Live data from Hacker News

FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

twitter.com

31–40 of 272 posts

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#31
post #2

Not much they can do to her in Russia. I also assume she's smart enough not to keep anything important in her iCloud.

> Not much they can do to her in X I think you really underestimate the power of smear/ blackmail campaigns and how effectively they have worked in the last century for the intelligence services. This has nothing to do with upholding the law.

> This has nothing to do with upholding the law.

No, the law is actually very clear here. What sci-hub does is clear copyright violation. There's no real debate to be had.

Civil cases where damages get into the tens of millions of dollars routinely involve law enforcement. It's no different from a big insider trading case as far as the FBI is concerned.

The fundamental truth behind the protest (and again it's important to realize: sci-hub is an act of protest) is that the law is unjust. Rosa Parks was in clear violation of the written law too.

The reason for the pedantry is that if you imagine this as solely an act of an unrestrained state actor, you won't be incentivized to work for the actual solution, which involves passing laws and otherwise working with the same state you're complaining about.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#32
I'm not sure I understand the concept of paid access to scientific research, so I'd be grateful if someone with more knowledge of the topic could explain it to me.

Governments fund universities, people donate large amounts of money to universities, and a large portion of the population has student debt because of how expensive tuition is. Why are they charging for access to research at these institutions then?

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#33

Given the provenance of most (all?) of the material on Sci-Hub, the copyright issues here seem laughable to me. Fruitless speculation about the FBI aside, you do have to wonder about the future of IP generally in the world. There's a sort of evolutionary pressure going on right now between different countries' approach to the matter and I can't say that the US-style rules will hold (or more realistically, be imposed)…

It seems so absolutely obvious that a jurisdiction adopting a "there is no such thing as IP" approach will have a huge advantage. What's the reason this hasn't happened?

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#35
post #29

“What Happens on your iPhone, Stays on your iPhone” - they said https://i.imgur.com/Dfk34yM.jpg

it does.

Unless you tell your iPhone to send everything you have to Amazon, or Dropbox, or iCloud, or Google, or Facebook, or Backblaze, or [insert cloud service subject to Chinese, EU, or US law here].

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#36
post #32

I'm not sure I understand the concept of paid access to scientific research, so I'd be grateful if someone with more knowledge of the topic could explain it to me. Governments fund universities, people donate large amounts of money to universities, and a large portion of the population has student debt because of how expensive tuition is. Why are they charging for access to research at these institutions then?

You'd think its because peer review costs money, but they are largely unpaid for that work.

So, there's no real answer beyond "capitalism."

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#39

For some reason I thought iCloud was encrypted in such a way that only the user could gain access. Apparently this is not the case. FBI was able to access even Rudy Giuliani's iCloud for over a year, while he defended Trump as his lawyer. With no repercussions for doing so. https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/lawyer-feds-got-rudy-iclou...

Who are they loyal too.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#40
post #33

Given the provenance of most (all?) of the material on Sci-Hub, the copyright issues here seem laughable to me. Fruitless speculation about the FBI aside, you do have to wonder about the future of IP generally in the world. There's a sort of evolutionary pressure going on right now between different countries' approach to the matter and I can't say that the US-style rules will hold (or more realistically, be imposed)…

It seems so absolutely obvious that a jurisdiction adopting a "there is no such thing as IP" approach will have a huge advantage. What's the reason this hasn't happened?

Have you heard about a country called “China”?
Post reply on HN