In a stunning and surprising verdict to many "experts" Elcomsoft has been found innocent on all four criminal copyright charges for producing a program that can crack anti-piracy protections on electronic books. Just last week many copyright attorneys were predicting that Elcomsoft would be found guilty.

As you may remember Dmitry Sklyarov helped create the Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR) software for his Russian employer Elcomsoft. According to the company's website, the software permits eBook owners to translate from Adobe's secure eBook format into the more common Portable Document Format (PDF). The software only works on legitimately purchased eBooks. It has been used by blind people to read otherwise-inaccessible PDF user's manuals, and by people who want to move an eBook from one computer to another (just like anyone can move a music CD from the home player to a portable or car).

Dmitry was arrested July 17, 2001 in Las Vegas, NV, at the behest of Adobe Systems, according to the DOJ complaint, and charged with distributing a product designed to circumvent copyright protection measures (the AEBPR). He was eventually released on $50,000 bail and restricted to California. In December 2001, was permitted to return home to Russia with his family. Charges have not been dropped, and he remains subject to prosecution in the US.

This is a major first step in the fight against the DMCA. What this means is that intent is a major factor in determining if a program is illegal. The software in question could be used for good or evil, just like everything else in the world. To make something illegal simply because it "MIGHT" be used for a purpose other than intended is beyond ludicrous, its silly.

While it doesn't answer jurisdiction issues, why a Russian company was charged under US law for developing a program in Russia, that is perfectly legal in Russia. This could work in both directions. Imagine going to England and being detained for driving on the right side of the road in the US on your way to work one day. This is what happened in this case. A Russian citizen was arrested and charged with criminal copyright violation in the US for doing his job in his home country. What's wrong with that picture?

I can imagine that there are a lot of RIAA Lawyers, MPAA Lawyers in shock right at the moment, and will probably move to the bars later on.

Since when did the US have the authority to cross other country's borders and impose their laws on them? I hope the shock lasts for ages, at least the beer industry will benefit

America is no different than the Roman Empire. Bullshit.

Best news in a long time. This will provide a springboard to topple the DMCA once and for good.

Now, all we need is for BnetD to win their counterclaim against Blizzard (See www.bnetd.org for details). BnetD is asking to declare the DMCA section 1201(a), which deals with anti-circumvention unconstitutional.

Wow! A surprise and a joy to be sure.

This is a great victory.

I am a big opposer of the DMCA, especially the section in question. The fact is that the law does not permit any production that "can" circumvent protection. Well computers circumvent protection, dvd recorders circumvent protection. Should that mean that they are pulled from the shelves as well. Of course not, because they have legitamite uses as well.

I salute to Elcomsoft for statding against the DMCA.

Hail Mp3!!!

In a possible answer to 'ChillinBuzz's' question of "Since when did the US have the authority to cross other country's borders and impose their laws on them?", it isn't so much the nation-states as the multinational corporations that pull the strings and REALLY run the country or countries (and the nominal governments in question) behind the scenes; in short, that have more power than any government. As it relates to us, the U.S. government is essentially a lapdog of the multinational conglomerates in general, and their entertainment-media components in particular.

W-B's got the right of it, imho. It's the multinational conglomerate corporate entities that are doing the cross-over. It has nothing to do with the US govt, other than the US being the place that so many megacorps choose to house their headquarters.

I think the finnish taxi drivers would tell you there are SOME governments out there a great deal MORE onerous in terms of piracy and privacy.

DVD recorders dont circumvent protection. The DVD technology is only available under a license which make them include a great deal of protection. They must recognise CGMS and macrovision on all inputs, apply it to outputs for protected video and must not have any digital input or output.

Adobe originally decided Dimetry (unspellable russian names...) was subject to US law when he visited the US to give a presentation on the poor security of adobe ebooks. The Justice Department started the case against Elcomsoft, and decided they were subject to US law because they sold the ebook processor in the US.