On 1/19/07, Eliah Kagan wrote:
> On 1/19/07, Fyodor wrote:
> > Remember the guy yesterday who threatened to report me and my ISP to
> > the FBI unless a small picture of a penis was removed from the
> > fulldisclosure archive[1]? Since I don't particularly want a penis
> > picture on my site anyway, I responded to him stating that I would
> > remove it if he either provides evidence for his contention that the
> > subject is a minor, or if he just asks nicely for it to be removed.
> >
> > I'm still stunned by what happened next ...
> >
> > Today he[2] sent a DMCA takedown notice to abuse@[various domains],
> > claiming that the picture violates his copyrights. So wait a minute
> > ... yesterday the image was revolting and illegal kiddie porn worthy
> > of FBI enforcement, and today he is the copyright holder for the photo
> > and entitled to "$150,000 for each infringement"?!!
>
> Perhaps he is confusing the picture in the archive with a picture he
> has copyright on which actually is a picture of a minor's penis. This
> is the only interpretation of his messages that I can think of that
> makes them consistent. I suggest combining his suggestions by leaving
> the picture in the archive and reporting him to the FBI for
> investigation as a possible child pornographer. I suppose it is also
> possible that the picture is of a minor's penis, and he has copyright
> on it--if you assume this then you could also, at your option, remove
> the picture and report him to the FBI.
>
You missed what I thought was the most obvious interpretation. The
picture is of his own penis and he is a minor. I doubt you can be
considered a child pornographer if you are, in fact, a child.
-Jason
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org
Received on Jan 19 2007
Intro
