Jeremy <ELE@psuvm.psu.edu> (06/23/91)
This was posted in comp.dcom.telecom today and if what he says is reasonable we've all got some serious thinking to do. I would like to see responses to this. =================================begin=repost================================== From: bill@ssbn.wlk.com (Bill Kennedy) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: These People and Institutions Were Hurt by Len Date: 20 Jun 91 01:26:00 GMT Organization: W.L. Kennedy Jr. and Associates, Pipe Creek, TX X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 481, Message 6 of 7 My concern is strictly for the damage that Len did to people and organizations who were just whooshed into his vortex. > Mr. Rose is on his way to jail for posessing unlicensed source code. > The world is now safer for humanity. The case that I want to plead has nothing whatsoever to do with the legality or lack thereof for which Len Rose is being incarcerated. I want to talk about common courtesy and respect for your fellow man. Not common courtesy or respect for Len, but rather HIS lack of it for others. > One stark bad example. Heading off to jail. Now, let us contrast the > damage done by Mr. Rose to the damage done by the SS to Steve Jackson > Games, and scale an appropriate sentence for them. Tanner makes my point with precision. Let me enumerate the damage done which could have been avoided had Len acted more responsibly: Steve Jackson games - They never would have become vulnerable to SS abuse had Len not made excursions beyond reason and the law. This wasn't Tanner's point, but it's my take on it. Usenet killer/attctc - This invaluable resource and national spoke in the Usenet wheel would not have been shut down had Len not decided to joyride beyond the bounds of propriety and common sense. Southwestern Bell - I'd use his name but I don't have his permission. He lost his job, for all intent and purposes, despite his *total* exhonoration in the matter. He was put under a microscope, intimidated, and otherwise mistreated and had to leave the company. His only "mistake"? He was honestly and innocently associated with Len Rose. AT&T employee - Ditto above. In my view these two people lost their jobs just because they had dealings with Len Rose in all good faith. Had Len Rose remained within the bounds of professionalism they would still be employed by their previous employers (in the SWBT case 22 years went down the drain). I happen to think that they are both better off in their current jobs and they probably agree, but it's not the point. Their careers with their employers were wrecked because Len Rose couldn't behave. Usenet texbell - THE major news and mail site in Texas came under scrutiny as a result of the Len Rose case. Southwestern Bell who had sponsored and underwritten it for years decided to shut it down on four days' notice and I can't be convinced that it wasn't realted to the internal investigation stimulated by the Len Rose case. Unnamed person Austin - I don't have his permission either so he'll have to stay anonymous too. His apartment was raided and all of his electronic stuff confiscated the same day as Steve Jackson Games, same city, Austin, TX. This individual is now having to file a lawsuit to get his gear back (no charges were ever filed) and it costs him money to do that. Len's stuff was returned. Here's my point. I don't care what anyone says or thinks about right or wrong with regard to Len Rose. My animosity and resentment stems from the "collateral damage" caused by a long standing collection of really bone headed things that the man did. I am just as sympathetic as everyone else for what he did to his family (I said "what he did") as I am what he did to the rest of the net at large, examples above. He caused a lot of grief. He grieved some people who could have been spared had he been able to contain himself. He didn't, they weren't spared. He's headed for the hoosegow, but I think he and we would be better served if he could get some treatment for what makes him hurt others. Yes, I'm an injured party too, but stomach acid only, he *HURT* the things I laid out above. Don't slather me with "it was the big bad feds"; had he not attracted their attention they'd have left him (and the rest of us) alone. 'Nuff said, I thought you ought to know. Bill Kennedy internet bill@ssbn.WLK.COM or ssbn!bill@attmail.COM uucp {att,cs.utexas.edu,pyramid!daver}!ssbn.wlk.com!bill ===============================end=repost====================================== -- jeremy.. ele@psuvm.psu.edu
ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) (06/24/91)
Bill> == bill@ssbn.wlk.com (Bill Kennedy) (Warning: sarcasm ahead, and "when you bring the Nazis into a USENET discussion, it's long dead." Even so...) Bill> Tanner makes my point with precision. Let me enumerate the damage Bill> done which could have been avoided had Len acted more responsibly: Churchill makes my point with precision. Let me enumerate the damage done which could have been avoided had the French acted more responsibly: Bill> Steve Jackson games - They never would have become vulnerable to SS Bill> abuse had Len not made excursions beyond reason and the law. This Bill> wasn't Tanner's point, but it's my take on it. Belgium - they never would have become vulnerable to Wehrmacht abuse had the French not made excursions beyond reason and the law. Bill> Usenet killer/attctc - This invaluable resource and national spoke in Bill> the Usenet wheel would not have been shut down had Len not decided to Bill> joyride beyond the bounds of propriety and common sense. Berlin - this invaluable city and international spoke in the European wheel would not have been divided for 40 years had the French not decided to joyride beyond the bounds of propriety and common sense. Bill> Southwestern Bell - I'd use his name but I don't have his permission. Bill> He lost his job, for all intent and purposes, despite his *total* Bill> exhonoration in the matter. He was put under a microscope, Bill> intimidated, and otherwise mistreated and had to leave the company. Bill> His only "mistake"? He was honestly and innocently associated with Bill> Len Rose. Random Warsaw Jew - I'd use his name but I don't have his permission. He lost his life, for all intent and purposes, despite his *total* innocence in the matter. He was put into a ghetto, intimidated, and otherwise mistreated and had to leave this Earth. His only "mistake"? He was honestly and innocently associated with his religion. [etc] Bill> Here's my point. I don't care what anyone says or thinks about right Bill> or wrong with regard to Len Rose. My animosity and resentment stems Bill> from the "collateral damage" caused by a long standing collection of Bill> really bone headed things that the man did. Do you excuse the rabid dog that bites a group of children because "someone provoked it"? Len Rose is human. He has made mistakes. I don't think he can honestly be blamed for EVERYTHING that happened, though. Yes, some of his mistakes were the proximate causes of things that happened, but the underlying mistrust, misunderstanding, and mishandling that are the *root* causes cannot be laid at his feet. Bill> Don't slather me with "it was the big bad feds"; had he not Bill> attracted their attention they'd have left him (and the rest of Bill> us) alone. 'Nuff said, I thought you ought to know. Don't slather me with "it was the big bad Nazis"; had he not attracted their attention they would have only taken Czechoslovakia and left the rest of us alone. This kind of apologia and appeasement doctrine angers me. Again, Len made mistakes, and, yes, some of them hurt innocent people. The blame does not lie solely with him, and we must attack the root causes of the problem. "Guilt by association" should not reign supreme again. -- Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org> | ELECTRONIC MAIL WORDS OF WISDOM #5: System Manager & Postmaster | "Internet mail headers are Electronic Frontier Foundation | not unlike giblets." +1 617 864 0665 | -- Paul Vixie <vixie@pa.dec.com>
wruss00@ricevm1.rice.edu (William R. Russell, Jr.) (06/24/91)
.. To link Mr. Rose's case to the assault on SJG is a reprehensible use of sensationalism, at best. Rick wruss00@ricevm1.rice.edu
wruss00@ricevm1.rice.edu (William R. Russell, Jr.) (06/24/91)
