Subj : Re: How much should I charge for fixed-price software contract? To : comp.programming From : Richard Heathfield Date : Sat Aug 20 2005 02:47 pm Gerry Quinn wrote: > In article , > invalid@address.co.uk.invalid says... >> Gerry Quinn wrote: > >> > I trust that you have never been inconvenienced by users of other fine >> > Elcomsoft products such as 'Advanced Email Extractor", "Advanced Direct >> > Remailer", and "Advanced NT Security Explorer". > >> Are these more examples of Russian software being produced in Russia by >> Russian nationals under Russian law? > > I assume so, but they only came to my attention when English-language > versions were offered for sale worldwide. Then I don't see what you're complaining about. If a foreign company produces software that cannot be used legally in the UK, it's *my* moral responsibility not to buy it. It is not, in my view, the moral responsibility of the originating company not to offer it for sale worldwide, just because some countries have laws against the use of that software. >> > If you had been, you might be a little less indignant at the fact of >> > Sklyarov being sued for his part in the production and sale in the US >> > of "Advanced eBook Processor". > >> If he broke American copyright law (and that's very much in doubt, since >> the program he wrote was written in Russia under Russian law, not in the >> USA under USA law), then by all means let Adobe sue him, and let a judge >> decide whether he has broken US law /whilst on US soil/. But Adobe had >> him /imprisoned/. That's a very different matter indeed. > > The program, on the face of it, violates the DMCA - there was certainly > a case to answer. The crime he was accused of specifically related to > copies sold in the US. I can find no evidence that he was personally responsible for selling /any/ copies in the US. Do you have such evidence? > I imagine that when a foreign national on a visit is arrested on a > serious charge, Whoa, tough crowd! Murder is a serious charge. Rape is a serious charge. Armed robbery is a serious charge. Flogging a few copies of a legally-produced program (if indeed he did, for I can find no evidence thereof) at a programming convention is hardly in the same league. Having read the DoJ press release and the Criminal Complaint against Sklyarov very carefully, I can find no evidence that he sold a single copy. All he did was talk at a convention. Is talking illegal in the USA? If so, then I suggest everybody clears out of there PDQ. > the possibility of him fleeing the jurisdiction is > considered a live one by police forces everywhere. It is entirely sensible to flee an unjust jurisdiction - if you can. The activity for which Skylarov was being charged - the "manufacture" of the AEBPR program - took place outside the USA's jurisdiction. The idea that the USA has jurisdiction over the activities of Russian programmers working in Russia for a Russian software house is simply absurd. Here is an approximately parallel case: a UK car designer travels to the USA to speak at a car design convention about a car he designed in the UK under UK law; these cars are designed to be driven on the left side of the road, and he admits this freely. Since driving on the left side of the road is illegal in the USA, the car designer is arrested and thrown into prison on what you have called a "serious charge". That's not justice. That's insanity. > However, Sklyarov > was released on bail after three weeks, and eventually allowed to leave > the country. > > He got off lightly enough, in my view. In my view, the USA got off pretty lightly. This was an international incident. Wars have been started over less. Freedom of speech is fundamental. So is the concept of national sovereignty. The Sklyarov incident shows that the US Government is prepared to ride rough-shod over both. -- Richard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk mail: rjh at above domain .