Now to point a stern finger...

Am I getting warm?

  • Maybe, maybe not.

    Votes: 43 37.1%

  • Newb.

    Votes: 15 12.9%

  • *sizzle*

    Votes: 58 50.0%
  • Total voters
    116
Status
Not open for further replies.
You may recall, that in Half-life 1, it's pointless to ban ***** because they seem to have 1000's of cd-key's and just keep coming back. When I first heard about this, and their claims of a keygen, I knew two things:

1) The keygen claims were bollocks.
2) They were "0wn"ing people and stealing their halflife keys.

I figured the first one because these weenies wouldn't be able to contain themselves if they had a working keygen, and it'd be out by now.

I figured #2 because I discovered a worm going around local cable modems, which I got a copy off and sent to network associates (It is win32/Hai.worm) which may be unrelated to *****, but which spreads through windows file sharing. The number of hits I was getting on my firewall on the netbios port told me that a lot of people had poor security and open filesharing. Also, people who have open fileshares were likely to have been to LANs or something where they shared files with people (as is common at lan parties), and thus were likely to have half-life. Now, if you were a ***** member, you could just scan for open fileshares and steal people's cd-key's. The situation is different now, this was a couple years ago, almost everyone has winxp now and it has a little better default security behaviors, but I'm sure ***** and friends took advantage of this time in internet history to steal a lot of cd-key's for half-life 1. The claims of a keygen were to cover for their illicit behavior.

Hey, they should use the Patriot Act on these ****ers. Hacking=terrorism now as far as the government is concerned.

---as an aside:
By the way, anyone who was involved in stealing the half-life 2 source code from Valve had better get a lawyer. Script kiddies cannot keep their mouths shut and you'd better believe that someone who knows you did it is mouthing off right now somewhere. If you also happen to run flood bots or similar through irc channels (as I bet most self-respecting script kiddies do), it gets even worse. Most irc servers log suspicious channels, and evidence of your control of DoS bots can result in you doing some hard time. You better consider your options.

Also, Half-Life 1 sold 10 million copies in all it's variants. In any estimate of the value of the "intellectual property" stolen, the potential sales of the product X it's retail value will be considered. It wouldn't be a stretch to say that Half-Life 2 will have sold at least 1 million. Thus the hl2 source code could probably be valued at least in the millions..
 
ya that is the most ****ed up thing manipulation of laws to meet the ends of politicians worse then cracking systems and stealing peoples favorite k1dd13 porn movies.

If anything the peeps who twist shit in the media and on the hill should be the ****ers roasting. anyways next subject
 
barbarian and willie, your posts are welcomed because they tell the real truth of some of the consequences that will occur due to this. Some of these kids do not realize that things have changed and are changing at a rapid pace internationally, about IP issues like this.

The days of hiding behind spoofs and proxies are gone. You will be found. Holding containing or even reading this source by means of it being on your HD can and will be tracked. You may think you are safe, heh, but you are NOT.

You WILL be caught. In fact even if you are an innocent bystander just VIEWING it, you CAN be charged. M Y G O T kids, you have been warned. I suggest you remove the link from your site asap. In fact i say leave it there, and watch and see. What you are doing is not only a federal crime but also an international crime now. Including in non democratic countries.

You may think it is all fun and games, but so did the last guy. The difference is the last guy got off very easy. If you doubt what I am saying please say so and i will go and get you as many links as necc, for you to understand. This is no longer a joke. Nor is it a game, you are now in the sights of not only the FBI, but many many other agencies. The days of your minor cheats and pathetic attempts at attention are over. You have just made it big time, i hope you enjoy the fame and attention from USP Lompoc. If you don't know what that is, i am sure you will find out shortly.

All jokes aside, but I suggest you say goodbye to your loved ones while your ahead. Or you can take up Willies advice.
 
How many people have just signed up to these forums, this is amazing. Headcrabs as far as the eye can see:p
 
And to think there are 3,000 people looking at these forums that arent registered. They just browse. Your words here are more powerful than you think.
 
Originally posted by killahsin-[CE]
barbarian and willie, your posts are welcomed because they tell the real truth of some of the consequences that will occur due to this. Some of these kids do not realize that things have changed and are changing at a rapid pace internationally, about IP issues like this.