[[ My apologies. The news header on my last message seems to have ]] [[ gotten terribly mangled; most of the message is missing and I ]] [[ can't cancel it. Here is a repost. Sorry. Rick ]] In article <91174.131736ELE@psuvm.psu.edu> ELE@psuvm.psu.edu (Jeremy) writes: >This was posted in comp.dcom.telecom today and if what he says is >reasonable we've all got some serious thinking to do. I would like >to see responses to this. ... [Begin quote by bill@ssbn.wlk.com (Bill Kennedy)] >My concern is strictly for the damage that Len did to people and >organizations who were just whooshed into his vortex. ... >> One stark bad example. Heading off to jail. Now, let us contrast the >> damage done by Mr. Rose to the damage done by the SS to Steve Jackson >> Games, and scale an appropriate sentence for them. > >Tanner makes my point with precision. Let me enumerate the damage >done which could have been avoided had Len acted more responsibly: > >Steve Jackson games - They never would have become vulnerable to SS >abuse had Len not made excursions beyond reason and the law. This >wasn't Tanner's point, but it's my take on it. [End quote by bill@ssbn.wlk.com (Bill Kennedy)] ... I tried to quote/requote minimal material here... I hope I don't confuse anyone. If this post is to be taken seriously, the worst demon we must fear is ignorance and misinformation. Len Rose had *nothing* to do with the attack on SJG. His name does not appear in the search warrant, or in the complaint issued by SJG with the help of the EFF. One might argue that Len Rose's activity brought "official" scrutiny on certain cmputing activites, which may have led to the investigation of the 911 service documents and subsequent connection to Loyd Blankenship, writer for SJG. But that is a very tenuous argument, which attempts to shift the blame from the Secret Service to Len Rose, who had nothing to do with it whatsoever. To link Mr. Rose's case to the assault on SJG is a reprehensible use of sensationalism, at best. Rick wruss00@ricevm1.rice.edu
dania@violet.berkeley.edu (Dania Bourkoff;;;;PV20) (06/25/91)
I will concede that all of the people/organizations listed in the post were affected. I will not, however, concede that Len is to blame for their misfortune. If anyone is to blame, it is the SS & ATT. It is their overzealousness, etc., that has caused so much harm. I could go on for a while, but my point is simple. I agree with the original post - damage was done. But Len and his login.c were not at fault.
brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) (06/25/91)
I suspect what Bill is trying to say is "we have cops (and thus inevitably law-abusive cops) because there are lawbreakers." The more lawbreaking there is, the more call there is for enforcement and the more trouble this enforcement will cause for innocent people, because of the fact that the enforcers are far from perfect. So in this sense, those who do screw around (and I make no judgement in particular on the Rose case, I don't know the details) are indeed a *cause* of the rights abuses suffered by the innocent. However, the fact that there are lawbreakers out there is not an excuse for absuse of the law, and we should not let it be an excuse, so saying that Rose, assuming he was indeed a nasty guilty party, is to *blame* for increased enforcement is a trap into which would should not fall. -- Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
david.turrell@f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG (david turrell) (06/25/91)
I am sympathetic to Bill Kennedy's remarks, especially after reading
Len
Rose's recent post, which might have been poignant if it had ended with
"Thanks". If the tone of the "Farewell" accurately depicts an
inability to
express contrition (often taken into account when determining a jail
sentence), then I can't get too up-in-arms over the stiffness of the
jail
term.
However, I don't think that Bill should have rested so much of his
case on the
plight of those who are anonymous, as his characterizations can't be
checked.
ATT must vigorously prosecute any possible infringement of copyright,
else
risk enormous revenue losses if their software is found, by a court,
to be in
the public domain. I can't fault them for their aggressiveness. I hope
no
expressions of "boycott AT&T" are coming from people who haven't
already
changed to Sprint or MCI.
I think it's best not to refer to the Secret Service as the "SS". It
can be
taken to be an attempt to compare them to an organization that
committed
crimes of indescribable magnitude, generating sympathy from those who
think
the comparison unwarranted and trivializing something truly heinous.
