Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Cisco's stolen code

[Ron DuFresne <dufresne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Mister Coffee wrote:

> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 03:46:45PM -0500, Ron DuFresne wrote:
> >
> >     [BIGGER SNIPPAGE]
> >
> > I'm trying to understand how obtaining and using stolen code, for any
> > reason, is different then acquiring stolen property in any other context.
> > If you know the property was obtained illegally, that would make you an
> > acessory after the fact, would it not?
> >
> I suppose that's ultimately something for the lawyers to decide.  But imagine 
> it this way - in keeping with the hypothetical situation we're using in the 
> example: Someone copies an article out of a magazine.  They then leave the 
> photocopies out on a table at the local coffee house that's known for having 
> magazines and books and such out for people to read.

But, for realities sake, let's avoid hypothetical's and deal with the
facts;

The code was stolen, it's been widely announced that it was obtained from
non-legal channels.  Now, back to my question;

how is this different from cquiring stolen property in any other context?

Thanks,


Ron DuFresne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity.  It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
        ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D.  Just don't touch anything.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html