The days of hiding behind spoofs and proxies are gone. You will be found. Holding containing or even reading this source by means of it being on your HD can and will be tracked. You may think you are safe, heh, but you are NOT.

You WILL be caught. In fact even if you are an innocent bystander just VIEWING it, you CAN be charged. M Y G O T kids, you have been warned. I suggest you remove the link from your site asap. In fact i say leave it there, and watch and see. What you are doing is not only a federal crime but also an international crime now. Including in non democratic countries.

You may think it is all fun and games, but so did the last guy. The difference is the last guy got off very easy. If you doubt what I am saying please say so and i will go and get you as many links as necc, for you to understand. This is no longer a joke. Nor is it a game, you are now in the sights of not only the FBI, but many many other agencies. The days of your minor cheats and pathetic attempts at attention are over. You have just made it big time, i hope you enjoy the fame and attention from USP Lompoc. If you don't know what that is, i am sure you will find out shortly.

All jokes aside, but I suggest you say goodbye to your loved ones while your ahead. Or you can take up Willies advice.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you click the link that is supposed to go to the halflife2 source, you dont get the source but a picture of a very sick sick man.
 
They were smart to change it, my offer still stands. I am neutral and will continue to stay that way. For the records i am not a fed nor have i ever worked for them. In fact they have come a knocking a few times trying to shit can my ass for some stuff. Things have changed since and i would advise those who are smart to consider my offer, granted its not an immunity offer but just drop me a line i will see what i can do before we even exchange information. Once i have the appropriate level of person on my end to talk to you i will either hand off all communications to you directly or act as a man in the middle to mediate between the two parties. And you retain control of who you want me to talk to and what you want at all times. (i can give ya options via private means, gpg is prefered) Drop me a line and hell we can bullshit for a while if you want to feel me out. I personaly dont want to see someone who may have gotten in over their heads eat shit cause of a simple mistake. That is my sole reason for offering this to whom it may concern. (i have been in that position before for some misdeeds of some coworkers and former buds of mine, both in the cyber realm as well as the real world) Note to everyone hanging out with guys who slang rocks and coke is a bad idea when they snitch out and point to one of the only white guys in the crew.

Big **** you to Terry and Jeff (i wont forget that one ****ers)
 
Originally posted by Fuzzy
How many people have just signed up to these forums, this is amazing. Headcrabs as far as the eye can see:p
Click to expand...

*passes you a crowbar*

quick! kill em all!
 
In addition to what killahsin said, keep in mind that ***** has been a thorn in Valve's side for a few years. Valve is a company with a lot of money. Valve can probably litigate most of these script kiddies to bankruptcy.
 
Hey, I'm still hoping for harsh physical pain.. even death. I'm not Mr.Perfect.. I might even be facist (dunno)... but I don't like these assholes (*****), why would I want them around?
 
The days of hiding behind spoofs and proxies are gone. You will be found. Holding containing or even reading this source by means of it being on your HD can and will be tracked. You may think you are safe, heh, but you are NOT.

You WILL be caught. In fact even if you are an innocent bystander just VIEWING it, you CAN be charged.
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that under US copyright law, you can not be charged for simply viewing this code or having it on your hard drive. As long as you do not distribute it you should be fine. The four factors of fair use apply here. A good page on this can be found here:

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm

scroll down to "The four fair use factors" which are:

1. What is the character of the use?
2. What is the nature of the work to be used?
3. How much of the work will you use?
4. What effect would this use have on the market for the original or for permissions if the use were widespread?

For this case:
1. Personal/Educational which is favor of fair use
2. Unpublished which is not in favor of fair use
3. None. Simply viewing, in favor of fair use.
4. You viewing the code has no effect of Valve, as long as you are simply using it for educational purposes. In favor of fair use.

That is 3 out of 4, with the last one tipping the scales because of #2. (Otherwise it wouldn't even be considered).

You say you can charge an innocent bystander. Under what law would you do this?
 
