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 : : :
110.
 
Re: Quick observation
Jan 20, 2004, 11:28
Re: Quick observation Jan 20, 2004, 11:28
Jan 20, 2004, 11:28
 
Revenge is not the same as justice.

And if just "copying data" isn't bad, and you wouldn't prosecute anyone if they "copied data" from you, post your credit card numbers, social security number (or equivalent), name, address, and phone number here in the forum. Obviously copying data isn't a big deal to you, so what's the harm if you put that data out for us to copy? Is it really a big deal if anyone gets your "secrets"?


The hallmark of the criminal mind is usually that it's a bit dense, if you know what I mean...:)

Enforcing laws meant to protect private property is not about "revenge," it's about deterrent. When some people see that others are caught and punished for the very crime they have contemplated committing themselves, it will at the very least make them think twice about actually going through with their plan, if not deter them from it altogether. Most of the time, criminals consider themselves "smarter" than others--the jails are full of such brainiacs...:) Truly intelligent people toying with criminal concepts generally take the hint and are deterred.

Remember that the purpose of laws is to protect our private property from unlawful search and seizure--theft. The irony here is that while some people see nothing wrong with hackers searching and seizing Valve's property, they think its terrible that the FBI might search and seize the hacker's property. It's pretty funny when you think about how hypocritical that viewpoint is...:) Where the criminal is concerned it is only he who has any rights.

Finally, just because in your view what was taken from Valve is of no value, that hardly justifies its theft. Consider that governments around the world can print all of the money they like when they like, and yet it is still a crime to rob banks in every country on earth. It is also a crime to counterfeit money, as well, around the world. The reason the printing of money must be tightly controlled is because if it was OK for everyone to just print up as much money as he needed then all paper money would soon become worthless, and we'd have to revert to a barter system. It is the difficulty involved (work) in obtaining legitimate money that gives paper money its worth.

Likewise with computer software--just because it is "code" which can be easily copied has no relation to what it is worth to its *owners*--which would be Valve--not the hackers, in case you are confused. Laws exist for rational purposes, even if criminals cannot comprehend those purposes themselves...:)

Also, I must point out that

(a) We have no corroboration the story is even true and should get it before assuming the story as told is accurate

(b) If this person's computers were seized, there is no corroboration that it involves Valve at all. He might have "photochopped" the search warrants to include mention of Valve simply to cover up the fact, among his friends and associates, that his property was seized for other purposes, such as common computer credit-card fraud, or something similar.

Finally, a good concept for you to consider is that the value of your neighbor's private property is determined by the owner of that property, and nobody else. It's a good thing to know. If you can accept the idea that what belongs to your neighbor belongs to him and not to you, regardless of what you may think that property is worth, I can guarantee you a long and happy life entirely outside of the prison system...:)

This comment was edited on Jan 20, 11:33.
It is well known that I don't make mistakes--so, if you should happen across an error in something I have written, you can be confident in the fact that *I* did not write it.
Avatar 16008
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
      Re: Quick observation
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
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