5 ms·

More info here: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Former-Kaspersky-Employee-Responsible-for-Leaked-Source-Code-181367.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Former-

More info here: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Former-Kaspersky-Employee-Responsible-for-Leaked-Source-Code-181367.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Former-Kaspersky-Employee-Res... It seems it's probably a beta version of AV 2009... Still embarrassing/potentially harmful to the company though - especially following the hacking of their website a few months ago (http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/security/3244882/kaspersky-website-hacked-in-fake-antivirus-attack/ http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/security/3244882/kaspers...)

dchest 16y ago
...the source code remains the intellectual property of Kaspersky Lab and downloading, distributing or using it without consent is illegal. Is it true that downloading it is illegal?
- ancymon 16y ago
  Probably it depends on what country you're in...
- johkra 16y ago
  Yes, downloading is akin to making a copy without consent of the copyright owner. (Edit: At least according to the Berne Convention, which most countries have signed.) Edit2: I think dchest is right and illegality of the act of downloading does probably not follow from the Berne Convention, sorry. Distribution (offering for download) certainly is and I think at least according to German law the resulting copy has to be destroyed. Mind you, I'm no lawyer and might be mistaken.
  - dchest 16y ago
    I'm pretty sure Berne Convention says nothing about the act of downloading. Your use of "akin" may be incorrect. Of course, different counties have different laws, but if we try to infer legality or illegality of downloading purely from Berne Convention, I'd like to ask this question: how can you make a copy of something that you don't have the original in the first place? Thus, it's more likely that the party who's distributing the work is making a copy, not the downloader.
  - onnonotme01 16y ago
    What about in the US? Can one be tracked/prosecuted simply for downloading?
    - HerberthAmaral 16y ago
      Without a doubt. Remember the Anonymous guys arrested by doing DDoS: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/two-real-guns-pointed-at-me-how-the-fbi-raided-anonymous.ars http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/two-real-gun...
    - nailer 16y ago
      Yes, it happens with other copywritten materials frequently.
    - cookiecaper 16y ago
      Theoretically yes but usually they target distributors in preference to users. It's easier to get a verdict or judgment against the distributor because it avoids the question of "what is a copy" and how that applies to the digital space and also because people are less sympathetic to distributors. The thing with P2P applications is that everyone is also automatically a distributor.
  - jrockway 16y ago
    Isn't it the server that makes the copy? You don't have anything, so how could you be copying it?
    - nailer 16y ago
      You have the copy your hard disk writes.
      - pyre 16y ago
        You have the copy that the server has transmitted to you, but the server still made the copy.
        nailer 16y ago
        You said 'You don't have anything' Which is false. You have the copy your hard disk wrote.
        pyre 16y ago
        I said nothing of the sort. Look back at who posted which comments. You responded to my only post in this thread.
        nailer 16y ago
        You're right, I was talking to jrockway. Not really sure why you entered the conversation.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Not where I live. They would wish it to be so, but that's a different matter. It won't scare off anybody though, that's for sure. Distributing it is illegal where I live, but downloading it is not.
  - joubert 16y ago
    Would the party who "serve" the download be considered a distributor for legal purposes?
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      Yes, absolutely.
      - joubert 16y ago
        I'm surprised that the nemo plus iurus principle doesn't make downloading illegal as well.
        jacquesm 16y ago
        I'm on the fence about that one. I used to sell licensed software and of course I lost plenty of money due to piracy (if a prospect cancels a sale but turns out to be running the product after all I think that qualifies ;)). Piracy is illegal (of software), but this case deals with source code. Now it is of course possible to see the name of the file and wonder 'hey, isn't that copyrighted software' but you could make that call for every package and you'd get a bunch of people arguing that the only way open source can function is by allowing people to download stuff, then verify the license is 'legit', compiling it and running it. So there are good reasons for not criminalizing the downloading of code, and the responsibility of anybody that does download code is that they will deal with it in the proper way once they find out the terms. If the code says '(C) 2000-2007 Kaspersky Inc, NOT for distribution or resale' at the top (I made that up), you will probably have a good idea that it's not wise for you to proceed, if on the other hand it has an open source license as a rider and you can not find anything wrong with it after careful inspection you should be free to proceed. To make an insightful decision you'd have to download it first.
- pvilchez 16y ago
  I read it as 'downloading without consent', 'distributing without consent' or 'using it without consent'.
- entity 16y ago
  Is it legal to steal from thief? They've stolen GPL code

dchest 16y ago

...the source code remains the intellectual property of Kaspersky Lab and downloading, distributing or using it without consent is illegal. Is it true that downloading it is illegal?

