Comments on: Tena vs Tegam

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:57:47 +0000

After reading both Tena’s and Tegam’s side, the crux of the argument does not seem to be addressed. If Tena supposedly violated Tegam’s copyright, how was he privy to copyrighted material? Did he hack into Tegam’s systems, steal source code, and publish it to the world? I certainly don’t think so; hardly the type of thing a molecular biologist would have the time to do.

Seems to me that Tena was curious about a security product, found vulnerabilities, and published his findings. Such a practice can be deemed needed or dangerous depending on one’s point of view. Personally I see both the costs and benefits. To use Tena’s own analogy, I’m glad that public disclosure of Ford’s safety problems years ago lead to better tire development and increased safety. At the same time, I would not want detailed blueprints and security procedures for government buildings in Washington DC to be available to those who would use them to cause death and destruction.

I would rather security professionals report vulnerabilities to producing vendors privately and allow them to fix the problem. However, this is not law, and this is not what has Mr. Tena facing imprisonment.

If one removes this value judgment argument and concentrates on the indictment itself, it would seem (from a cursory point of view) that Tegam’s accusation is ridiculous on its face. Tegam seems not to be trying to protect its intellectual property from unauthorized duplication but rather protect its product from bad press. The former is prevention of theft; the latter is the suppression of dissent.

I hope our brothers across the Atlantic hold individual liberty dear enough to rule wisely in this case.

Tom K.
CISSP (Information Security Professional)
USA

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:46:35 +0000

There is one way to stop the software cartels and their buddies on the bench from bullying people, and that is by not using products designed by the software cartels unless absolutely necessary (when there is no free alternative).

When forced to use software made by the software cartels, consider making donations to their open source competitors or working on an open source version yourself if you have the capability.

I feel the same about the music cartels. I don’t download their products. I don’t buy their products, nor do I listen to their products on the radio. I find plenty of talent out there (thanks to p2p) that is not sponsored by the cartels that deserve a chance to compete. I see, for example, that crappy music can make the “Top 40″ after weeks of being played on the radio. It is amazing what free advertising can do. Just imagine what will happen when Microsoft breaks big into the content provider industry. Imagine all the free advertisement Microsoft can use for their products while their competitors have to pay for their advertisement.

I’m a strong proponent of capitalism, and I believe that neither cartels nor governments should be in the business of suppressing fair competition. Unfortunately, both governemnts and cartels are effectively blocking competition. The good news is that I see a change of heart in consumers. Thanks to the Internet, the cartels are now being forced to compete. The cartels do not like competition, so they are fighting back with DRM, frivolous criminal and civil prosecution, and other means. Educating (or getting rid) of judges who are being used to bully consumers and whistle blowers would be an ideal partial solution. Another solution would be to not buy products infected with DRM. To fight the software cartels, I recommend http://www.sourceforge.net and to fight the music cartels, I recommend using p2p software and http://www.p2pnet.net .

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:56:10 +0000

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 12 Jan 2005 02:31:26 +0000

I’m still not clear why a Harvard University researcher can be accused in France.
Is it a legal implication of having a measly web page hosted in France?
It was my understanding that you had to prosecute people in their home country.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:48:32 +0000

Good luck buddy!