Tuesday we reported that a professor at the Princeton University had withdrawn from a competition to crack a new audio protection.
This protection is called a watermark, and the professor and his team were able to crack it but because they were in the competition they were not allowed to make their results public.
But now, even when they are withdrawn of the competition, the RIAA is trying to stop them, to publish details about the crack. And it seems they succeeded. Here's a part of the statement they made why they don't publish the information:
Our paper was submitted via the normal academic peer-review process. The reviewers, who were chosen for their scientific reputations and credentials, enthusiastically recommended the paper for publication, due to their judgment of the paper's scientific merit. |
Nevertheless, the Recording Industry Association of America, the SDMI Foundation, and the Verance Corporation threatened to bring a lawsuit if we proceeded with our presentation or the publication of our paper. Threats were made against the authors, against the conference organizers, and against their respective employers.
Litigation is costly, time-consuming, and uncertain, regardless of the merits of the other side's case. Ultimately we, the authors, reached a collective decision not to expose ourselves, our employers, and the conference organizers to litigation at this time.
We remain committed to free speech and to the value of scientific debate to our country and the world. We believe that people benefit from learning the truth about the products they are asked to buy. We will continue to fight for these values, and for the right to publish our paper.
So, they don't publish it because they don't want an expensive, time consuming lawsuit. Some of you would call them cowards, others -like me-wise men.
Because I've the idea there will be others that will be able to crack the protection on a less legal way. Cracks have always been there that way, so why should we need a professor ?
Source: Slashdot.org
