -- not those organizations listed in the IIPA membership who most profit from that ill-paid, ofttimes stolen, intellectual hard labor?"
-- Cryptome, The Copyright Corporations, January 23, 2000
"The DTCP specification relies on strong cryptographic technologies to provide flexible and robust copy protection across digital buses. These cryptographic techniques have evolved over the past 20 years to serve critical military, governmental and commercial applications. These techniques have been thoroughly evaluated by hackers and by legitimate cryptographic experts and have proven their ability to withstand attack. The cryptographic stability of the system is derived from the proven strength of the underlying technologies, rather than merely how well a certain algorithm can be kept secret.
More on MPAA/DVD CCA's "related" organizations:
From: http://www.mpaa.org:80/relatedsites/
International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)
Digital Transmission Licensing Administrator (DTLA)
NDS / Content Management Protection (CMP)
United States Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Business Affairs
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Copy Protection Technology Working Group (CPTWG)
Online Privacy Alliance (OPA)
International Recording Media Association (IRMA)
For those interested in cryptography, law and license enforcement the Copy Protection Technology Working Group site is especially worth study."
-- Cryptome, Digital Copying Specification, January 23, 2000
"Pursuant to the discussions between our offices and Mr. Anthony Coppolino of the Justice Department, this letter requests an official advisory opinion concerning the new encryption export regulations issued by your offices on January 14, 2000 (hereinafter "EI regulations"). Our overall concern is that the EI regulations continue to interfere strongly with Professor Bernstein's planned scientific activities. First, the EI regulations continue to maintain unconstitutional and pointless distinctions between print and electronic communications media. Second, while we recognize that your agency intended to reduce significantly the burden on Prof. Bernstein and others who communicate encryption software, the EI regulations remain so complex and ambiguous that Prof. Bernstein cannot be sure whether many of his normal scientific activities would be lawful. Given that this matter is currently in litigation on a facial challenge, we have three suggestions that we believe will assist both parties as well as the general public in reviewing and relying on the matters discussed in the Opinion. We request that the Opinion be made publicly available by BXA; we participate in drafting the Opinion; and that a revised schedule be set to submit briefings to the court."
-- Cindy Cohn, Bernstein Asks BXA for Clarification of Encryption Export Regulations, January 16, 2000
"Contents
Exhibit A DeCSS, October 6, 1999
Exhibit B CSSscramble.txt, October 25, 1999
Exhibit C CSS Interim License Agreement"
-- DVD CCA, Reply Declaration of John J. Hoy, January 18, 2000 (Caution: It may be illegal for California and New York residents to download the files above. Have lawyer on hand. Or say fuck it and enjoy the forbidden fruit of intellectual censorship. Rest of world is free to grab it, for now.)
"It is customary to blame governments for these industries of death. But one also has to wonder about the individual scientists. A compelling book, for which Regis did the research, would have examined the morality and motivations of the men behind biological weapons. Henry Jekyll blamed self-indulgence for the shipwreck of his life. What prompted these American scientists to feed the Hydes of their souls?"
-- Timothy Naftali, The Biology of Doom - The History of America's Secret Germ Warfare Project, January 23, 2000
"Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan today granted a preliminary injunction against three defendants sued by the Motion Picture Association of American for offering the DeCSS DVD descrambling program on the Internet.
At a three-hour preliminary hearing today in the Southern District of New York, arguments were presented for MPAA by its counsel, Proskauer Rose, and for the defendants, Shawn Reimerdes, Roman Kazan, and Eric Corley a/k/a Emmanuel Goldstein, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Attorney Peter Katz. EFF's attorneys, Robin Gross and Allon Levy, participated from its California offices by way of teleconference. Defendants Reimerdes and Kazan were present during the hearing, Corely was not.
Judge Kaplan rejected every argument, point by point, made by the defendants and firmly endorsed, point by point, the claims of MPAA made under provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for protecting intellectual property.
A clear link was made between this federal case and the California case by both the plaintiffs and Judge Kaplan. MPAA counsel argued that the suit was reluctantly filed in response to widespread, global posting of DeCSS as a hacker backlash to the California suit. The judge agreed that this backlash warranted a preliminary injunction to prevent "irreparable harm" to the copyright holders. This was among other justifications for the injunction which he elaborated in a lengthy statement on the case, its opposing arguments and law governing copyright and the First Amendment.
He emphasized that there are times when copyright and the First Amendment come into conflict and that Congress anticipated this seeming constitutional contradiction between freedom of speech and the protection of intellectual property. In this case he affirmed that copyright should prevail over the defendants' claim for First Amendment rights.
Upon completion of his verbal statement Judge Kaplan signed and presented to counsel his order for the preliminary injunction. He will issue an extended written version of his decision and order early next week.
Judge Kaplan offered a speedy trial for the suit, "as early as next Tuesday if you want it," he said to MPAA counsel. "I would like this tried as soon as possible. I offer you a runaway train if that's what you want. My schedule is clear for this."
Defendants' counsel requested a delay and the judge agreed to accept an application for an alternate date.
