Subj : Re: How much should I charge for fixed-price software contract? To : comp.programming From : Gerry Quinn Date : Wed Aug 24 2005 12:03 pm In article , invalid@address.co.uk.invalid says... > Gerry Quinn wrote: > > but yes, if library fines were put > > that high for some reason, I guess there would be no point doing so > > unless stringent efforts were made to enforce them. > > Thank you for making it so clear how you define serious charges that merit > arrest. But it doesn't make sense to me to let the seriousness of the > charge depend on the size of the penalty that applies if the defendant is > found guilty. Rather, the size of the penalty should reflect the > seriousness of the charge! Indeed, and that's why library fines are low, whereas penalties for distributing cracking tools are moderately high. > > In this scenario, Sklyarov could make > > the same claim that you seem to think automatically exonerates him of > > all liability, i.e. that while he might have helped cause a crime to > > happen in Russia, he didn't do anything inside Russia to make it > > happen. > > A closer scenario, in which I will use "MetaSklyarov" in an attempt to avoid > confusion: > > We assume for this scenario the existence of a Country X, where contract > killings are legal. Never mind the morality of it for now - we're just > talking about the legal aspect. MetaSklyarov, in this scenario, is a > citizen of Country X. He offers a service which is legal in Country X - the > hire of contract killers. Someone from Russia buys a contract over the > Internet. MetaSklyarov accepts the contract (perhaps without even knowing > at the time that his customer lives in Russia, since the acceptance may > well be computerised), and an agent is dispatched to Russia to fulfil the > contract. In this scenario, the agent (who commits murder in Russia) breaks > Russian law and would be open to prosecution. The Russian purchaser > resident in Russia would also, presumably, be in violation of Russian law, > and would similarly be open to prosecution. But MetaSklyarov would not have > broken Russian law at all! After all, all his activities took place outside > Russian jurisdiction. Well, there we differ - I think it is quite correct that MetaSklyarov should be charged with conspiracy to murder, and face penalties similar to or indeed worse than those for murder. Country X would, in fact, be strongly advised to get its act together. (Incidentally, the Elcomsoft software was written in English and advertised in such a way that it was clearly intended for sale in the US. It's completely irrelevant whether a particular sale was 'computerised'.) > > But the plain fact is > > that the world does not operate in the fashion you assert. At one time > > it might have. One consequence of globalisation (and nothing is more > > global than the internet) is that transnational legal cooperation, > > willing or unwilling, is a fact of life. Those who think they have a > > good thing going living between the cracks are likely to be disabused > > of the notion, unless they have the good fortune to avoid the hostile > > attention of major players, be they governmental, corporate, NGO or > > other. > > So you think the Internet means the end of national sovereignty? How > interesting. I think it offers an arena which nations must needs regulate to some degree in accordance with international norms, lest they find their affairs forcibly regulated for them. > > If that makes the internet world as presently constituted look more > > like Deadwood than some idealised community of free thinkers, so be it. > > There's too much gold there for it to remain outside the bonds of > > civilisation... > > Civilisation is one word for it, I suppose. Rousseau felt the same. - Gerry Quinn .