Bugtraq mailing list archives
RE: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code]
From: woods () weird com (Greg A. Woods)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:08:27 -0400 (EDT)
[ On Wednesday, July 25, 2001 at 20:27:51 (-0400), Eric D. Williams wrote: ]
Subject: RE: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] With all do respect it is clear the case especially the Godwin ref. are not directly material to the issue / topic here but rather the application of the principles herein as you discussed.
Well I see the Godwin article as primarily discussing whether or not crackers can get in trouble by publishing some document that they find through their (illegal) efforts, and as such only marginally applicable to the quite opposite question posed here.
I am not clear on what your allusion to self-propagating worm is here, I believe this thread started where a question was asked whether a cracker would be protected from scrutiny by copyright.
The question that opened this thread, IIRC, was asking whether or not someone publishing an analysis of a worm or virus would be violating the copyright of worm/virus author. The original question also asked if the worm/virus code could be shared. Under normal circumstances, in at least many modern "Western" legal jurisdictions, copyright is implict and does not have to be registered to be valid. This means that a virus/worm author has implicitly reserved all of their rights under copyright law even if they don't include any kind of copyright licensing notice. So the original question was indeed partly on-track w.r.t. whether or not the worm/virus code could be shared. While strictly speaking it's probably not legal to make more copies of the worm/virus code to share with other analysts, that doesn't mean you can't "show" your copy to them. However as I've argued it would seem that due to the nature of worm/virus self- propagation the author must implictly relinquish his or her right to control redistribution, at least free redistribution, since nobody can prove one way or another how some second analyst might have obtained a copy of the code when all initial distribution is anonymous (and free). -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods () acm org> <woods () robohack ca> Planix, Inc. <woods () planix com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods () weird com>
Current thread:
- hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Eric D. Williams (Jul 25)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Stan Horwitz (Jul 26)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Stanley G. Bubrouski (Jul 26)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Timothy Lawless (Jul 26)
- 10 Big Myths about Copyright (especially as pertains to Internet Publication) Don Papp (Jul 26)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Greg A. Woods (Jul 26)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Joe Shaw (Jul 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Eric D. Williams (Jul 26)
- RE: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Greg A. Woods (Jul 26)
- RE: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Eric D. Williams (Jul 26)
- Re: hacker copyrights was [RE: telnetd exploit code] Joe Shaw (Jul 26)