FBI Half-Life 2 Raids

A weblog post mentioned in a Slashdot story apparently gives the account of a San Francisco native's encounter with the FBI as the fed's raided his home looking for evidence in connection with the theft of the Half-Life 2 source code (story). According to Slashdot (since the site has been, naturally enough, Slashdotted), the blog includes a scan of the FBI's search warrant. Thanks Captain Trips.
View : : :
79.
 
Re: Quick observation
Jan 20, 2004, 02:38
79.
Re: Quick observation Jan 20, 2004, 02:38
Jan 20, 2004, 02:38
 
Prosecuting your mom's murderer will not bring your mom back to life.
More often than not, it won't even make you feel any better.
So, is pressing charges only "revenge"...? No. It's justice.

Killing someone's mom is, as you mentioned, an extreme example, but there is no denying that these individuals stole valuable intellectual property, flagrantly violated many individuals' privacy (including a full email log), and illegally compromised an innocent company's systems. These actions are criminal, and not in any trivial way. Though Valve does not stand to gain much or perhaps, any, from possible legal proceedings, that does not mean these criminals should not be brought to justice.

It's not like someone stole your TV, and you want it back because your insurance doesn't cover it. Nothing was stolen. Data was copied. People may have gotten a hold of some of their "secrets", but the cat's out of the bag.

So many people think this way, and it is the reason people who would never try to sneak out of a music store with a few CDs tucked in their jacket, would unhesitatingly pirate a computer game worth much more.

The truth of the information age is that data, which is inherently easily reproducible, has just as much value as tangible goods and that intellectual property can be worth much more than the computer that houses it.

Additionally, the general attitude that hacking and other cyber-crime should go lightly punished (and the reality that it frequently does), have made the internet into a lawless, dangerous place. A casual computer owner, who doesn't always keep every bit of software on his computer patched, runs a very high risk of becoming a victim. Perhaps with more enforcement (like this raid) hackers will think twice before maliciously compromising some stranger's system.


A police officer who tickets a motorist who ran a red light is not compensating the city for any damages, neither is he out for "revenge". The deed is done and nothing can change the motorist's past transgression. So why give the ticket? Simple. Police enforce traffic violations to keep the roads safe. People know traffic regulations are enforced, and so they follow them. Hopefully, cyber-crime will soon be well policed enough to make the internet at least reasonable safe.


Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
5.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
8.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
9.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
96.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
2.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
3.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
4.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
6.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
7.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
10.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
11.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
13.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
18.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
26.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
27.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
33.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
14.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
15.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
17.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
20.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
23.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
24.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
      Re: pointless raid
21.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
22.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
28.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
29.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
30.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
32.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
34.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
      .
35.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
36.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
      Re: pointless raid
38.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
40.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
43.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
      Re: pointless raid
46.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
       Re: pointless raid
47.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
        Re: pointless raid
51.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
         Re: pointless raid
52.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
          Re: pointless raid
54.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
          Re: pointless raid
56.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
72.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
135.
Jan 24, 2004Jan 24 2004
31.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
39.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
48.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
50.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
55.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
     Re: No subject
58.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
      Re: No subject
59.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
       No subject
64.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
        Re: No subject
60.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
       Re: No subject
87.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: No subject
88.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
         Re: No subject
95.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: No subject
85.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
      Re: No subject
86.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
       No subject
89.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Source code =/= beta
117.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
         Re: Source code =/= beta
94.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
       Re: No subject
103.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: No subject
106.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
         Re: No subject
108.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
          Re: No subject
109.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
          Re: KEEP QUIET
119.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: No subject
120.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
         Re: No subject
134.
Jan 24, 2004Jan 24 2004
       Re: No subject
136.
Jan 24, 2004Jan 24 2004
        Re: No subject
137.
Jan 26, 2004Jan 26 2004
         Re: No subject
102.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
     Re: No subject
104.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
      Re: No subject
49.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
16.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
19.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
25.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
37.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
41.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
42.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
45.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
53.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
57.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
44.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
61.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
62.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
63.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
67.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
73.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
74.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
116.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
65.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
66.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
69.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
71.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
75.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
76.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
90.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
92.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
       Re: Quick observation
93.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: Quick observation
77.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
110.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
113.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
       Re: Quick observation
114.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: Quick observation
118.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
        Re: Quick observation
78.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
 79.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
     Re: Quick observation
124.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
125.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
       Re: Quick observation
128.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
       Re: Quick observation
129.
Jan 22, 2004Jan 22 2004
        Re: Quick observation
105.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
68.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
70.
Jan 19, 2004Jan 19 2004
80.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
81.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
82.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
83.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
84.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
91.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
107.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
100.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
101.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
97.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
99.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
98.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
111.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
112.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
123.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
115.
Jan 20, 2004Jan 20 2004
122.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
126.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
127.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
121.
Jan 21, 2004Jan 21 2004
130.
Jan 22, 2004Jan 22 2004
131.
Jan 22, 2004Jan 22 2004
132.
Jan 22, 2004Jan 22 2004
133.
Jan 22, 2004Jan 22 2004