From: Brent Colflesh (Brent.Colfleshulticom.com)
Date: Wed Oct 01 2003 - 14:45:36 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

IANAL, but the typical way it works in the US is that wealthy defendants are
found guilty, possibly suffer some consequence, and that's the end of it.
Poor defendants are found guilty and are labelled criminals for the rest of
their lives.

Regards,
Brent

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-adminlists.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-adminlists.netsys.com]On Behalf Of Georgi
Guninski
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 3:07 PM
To: full-disclosurelists.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] NINCOMPOOPERY OF MICROSOFT

This user Bullmur should be carefull with the word "criminal".

Question to the lawyers on the list:
It is my understanding that "criminal" is someone who breaks the law.
microsoft seem to have been found guilty by a court in the antitrust trial,
so they seem to have broken the law.

Are microsoft criminals from legal point of view?

Or does justice work this way: if you deface a website, you are a criminal,
but if you screw most of the internet you are a hero?

georgi

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 07:54:12 -0700
<dhtmlhush.com> wrote:

> "Hackers are criminals" Most, he notes, release their malicious code
> after patches for Microsoft software have been released, meaning that
> they are simply reverse engineering to exploit security weaknesses or
> holes in software. - Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
>
> 'ninkum`poop [n] a stupid foolish person See Also: simple, simpleton
>
>

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

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

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]