During the hearing it became clear which way the judge would rule. He repeatedly urged defense attorneys to get on with their argument, hectored them and lectured them on the law. He had earlier refused an adjournment in the hearing to allow the defense more time to prepare responses to the suit.
Defense papers of Roman Kazan apparently were not properly submitted to the court in time to be considered. Judge Kaplan refused to allow late submission and dismissed the need for more time, saying, "these rapid schedules are customary in preliminary injunction cases, there was plenty of time to respond. I am obliged to rule on what the court has."
Judge Kaplan stated there was a clear intent to break the law as indicated by vulgar remarks on Reimerdes' Web site. For emphasis on this point he repeated them as if with distaste on three occasions during the hearing: "the DVD CAA lawyers are cocksuckers."
We were unable to get a copy of Judge Kaplan's order for the PI. Promised a fax by Proskauer (defendants' counsel toilet-flushed himself with his), we learned from MPAA PR later that lead counsel had gone home with the only other copy to recover from an all-nighter for the case. Not even MPAA PR would see it until tomorrow.
We'll get a copy of the order from the court tomorrow and make it available here, and the decision when available.
The order and Judge Kaplan's decision should provide First Amendment advocates with a lot of tough meat to chew on. He seems to have to decided to try to put an end to overuse and abuse of the First Amendment for inappropriate defense of the indefensible, as he put it. He specifically ordered that links to sites which offered DeCSS be prohibited, even though Proskauer tried to get that changed in his order to prohibit only links to download DeCSS itself.
Judge Kaplan said that his order stands, and that the issue of linkage to links is sufficiently complicated to justify a separate application for a hearing. So, for now all news organizations, search engines, mail list archives, Deja, the worldwide Internet kaboodle, that provide links to sites that offer DeCSS are illegal, even if those sites offer information other than DeCSS.
The Proskauer team tried to head this off and Judge Kaplan drove his runaway train right over their more limited counterproposals which they explained would not impair the functionality of the Net.
If I was a member of the press I would take a very close look at what the judge hath writ and so ordered about abuse of the First Amendment.
There was a single reporter was at the hearing in Judge Kaplan's chambers, Jeff Howe with the Village Voice, two observers from Cryptome, and the MPAA public relations representative, Ken Frydman, who distributed a pre-prepared victory statement from Jack Valenti, President and CEO of MPAA:
'Judge Kaplan's ruling represents a great victory for creative artists and consumers everywhere. I think this serves as a wake-up call to anyone who contemplates stealing intellectual property.'
Cryptome asked Judge Kaplan after the hearing if he would answer questions. He said he does not speak to the press.
We asked chief attorney for MPAA, Jon Baumgarten of Proskauer Rose, for comments. He said no, statements will have to come from MPAA public relations and that he would be briefing that office shortly.
We spoke with Shawn Reimerdes and Roman Kazan about their views of the hearing. What they said is what Jeff Howe will report in another forum, tomorrow I believe."
-- Cryptome, January 20, 2000
"Pursuant to 15 CFR Part 734, notice is hereby given that the following files containing open Kerberos source code will be published at
http://cryptography.org/source/kerbnet/ (with links from http://cryptography.org/source/index.htm), without benefit of the current export control CGI program:
http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/KerbNet/docs/kerbnet-docs.tgz
http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/KerbNet/release_notes
http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/KerbNet/MD5SUMS
http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/KerbNet/source/kerbnet-source.tgz
http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/KerbNet/source/tcl-source.tgz "
-- Michael Paul Johnson, January 19, 2000
"Eben Moglen, Professor of Law from Columbia Law School then took over the defendants' argument. I don't think I overstate the issue when I say this guy absolutely kicked ass. Besides being a good orator, the man clearly understands technology as well as law. Mr. Moglen basically proceeded to shred the plaintiff's arguments. He pointed out that DeCSS has nothing to do with wholesale copying; DVDs may be bit-for-bit duplicated and will play in any player without the use of DeCSS. He debunked the assertion of "irreparable harm" to the movie industry by doing some basic bandwidth math showing that downloading a 5.1 gigabyte movie will take you 30 hours (DSL speeds). He went on to describe CSS as extremely weak, and outlined Stevenson's novel attack against the cipher, which involves attacking the hash value to reconstruct the "title key" by which the MPEG stream may be decoded. In such a case, none of DVD CCA's keys are employed. Thus, the trade secret at issue must not have have been very secret, as it was literally child's play to discover it. With all this, Moglen asserted that no cause of action remains because no trade secret remains. The "secret" in question was obtained by legitimate means, and Stevenson's subsequent work illustrates that none of DVD CCA's alleged secrets need be involved in decrypting a DVD."
-- Schwab, Report on DVD-DeCSS Hearing, January 19, 2000 (offsite)
"An individual seeking notification of whether a system of records contains a record pertaining to him, or an individual seeking access to records pertaining to him which are available under the Privacy Act, shall address the request in writing to the Privacy Act Coordinator, National Reconnaissance Office, 14675 Lee Road, Chantilly, VA 20151-1715."
-- National Reconnaissance Office, Privacy Act Program, January 19, 2000
| Cryptome Out |
|
| Echelon | MI6 | TEMPEST | DVD-DeCSS | GSM | PGP |