Originally posted by Sling_Blade
It is my understanding that under US copyright law, you can not be charged for simply viewing this code or having it on your hard drive. As long as you do not distribute it you should be fine. The four factors of fair use apply here. A good page on this can be found here:

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm

scroll down to "The four fair use factors" which are:

1. What is the character of the use?
2. What is the nature of the work to be used?
3. How much of the work will you use?
4. What effect would this use have on the market for the original or for permissions if the use were widespread?

For this case:
1. Personal/Educational which is favor of fair use
2. Unpublished which is not in favor of fair use
3. None. Simply viewing, in favor of fair use.
4. You viewing the code has no effect of Valve, as long as you are simply using it for educational purposes. In favor of fair use.

That is 3 out of 4, with the last one tipping the scales because of #2. (Otherwise it wouldn't even be considered).

You say you can charge an innocent bystander. Under what law would you do this?
Click to expand...

But its still stealing and they have broken in into another system?
 
I am not speaking of the people who actually broke into those computers. That is a seperate crime. People who download it are completely seperate and not liable for the crimes of the people who originally got the source.
 
This is not stolen proprety. It is unpublished copyrighted work that has been copied. There is a big difference.
 
slingblade you got owned at shacknews dont come here talkign abotu somthing you have no idea about. Your fair use clause has nothing to do with source code IP, nothign what so ever, it isn't even applicable.
 
Christ, what a load of bull excrement. First he finds a "culprit" (a guy who along with just a few thousand other downloaders apparently had the source soon after it hit the Net; and hey, the "culprit" is a member of a universally hated group, so it all fits in, doesn't it! And there's some solid proof for the court, too - you see, Your Honor, the defendant used a certain nickname online once!) And there is an obligatory bad movie cliche of a mysterious scared witness as well, and 'tis The Great Detective that found him and shall protect him, lo and behold! All he needs is a karate-fighting sidekick and the witness to turn into an intelligent supermodel lawyer who will fall in love with The Great Detective. Oh, and the culprit should have a dark subterranean lair from which the hack was conducted. Just don't do it the way you saw in those movies you're reconstructing this scenario from, oh "Detective" - save some evidence.

Then he submits it and, presto, he gets all the details of the hack in return, so he can come and brag (and be mysterious, too - instead of saying "I don't know crap", he can now say "I was asked not to divulge any details") Oooh, and there's a worldwide conspiracy network, too! Wow! How cool & 1337 is that! If I were another 11 year old thinking of a Kim Possible cartoon and slobbering over his "detective" "skills" (two quotes, because he's neither close to being anything resembling a detective, nor are those any skills), I would probably vote "sizzle" and post "w0w jUUr gr3at r4d0ni, you r00l!", too.

Sherlame Holmessed here should definitely offer the FBI his equally skillful assistance in tracking down Al Qaeda: "Hello, investigators, I want to offer information regarding the terrorists' activity. You see, I know you are looking for one Osama bin Laden, and there's this guy I dislike - and everyone else who knows him dislikes him. And, guess what! The guy I'm talking about once chatted in a public channel and used the nick OSAMA! *AND* he talked anti-US things! How's THAT for proof? What's that, officer? Oh, you say that for my incredibly valuable tip I will receive all classified information about the investigation so I can brag about it to kids, only without stating any details? Hey, thanks!"
 
Originally posted by Alea-Iacta-Est
Christ, what a load of bull excrement. First he finds a "culprit" (a guy who along with just a few thousand other downloaders apparently had the source soon after it hit the Net; and hey, the "culprit" is a member of a universally hated group, so it all fits in, doesn't it! And there's some solid proof for the court, too - you see, Your Honor, the defendant used a certain nickname online once!) Then he submits it and, presto, he gets all the details of the hack in return, so he can come and brag (and be mysterious, too - instead of saying "I don't know crap", he can now say "I was asked not to divulge any details by the investigators") Oooh, and there's a worldwide conspiracy network, too! Wow! How cool & 1337 is that! If I were another 11 year old thinking of a Kim Possible cartoon and slobbering over his "detective" "skills" (two quotes, because he's neither close to being anything resembling a detective, nor are those any skills), I would probably vote "sizzle" and post "w0w jUUr gr3at r4d0ni, you r00l!", too.

