[21857] in bugtraq
hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric D. Williams)
Wed Jul 25 15:35:44 2001
Message-ID: <01C11515.47EAEF00.eric@infobro.com>
From: "Eric D. Williams" <eric@infobro.com>
To: "'aleph1@securityfocus.com'" <aleph1@securityfocus.com>,
"bugtraq@securityfocus.com" <bugtraq@securityfocus.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:22:43 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re: the lack of legal backing here are a number of links that appear relevant
to the question (do you violate copyright by publishing hacker code, discovered
subsequent to intrusion?). Indeed it appears that the law is fuzzy on this one
concerning copyright and intellectual property. But, given the circumstance
that a listing or binary of the aformentioned code can not be deterined as
authorized in the first case - the intrusion itself is illegal, it appears it
can not pass the copyright or intellectual property tests.
Refs with USC refs:
http://www.eff.org/Publications/Mike_Godwin/phrack_riggs_neidorf_godwin.article
Ref with USC footnotes: http://www.netatty.com/copyright.html
On Wednesday, July 25, 2001 11:48 AM, aleph1@securityfocus.com
[SMTP:aleph1@securityfocus.com] wrote:
> The are quite a few responses to this thread but its painfully obvious
> that no one is quite sure if what they are saying is backed by law.
> Lots of IANAL. So unless someone with more than a simply opinion posts
> I'll kill the thread here.
>
> --
> Elias Levy
> SecurityFocus.com
> http://www.securityfocus.com/
> Si vis pacem, para bellum
