Judge: Code Can't Be Stolen Because It Isn't Property

[exfileme]

Software code is not considered as property, so it can't be stolen.

Judge: Code Can't Be Stolen Because It Isn't Property : Read more

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

HAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHA

This is funny. Not sure what to think about it though.

Judge does have a point...

 

[john_4]

The judge has a point but this ruling is not going to sit well at all with the higher powers who rule us all and own everything.

 

[john_4]

And PS Long Live Open Source, Linux (Ubuntu) and Libre Office, Open GL/CL..........

 

[targetdrone]

Misleading article is misleading.

While not guilty of breaking the National Stolen Property Act there are other crimes he could be charged and convicted of.

This is nothing more than a lawyer rub off.

 

[obiown77]

in other news....... 2 judges get fired, and 1 has a heart attack, all in the same day.

 

[trumpeter1994]

The title of this article is definetely misleading.....
As for the judges decision, it seems reasonable that he had the right to code he developed so long as it wasn't signed off as copyrighted property of the bank before he left. Yet why would he have multiple copies of code he had "accidently obtained"?

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]john_4[/nom]The judge has a point but this ruling is not going to sit well at all with the higher powers who rule us all and own everything.[/citation]
Speak for yourself. I'm neither universally ruled nor possession-less.

 

[xjchcxx]

[citation][nom]trumpeter1994[/nom] it seems reasonable that he had the right to code he developed so long as it wasn't signed off as copyrighted property of the bank before he left. [/citation]

Not necessarily. Most companies have in their paperwork you sign to worth there that states anything you develop on their clock is their property, which is probably why this case went this far to begin with.

If i leave my current job, you can bet i'll take my programming code with me.... you spend hours trying to resolve issues, it seems dumb not to keep your work, your portfolio with you. I totally understand why the guy would want a copy of his work after leaving. What if 3 months down the road you need to do something you did at the old job? why re-write when you can copy/paste?

But also, "multiple copies?" That's vague, and could be misinterpreted, did he have multiple instances of downloaded code (ie multiple projects) or multiple copies on separate DVDs .. that would suggest intent to distribute. I'd have to get into the case file to really form a concrete opinion on that matter

anyways, happy coding all... knowing Joe Bob may be able to just take your code one day lol

 

[xjchcxx]

you sign to work*

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]lamorpa[/nom]Speak for yourself. I'm neither universally ruled nor possession-less.[/citation]
You really think that? You think that if the government wanted to strip you of everything and jail you that they couldn't? The fact that they can shows that as of right now we are all controlled and owned, at least until we find a way to go against them and take back the freedom they keep taking.

 

[willwayne]

So, that means I can't steal MP3s either, right??

 

[hang-the-9]

[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]You really think that? You think that if the government wanted to strip you of everything and jail you that they couldn't? The fact that they can shows that as of right now we are all controlled and owned, at least until we find a way to go against them and take back the freedom they keep taking.[/citation]

They can, but they don't. Which is the whole point. Anyone can do anything if they wanted to. I can walk by anyone in the street and spit on them all day, but I don't.

You think a bunch of unwashed 20 somethings in tents will be able to control the roads, set and enforce rules for companies, criminal laws, and a million other things any better? I bet not a single person screaming "down with politics" will be able to handle anything if it all went away. They'd be in a cave gnawing on bones and grunting at anyone that came close to them.

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]You really think that? You think that if the government wanted to strip you of everything and jail you that they couldn't? The fact that they can shows that as of right now we are all controlled and owned, at least until we find a way to go against them and take back the freedom they keep taking.[/citation]
As opposed to what? It is possible for institutions to be corrupt. It is also necessary to have institutions to have things like infrastructure, courts to resolve conflicts, social services, etc. We'd all still be subsistence farmers otherwise, skirmishing with our neighbors over coconuts. Though not perfect, you live in one of the most non-corrupt countries on the Earth. What is your point other than paranoid complaining? What is your contribution?

 

[datawrecker]

[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]You really think that? You think that if the government wanted to strip you of everything and jail you that they couldn't? The fact that they can shows that as of right now we are all controlled and owned, at least until we find a way to go against them and take back the freedom they keep taking.[/citation]

Paranoid much? What are you so afraid of? Do material possessions mean that much to you? Jail is not that bad either. Its definitely easier to get you drug of choice in jail.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]john_4[/nom]The judge has a point but this ruling is not going to sit well at all with the higher powers who rule us all and own everything.[/citation]

That's just a foolish statement. This ruling is troubling for everyone.

If code can be taken by anyone, that means someone is a lot less likely to create something. Why? Because, someone can just take it with no risk that they will be punished.

You may cheer because you think now that this sticks it to the "evil" corporation, but it also affects the self employed person just as much. And even within the "evil" corporation, since they can no longer control access to their own content, they just will not create content. No content being created means no employing someone to create said content which means fewer jobs.

 

[jabliese]

[citation][nom]willwayne[/nom]So, that means I can't steal MP3s either, right??[/citation]

That is correct. And, it is why the RIAA uses the loss of revenue to "prove" damage.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]trumpeter1994[/nom]The title of this article is definetely misleading.....As for the judges decision, it seems reasonable that he had the right to code he developed so long as it wasn't signed off as copyrighted property of the bank before he left. Yet why would he have multiple copies of code he had "accidently obtained"?[/citation]

Except in business, it has always been considered that what you make while in the employ of someone is the property of who paid you to make it, not the person who made it. If he wanted the code to be his he should have made it on his own time with his own money. The fact is this ruling is idiotic and will have a chilling effect on things.

Remember this in a few years, if the ruling stands, if the amount of games and other software dwindles and you wonder why you can't get what you want. It's because people won't invest to have something made if it can just be taken. No point in taking that risk.

 

[Guest]

Cool, time to pirate some games. CliffyB I'm coming for you son, and Hell's coming with me!

 

[4745454b]

I don't see how this doesn't apply to downloading media files. Code is code. Whether it controls bank software, puts noises on my speakers, or images on my screen I don't see why stealing one is ok while the other two aren't. Other then of course Goldman Sachs didn't donate enough money.