Sherlame Holmessed here should definitely offer the FBI his equally skillful assistance in tracking down Al Qaeda: "Hello, investigators, I want to offer information regarding the terrorists' activity. You see, I know you are looking for one Osama bin Laden, and there's this guy I dislike - and everyone else who knows him dislikes him. And, guess what! The guy I'm talking about once chatted in a public channel and used the nick OSAMA! *AND* he talked anti-US things! How's THAT for proof? What's that, officer? Oh, you say that for my incredibly valuable tip I will receive all classified information about the investigation so I can brag about it to kids, only without stating any details? Hey, thanks!"
Click to expand...

whats so unlikely about it?
 
oh my god, about 10,000 people have source already, if not more. and you start picking on one guy?
i have it too.
so do about 30% of the people on these forums.
 
Originally posted by Alea-Iacta-Est
Christ, what a load of bull excrement. First he finds a "culprit" (a guy who along with just a few thousand other downloaders apparently had the source soon after it hit the Net; and hey, the "culprit" is a member of a universally hated group, so it all fits in, doesn't it! And there's some solid proof for the court, too - you see, Your Honor, the defendant used a certain nickname online once!) Then he submits it and, presto, he gets all the details of the hack in return, so he can come and brag (and be mysterious, too - instead of saying "I don't know crap", he can now say "I was asked not to divulge any details by the investigators") Oooh, and there's a worldwide conspiracy network, too! Wow! How cool & 1337 is that! If I were another 11 year old thinking of a Kim Possible cartoon and slobbering over his "detective" "skills" (two quotes, because he's neither close to being anything resembling a detective, nor are those any skills), I would probably vote "sizzle" and post "w0w jUUr gr3at r4d0ni, you r00l!", too.

Sherlame Holmessed here should definitely offer the FBI his equally skillful assistance in tracking down Al Qaeda: "Hello, investigators, I want to offer information regarding the terrorists' activity. You see, I know you are looking for one Osama bin Laden, and there's this guy I dislike - and everyone else who knows him dislikes him. And, guess what! The guy I'm talking about once chatted in a public channel and used the nick OSAMA! *AND* he talked anti-US things! How's THAT for proof? What's that, officer? Oh, you say that for my incredibly valuable tip I will receive all classified information about the investigation so I can brag about it to kids, only without stating any details? Hey, thanks!"
Click to expand...

Kim Possible is AWESOME!
 
Oh really killahsin. Please feel free to "own me" again by citing any laws that back your claims. I'm interested in getting the truth here, but as of yet I haven't found anyone to offer anything more intelligent than "you got owned".

If you can show me a law or a case to back what you are saying then please do so. Otherwise stop flaming.
 
heaps of people have it, as if everyone will get lawyered up.
 
wesisapie, the one person they arte picking on or trying to isolate is the original distrobutor. Or should i say distrobutors, as they will be the people mainly charged, since they have no legal merits for doing so.

The secondary people can also be charged actually under the law in whjich sling blade is defending is a violation of the fair use clause, 17 USC 504(c)(2). (note: this is only in america, if you want to get technical please state country and i will inform you of the laws there which distributors and possesors can be charged, heh. As individual countries have different namings of the law which was made at the Confrence of fair use, as almost all countries have laws against self education of ones SOURCE code IP without explicit consent from the developers of said material)


All in all, its going to be very expensive for whomever, valve desides to sue, 150,000 max just for looking at the engine, heh.(civil court). And much worse for those whom actually distrobuted it(30 years give or take a decade or 2).
 
killahsin shows a good point, wtf is going to happen to this guy/girl who distributed it? anyone know alot about law?
 
Killahsin, what do you take me for, a fool? 17 USC 504(c) simply deals with the damages and profits of copyright infringement. It has nothing to do with the decision of whether something is infringing or not. Come on, you can do better than that.
 
Skaytorre, those who distributed it did break the law, and are subject to kellahsin's almighty 17 USC 504(c). What happens to them is anyone's guess. Since this is a civil case, it largely depends on what Valve wants to do.
 
