Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 02:20:21 EDT

A recent article by John C. Dvorak from the May 11, 1993 issue of PC
Magazine, commented on the Rusty & Edie's bust (we thank Mike Castle
for drawing our attention to the piece).  Dvorak was especially
critical of the SPA.  Dvorak is the second major columnist in the past
month to begin challenging the SPA's philosophy and tactics. In CuD
5.32, we reported Michael Alexander's (editor of INFOSECURITY NEWS)
criticisms and call for the SPA to change its direction.  Alexander
concluded:

     However, I believe that the SPA's much-publicized raids on
     businesses whose users are allegedly making unauthorized copies
     of software do little to advance the cause of information
     systems security. Any infosecurity practitioner will tell you
     that fear, intimidation and threats do not make for better
     security. What works is education, communication and
     cooperation.

Dvorak's piece, "BBS Easy Target in FBI Bust" begins by summarizing
Rusty and Edie's troubles when the FBI seized their equipment and
other material in February.  Dvorak cites one "intelligence-gathering"
service that estimated that as many as 2,000 BBSes of the 25,000 it
monitors specialize in "pirated" software, and that any of these could
have been busted.  However, he claims that R&E's was particularly
vulnerable:

        But Rusty and Edie had made a lot of enemies in the BBS
    community because they had a reputation for reposting nudie
    .GIFs from other sources, removing the original promotional
    material and inserting their own promotional stuff--a practice
    despised by BBS operators.  Many bulletin board services barely
    eke out a living and would be profitless if it weren't for the
    peculiar demand for downloadable pictures of people in the buff.
    Rusty had also done little to make friends in the BBS community.
    It's one of the few BBSs that do not even post the number of
    other BBSs for the convenience of subscribers.
        So when Rusty was busted, the community did nothing and said
    nothing.  Many operators quietly smirked or applauded.  Yes
    indeed, the SPA picked a convenient target.

Dvorak argues that R&E's was not an outrageous pirate board that
flaunted commercial software or other illicit activities. It was, he
contends, a board that promoted shareware, which he calls a
"legitimate threat to the software companies that sponsor the SPA."
Why, he asks, didn't the SPA call R&E's or conduct an audit as they do
in other cases?  It was, Dvorak reasons, when R&E announced their
intention to expand to 500 lines that "the FBI got serious." He adds
with sarcasm that it's also a coincidence that "a major source of
shareware is obliterated."

Dvorak does not defend piracy, and he is explicit in stating that
commercial software publishers should be compensated for their
efforts.  His column is not a defense of R&E, but a criticism of the
SPA.  Dvorak concludes:

          The SPA should protect the BBS operator from having
     equipment confiscated.  These are computers, not drugs or
     illegal weapons!  The rational means any PC Magazine reader
     suspected of having pirated software may have a PC confiscated.
     As in Stalin's Russia, it only takes a tip from an unfriendly
     neighbor.  The SPA is that neighbor today.  A disgruntled
     employee or jilted lover will be that neighbor tomorrow.

Dvorak makes several good points. First, the current criminalization
trend of even trivial computer delinquency risks unacceptable invasion
by law enforcement. Second, the SPA--counter to it's claim to be a
"good neighbor" may be acting in bad faith to promote its own vested
interests. Finally, he has taken what until now has been an issue of
concern to a small proportion of computer users and suggested how a
continuation of the SPA's policies could lead to an oppressive climate
in cyberspace.

CuD has become increasingly critical of the SPA, and we have severe
reservations with their professed goal of combatting piracy through
education. It is our view that they are not acting in good faith and
that they play rather loose with facts to bolster their raiding
tactics. We will elaborate on this in a special issue in about two
weeks.

------------------------------

From: CuD Moderators <tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu>
Subject: File 7--New 'Zine (ORA.COM) by O'Reilly & Associates

Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253