ancymon 16y ago
Probably it depends on what country you're in...
johkra 16y ago
Yes, downloading is akin to making a copy without consent of the copyright owner. (Edit: At least according to the Berne Convention, which most countries have signed.) Edit2: I think dchest is right and illegality of the act of downloading does probably not follow from the Berne Convention, sorry. Distribution (offering for download) certainly is and I think at least according to German law the resulting copy has to be destroyed. Mind you, I'm no lawyer and might be mistaken.
- dchest 16y ago
  I'm pretty sure Berne Convention says nothing about the act of downloading. Your use of "akin" may be incorrect. Of course, different counties have different laws, but if we try to infer legality or illegality of downloading purely from Berne Convention, I'd like to ask this question: how can you make a copy of something that you don't have the original in the first place? Thus, it's more likely that the party who's distributing the work is making a copy, not the downloader.
- onnonotme01 16y ago
  What about in the US? Can one be tracked/prosecuted simply for downloading?
  - HerberthAmaral 16y ago
    Without a doubt. Remember the Anonymous guys arrested by doing DDoS: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/two-real-guns-pointed-at-me-how-the-fbi-raided-anonymous.ars http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/two-real-gun...
  - nailer 16y ago
    Yes, it happens with other copywritten materials frequently.
  - cookiecaper 16y ago
    Theoretically yes but usually they target distributors in preference to users. It's easier to get a verdict or judgment against the distributor because it avoids the question of "what is a copy" and how that applies to the digital space and also because people are less sympathetic to distributors. The thing with P2P applications is that everyone is also automatically a distributor.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Isn't it the server that makes the copy? You don't have anything, so how could you be copying it?
  - nailer 16y ago
    You have the copy your hard disk writes.
    - pyre 16y ago
      You have the copy that the server has transmitted to you, but the server still made the copy.
      - nailer 16y ago
        You said 'You don't have anything' Which is false. You have the copy your hard disk wrote.
        pyre 16y ago
        I said nothing of the sort. Look back at who posted which comments. You responded to my only post in this thread.
        nailer 16y ago
        You're right, I was talking to jrockway. Not really sure why you entered the conversation.
jacquesm 16y ago
Not where I live. They would wish it to be so, but that's a different matter. It won't scare off anybody though, that's for sure. Distributing it is illegal where I live, but downloading it is not.
- joubert 16y ago
  Would the party who "serve" the download be considered a distributor for legal purposes?
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Yes, absolutely.
    - joubert 16y ago
      I'm surprised that the nemo plus iurus principle doesn't make downloading illegal as well.
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        I'm on the fence about that one. I used to sell licensed software and of course I lost plenty of money due to piracy (if a prospect cancels a sale but turns out to be running the product after all I think that qualifies ;)). Piracy is illegal (of software), but this case deals with source code. Now it is of course possible to see the name of the file and wonder 'hey, isn't that copyrighted software' but you could make that call for every package and you'd get a bunch of people arguing that the only way open source can function is by allowing people to download stuff, then verify the license is 'legit', compiling it and running it. So there are good reasons for not criminalizing the downloading of code, and the responsibility of anybody that does download code is that they will deal with it in the proper way once they find out the terms. If the code says '(C) 2000-2007 Kaspersky Inc, NOT for distribution or resale' at the top (I made that up), you will probably have a good idea that it's not wise for you to proceed, if on the other hand it has an open source license as a rider and you can not find anything wrong with it after careful inspection you should be free to proceed. To make an insightful decision you'd have to download it first.
pvilchez 16y ago
I read it as 'downloading without consent', 'distributing without consent' or 'using it without consent'.
entity 16y ago
Is it legal to steal from thief? They've stolen GPL code