Originally posted by Sling_Blade
Killahsin, what do you take me for, a fool? 17 USC 504(c) simply deals with the damages and profits of copyright infringement. It has nothing to do with the decision of whether something is infringing or not. Come on, you can do better than that.
Click to expand...

incorrect 17 USC 504(c)(2) is the clause in which you are using to defend fair use. It is as follows from your OWN source.


(a) In General. -
Except as otherwise provided by this title, an infringer of copyright is liable for either -

(1)
the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or

(2)
statutory damages, as provided by subsection (c).

(b) Actual Damages and Profits. -
The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.

(c) Statutory Damages. -


(1)
Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.

(2)
In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. In a case where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200. The court shall remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed and had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of the copyrighted work was a fair use under section 107, if the infringer was:

(i)
an employee or agent of a nonprofit educational institution, library, or archives acting within the scope of his or her employment who, or such institution, library, or archives itself, which infringed by reproducing the work in copies or phonorecords; or

(ii)
a public broadcasting entity which or a person who, as a regular part of the nonprofit activities of a public broadcasting entity (as defined in subsection (g) of section 118) infringed by performing a published nondramatic literary work or by reproducing a transmission program embodying a performance of such a work.

(d) Additional Damages in Certain Cases. -
In any case in which the court finds that a defendant proprietor of an establishment who claims as a defense that its activities were exempt under section 110(5) did not have reasonable grounds to believe that its use of a copyrighted work was exempt under such section, the plaintiff shall be entitled to, in addition to any award of damages under this section, an additional award of two times the amount of the license fee that the proprietor of the establishment concerned should have paid the plaintiff for such use during the preceding period of up to 3 years.

None of which is valid in your arguement, therefore it can be used AGAINT the defendant(s) ins aid case.

Read section a clause 2 and section ii subset d, please.

You will although make a good lawyer one day, hoever you will lose in court, sorry.
 
Originally posted by Sling_Blade
Killahsin, what do you take me for, a fool? 17 USC 504(c) simply deals with the damages and profits of copyright infringement. It has nothing to do with the decision of whether something is infringing or not. Come on, you can do better than that.
Click to expand...

i think its fair to say whoever hacked valve and stole their source code is in for some hefty legal action when (not if) theyre caught
 
im not very up to date on law but i do have pretty good knowledge of computers and isnt it a federal crime to do what, according to valve, they did? Or is it too hard to charge them with something because it was partially valves fault ( for not having ran Windows Update which had a fix for the Outlook Express exploit ).
 
Ahh wait i see what you are saying slingblade, but i think you are mising one simple point, fair use in all 4 sections requires one simple thing, even for self education, which you seem to have eloquently skipped.
Coursepacks
Distance learning Image archives
Multimedia works
Music
Research copies
Reserves
1. obtain permission
2. obtain permission
3. obtain permission
4. obtain permission
5. obtain permission
6. obtain permission

in every aspect of fair use, even for educational purposes you must obtain permission to have legal rights to FAIR USE.

This is what you are missing.
 
Are you blind? This section assumes that the court already decided that infringement occured.

(2)
In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully
Click to expand...

That is why it is called "COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND REMEDIES ". And not "SUBJECT MATTER AND SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT" as the chapter dealing with fair use does.
 
Will you two PLEASE call Judge Mills Lane already?







Verdict: LET'S GET IT ON!
 
~Azzy, I am not speaking of the people who broke into Valve's computers, or the people who distributed it. They are both guilty. I am only speaking of people who downloaded it and viewed it.

~Killahsin WRONG. No where in fair use does it say that you must obtain permission. You must obtain permission if fair use does NOT apply, because permission is what exempts you from copyright infringement. There would be no point to fair use if you needed permission to use fair use.

Sec. 107. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use



Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -

(1)

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2)

the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3)

the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4)

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors
Click to expand...
 
He's conceded you have a point but he's still quite right from a legal point of view, However if permission of use wasn't granted (and it's clear it wasn't) there is no fair use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Terminator
Long time...
Replies
16
Views
1K
Xtremecherry95YT
Xtremecherry95YT
Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
  • Poll
A proposition: ValveTime Half-Life 1 co-op event
Replies
5
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Solaris
What are you up to these days?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Shem
Shem
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top