-David
--
david turrell - via FidoNet node 1:125/777
UUCP: ...!uunet!hoptoad!fidogate!111!david.turrell
INTERNET: david.turrell@f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORGallen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) (06/25/91)
In article <1991Jun25.005151.27279@looking.on.ca> brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes: >However, the fact that there are lawbreakers out there is not an excuse >for absuse of the law, and we should not let it be an excuse, so saying >that Rose, assuming he was indeed a nasty guilty party, is to *blame* for >increased enforcement is a trap into which would should not fall. This is true. However, all but one of the "raids" and incidents that Bill talked about was directly involved with the Len Rose investigation. This includes the raids on AT&T, Southwestern Bell and the consultant in Austin in which people's jobs were compromised and equipment seized. These things were not unrelated. Len had something to do with every site/person affected. Now I'll grant you that there were others that were not directly related, but Len has caused a lot of people alot of trouble. And the fact that he's going to spend a year in prison is probably a good thing. Sorry to sound so callous, but Len is a criminal and should be treated like one. -- Allen Gwinn (allen@sulaco.lonestar.org) "If SCO would like to use this server in one of their products they have to pay $100 for every copy they redistribute, cause I don't like this company and their braindamaged products." - Thomas Roell on The Santa Cruz Operation
ryan@ra.cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) (06/26/91)
In article <1991Jun25.122028.7528@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG> allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) writes:
This is true. However, all but one of the "raids" and incidents that Bill
talked about was directly involved with the Len Rose investigation. This
includes the raids on AT&T, Southwestern Bell and the consultant in Austin
in which people's jobs were compromised and equipment seized. These things
were not unrelated. Len had something to do with every site/person
affected.
Now I'll grant you that there were others that were not directly related,
but Len has caused a lot of people alot of trouble. And the fact that he's
going to spend a year in prison is probably a good thing.
So if I kill my girlfriend and throw her body into a dumpster and the
cops figure out it was me that did it, I can simply say Len Rose
caused me to do it. They'll have to let me go right away. It's so
logical. If Len hadn't sent login.c to Neidorf I wouldn't have lost
my mind and stabbed my baby 100 times. Hell, if the feds can blame
Len for the rape of innocent citizens, I can too.
Sorry to sound so callous, but Len is a criminal and should be treated like
one.
Sorry to sound so callous, but you don't have a clue about action and
responsibility. I hope you never illegally copied any copyrighted
software, or stole a penny candy, or ... If you did, maybe you could
use some "therapy" (Hi PAT) in the penitentary.learn@piroska.uchicago.edu (William Vajk (igloo)) (06/26/91)
In article <1991Jun24.042434.3407@rice.edu> William R. Russell, Jr. writes: >One might argue that Len Rose's activity brought "official" scrutiny on >certain cmputing activites, which may have led to the investigation of >the 911 service documents and subsequent connection to Loyd Blankenship, >writer for SJG. But that is a very tenuous argument, which attempts to >shift the blame from the Secret Service to Len Rose, who had nothing to >do with it whatsoever. One would be in error to make this argument. The chain of events began when Len's then good friend, Rich Andrews, reported the presence of the E-911 files at jolnet to the authorities. The trail led to Neidorf, Darden, Riggs, and Grant. During investigation of Neidorf's files Len's login.c was uncovered. While the question of overly broad search in Neidorf's case has never been brought up, given the scope of *every* other search and seizure, it is probably a safe assumption that the U of Missouri search was overbroad. Records I have in my posession (easily available to researchers) indicate that two nights were spent investigating Neidorf on the university computers alone. Without a doubt, one command grep 911 * in Neidorf's directories would have uncovered the only legally available reason to search Neidorf's files. There is little doubt in my mind that the US Secret Service performed an overbroad search in Neidorf, and the results led to the Rose case and all those spawnings. And it was overbroad search and seizure in Rose which led to *some* of the complaints Bill Kennedy voices against Rose. With any luck at all, this is the extent of my response to the ravings of Kennedy. People can get caught up as the result of unilateral illegality. Usually there's little to no problem with such matters, till we get a bunch in Law Enforcement with less sense and soul than a dial tone contorting government power on behalf of a mega-corp. Bill Vajk
allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) (06/28/91)
In article <RYAN.91Jun25225225@ra.cs.umb.edu> ryan@ra.cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: >So if I kill my girlfriend and throw her body into a dumpster and the >cops figure out it was me that did it, I can simply say Len Rose >caused me to do it. They'll have to let me go right away. It's so >logical. If Len hadn't sent login.c to Neidorf I wouldn't have lost >my mind and stabbed my baby 100 times. Hell, if the feds can blame >Len for the rape of innocent citizens, I can too. Excellent rant... but how about being a little more realistic with your examples: How about if you killed your girlfriend and dumped her in my house. Would you say that the police had just cause for searching my premises? > Sorry to sound so callous, but Len is a criminal and should be treated like > one. >Sorry to sound so callous, but you don't have a clue about action and >responsibility. No certainly not. I agree with you. One should be able to break any law in the land, and as long as he/she has support from you, one should be able to walk off scott-free. Sorry for even questioning the issue. >I hope you never illegally copied any copyrighted >software, or stole a penny candy, or ... If you did, maybe you could >use some "therapy" (Hi PAT) in the penitentary. I believe that you'll find that Len perhaps stole trade secrets (rather than violated a copyright). In addition, if you'll check a little closer, you might find out that he was convicted of theft and receiving stolen merchandise (making him a common criminal). -- Allen Gwinn (allen@sulaco.lonestar.org) "If SCO would like to use this server in one of their products they have to pay $100 for every copy they redistribute, cause I don't like this company and their braindamaged products." - Thomas Roell on The Santa Cruz Operation
wcs) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun28.000159.2653@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG> allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) writes:
] >So if I kill my girlfriend [...] I can simply say Len Rose caused me to do it.
] Excellent rant... but how about being a little more realistic with your
] examples:
] How about if you killed your girlfriend and dumped her in my house. Would
] you say that the police had just cause for searching my premises?
Only if they had sufficient indication that it happened to convince
a judge they had probable cause (not just articulable suspicion),
for a warrant, or if you gave permission. Heck, you'd probably call them.
Meanwhile, since they found the cocaine in her pocket,
they're confiscating your house. Hope you don't mind.
Disclaimer: It's NOT Len's Fault!
--
Pray for peace; Bill
# Bill Stewart 908-949-0705 erebus.att.com!wcs AT&T Bell Labs 4M-312 Holmdel NJ
# No, that's covered by the Drug Exception to the Fourth Amendment.
# You can read it here in the fine print.ryan@ra.cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) (06/30/91)
In article <1991Jun28.000159.2653@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG> allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) writes: [Stuff deleted] Excellent rant... Thanks I wrote: >Sorry to sound so callous, but you don't have a clue about action and >responsibility. No certainly not. I agree with you. One should be able to break any law in the land, and as long as he/she has support from you, one should be able to walk off scott-free. Sorry for even questioning the issue. First off we are not talking about Len's responsibilities, we are talking about whether or not the Feds were justified in running roughshod all over innocent citizens. You can't seem to understand what the argument is so you keep hammering away at Len. Second, if we want to argue about how much punishment Len is getting for receiving stolen property, just remember that Ollie North has yet to serve a single day in prison. By the way, your not such a bad ranter yourself.
ryan@ra.cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) (06/30/91)
In article <15713.286916E2@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG> david.turrell@f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG (david turrell) writes:
I am sympathetic to Bill Kennedy's remarks, especially after reading
Len Rose's recent post, which might have been poignant if it had
ended with "Thanks". If the tone of the "Farewell" accurately
depicts an inability to express contrition (often taken into
account when determining a jail sentence), then I can't get too
up-in-arms over the stiffness of the jail term.
Oh, this is marvelous. We send the guy to be eaten alive in prison
for a year and then we want him to kiss our feet. Gee Dave, it's nice
that you're so compassionate. Maybe for furlough work he can come and
wash your car.
