3 ms·

It could have as easily been phrased (and likely would by a prosecutor) as "a cache of source code longer than the King James version of the bible." The defenc

by ajarmst 13y ago

It could have as easily been phrased (and likely would by a prosecutor) as "a cache of source code longer than the King James version of the bible." The defence could respond "only about three millionths of the amount of data in a human cell's nucleus." "More than seventy times the amount of software needed to land on the moon!". The amount is irrelevant. He released proprietary source code which is an offence under current law, with fairly well established sentencing guidelines. I agree that the law should be changed, but if you protest a law by breaking it, the results shouldn't come as a surprise.

petegrif 13y ago
a) I didn't read anything that suggested he was protesting the law. Perhaps you could point out that part of the story. b) He didn't release proprietary source code. Or did I miss that part?
- ajarmst 13y ago
  (a)I was offering him the benefit of the doubt. You're correct. Other possibilities include that he's simply a criminal or merely dumb. (b) You did. Reread the third line of the post.
  - TheZenPsycho 13y ago
    Are those really the only possibilities? Are you perhaps not really thinking very deeply about his possible motives?
    - ajarmst 13y ago
      "Other possibilities include"
  - vidarh 13y ago
    > (b) You did. Reread the third line of the post Which third line of the post is this? I don't see anything about him releasing the source. And if you read up on the case, you will find that what he actually did was to upload encrypted archives that he then downloaded from home. I don't believe there's any allegation that he publicly distributed any of this source.
    - ajarmst 13y ago
      Apologies. I thought you were objecting to "proprietary". I think we've just a semantic issue. How about "he knowingly caused proprietary source code to leave the control of its owner"? Although, as he did post to a public server, I think I can defend "released" if I need to. The word "encrypted" does not occur in the linked story, nor does it seem to be implied.
milkshakes 13y ago
you'd have a point, except for the part where an appeals court unanimously acquitted him
- ajarmst 13y ago
  I said that breaking a law has fairly predictable results. Among them the possibility of acquittal on appeal. In fact, if you're doing it for some sort of protest reason, this might actually be the goal (building case law against an unfair/unconstitutional law or interpretation).

by ajarmst 13y ago

petegrif 13y ago

a) I didn't read anything that suggested he was protesting the law. Perhaps you could point out that part of the story. b) He didn't release proprietary source code. Or did I miss that part?

ajarmst 13y ago
(a)I was offering him the benefit of the doubt. You're correct. Other possibilities include that he's simply a criminal or merely dumb. (b) You did. Reread the third line of the post.
- TheZenPsycho 13y ago
  Are those really the only possibilities? Are you perhaps not really thinking very deeply about his possible motives?
  - ajarmst 13y ago
    "Other possibilities include"
- vidarh 13y ago
  > (b) You did. Reread the third line of the post Which third line of the post is this? I don't see anything about him releasing the source. And if you read up on the case, you will find that what he actually did was to upload encrypted archives that he then downloaded from home. I don't believe there's any allegation that he publicly distributed any of this source.
  - ajarmst 13y ago
    Apologies. I thought you were objecting to "proprietary". I think we've just a semantic issue. How about "he knowingly caused proprietary source code to leave the control of its owner"? Although, as he did post to a public server, I think I can defend "released" if I need to. The word "encrypted" does not occur in the linked story, nor does it seem to be implied.

milkshakes 13y ago

you'd have a point, except for the part where an appeals court unanimously acquitted him

ajarmst 13y ago
I said that breaking a law has fairly predictable results. Among them the possibility of acquittal on appeal. In fact, if you're doing it for some sort of protest reason, this might actually be the goal (building case law against an unfair/unconstitutional law or interpretation).