ATT must vigorously prosecute any possible infringement of copyright,
else risk enormous revenue losses if their software is found, by a
court, to be in the public domain. I can't fault them for their
aggressiveness.
Yeah, maybe Lotus should do spot searches of peoples homes to check
for illegal copies of 1-2-3. Anyone caught should be sentenced to a
year of hard labor.
I think it's best not to refer to the Secret Service as the "SS". It
can be taken to be an attempt to compare them to an organization
that committed crimes of indescribable magnitude, generating
sympathy from those who think the comparison unwarranted and
trivializing something truly heinous.
Nice that you have your priorities straight. It's OK to excuse the SS
for stealing innocent citizen's property but please don't refer to
them as "SS".geyer@galton.uchicago.edu (06/30/91)
In article <RYAN.91Jun29142107@ra.cs.umb.edu> ryan@ra.cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: > Second, if we want to argue about how much punishment Len is getting for > receiving stolen property, just remember that Ollie North has yet to serve > a single day in prison. Now that's really irrelevant. Ollie North escaped jail because it was deemed more important for congresscritters to get on television. Let's just stick to the Feds fascism, o. k.? Charles Geyer Department of Statistics University of Chicago geyer@galton.uchicago.edu
bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) (07/01/91)
david.turrell@f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG (david turrell) writes: > However, I don't think that Bill should have rested so much of his > case on the plight of those who are anonymous, as his characterizations > can't be checked. Bill Vajk has shaken a finger at "you boys down in Texas". The topic has been discussed heavily by those to whom the "anonymous" are neighbors, electronic or physical. I can't speak for Bill Kennedy, so I can't say whether he feels that *his* knowing the people involved was enough to formulate an opinion... ;-) > I think it's best not to refer to the Secret Service as the "SS". It is their initials. If people leave the periods out as a rhetorical trick, that's life. > It can be taken to be an attempt to compare them to an organization that > committed crimes of indescribable magnitude, Supression of our freedom to publish, electronically or in print, can't possibly be equated with mass murder, true. While it's not mass murder, it is a violation of some basic principles that we've structured our country on. > generating sympathy from > those who think the comparison unwarranted and trivializing something > truly heinous. I know that the thing I think I read is not the the thing you thought you wrote. ;-) -- Bob Opinions expressed in this message are those of its author, except where messages by others are included with attribution. Bob Izenberg [ ] bei@dogface.austin.tx.us home: 512 346 7019 [ ] CIS: 76615.1413@compuserve.com
allen@sulaco.Lonestar.ORG (Allen Gwinn) (07/01/91)
In article <1991Jun28.175546.14744@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> wcs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (Bill Stewart 908-949-0705 erebus.att.com!wcs) writes: [story about murdering girlfriends and dumping them in other people's houses deleted] >Meanwhile, since they found the cocaine in her pocket, >they're confiscating your house. Hope you don't mind. Nah... here's the keys :-) ...maybe the lawn will finally get mowed :-) -- Allen Gwinn (allen@sulaco.lonestar.org) "If SCO would like to use this server in one of their products they have to pay $100 for every copy they redistribute, cause I don't like this company and their braindamaged products." - Thomas Roell on The Santa Cruz Operation
mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) (07/01/91)
In article <1991Jun30.230235.11895@athena.toronto.edu> dwivian@uga.edu (Dwivian Unterschreiber) writes: >(Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: >>Yeah, maybe Lotus should do spot searches of peoples homes to check >>for illegal copies of 1-2-3. Anyone caught should be sentenced to a >>year of hard labor. > >I don't feel that this is a necessarily bad thing....certainly would cut >down on people stealing the product of a group of people's hard work, now >wouldn't it? > Gack! Never heard of unreasonable search and seizure, probable cause, privacy, or innocent until proven guilty? Spot searches?????? -- ------------------------------------------------------- Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs The University of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602 U.S.A. -------------------------------------------------------