Talk:Tron (hacker)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ambiguous Typo

"by the parents and Andy Müller-Maguhn" Should that be "parents of" or was it Andy and his parents? Or was it Tron's Parents and Andy?? 

--- Tron's Parents and Andy, so the text is OK.

Back to Boris F.

Now that it seems that Wikipedia Germany has won its battle for free speech. Doesn't it seem that removing the family name is the right thing to do. -- User:Aniket ray


This is no news page

The article is completely useless. It doesn't tell much about Tron, instead it focuses on recent events (of which some are not proven yet to have anything to do with Tron at all). So please, focus on the topic! --12:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

That's why I think it would be best to translate the article about Tron from German Wikipedia. Ausir 12:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

And so it happened. I think this addresses the critism in a sufficient way. One note, though: It is simply not true, that the connection is not proven (it was acknowledged hours before the comment above was posted by the German Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.) -- Pedewikia 14:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Court order?

Wikimedia Foundation is not subject to a court order. Nothing has been delivered to the foundation. There are just media reports about a dispute between Ivo Floricic (owner of the "tron" trade mark) and Wikimedia Foundation Inc. -- 84.132.128.245 10:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Please keep in mind this is the ruling of a German court and now nearly a month after the ruling the order has been served to Wikipedia Foundation Inc. by now, you can depend on that. The only thing to keep in mind however is that the Berlin Municipal Court (de:Amtsgericht) can in no way enforce this ruling against Wikipedia Foundation Inc. And this is a good thing too... Think about this for example... At least here in the United States you can appear in public and say "The Holocaust never happened: No chemical residue of cyanide gas was found on the walls of the rooms purported to have been misused as gas chambers.". In Germany saying something like that (and meaning it, of course :-) ) can land you up to five years in prison. German censorship is not limited to the Holocaust or anything "Nazi" or "Nationalsocialist". Did you know it is also forbidden to blaspheme God in public or poke fun at religious congregations? Yes. You can go to jail for that too... We should be glad that Germanys judiciary has no clout over here. 84.160.220.48 04:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Can not enforce the ruling? Actually, this was discussed on the german wikipedia somewhere too. Apperantly there are international rules/laws/whatever for this, they actually could enforce the ruling under the right circumstances. 81.201.224.13 07:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


It's not true that it's forbidden to blaspheme god or something in Germany. You can clearly tell your opinion about god or your disbelief in god with no consequences at all. It might be forbidden to say something against religious congregations (as well as against other persons or organisations) but thats the same even in the US because even there you can get accused of saying diffaming things about someone or some organisation. But I must admit that unfortunately the "Nazi" thing is a true example for censorship in Germany. This is what the allies and war winners left to us even about sixty years after the war ended. By the way, I don't believe there is any doubt that the holocoust really happened. There are too many obvious proofs. But that is not a matter of this discussion...84.161.73.43 04:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
This point is trivial, but I can't let the above comment go by: In the US you would never be jailed for saying anything about any religious congregation. Slander and libel laws are civil matters, so the congregation itself could sue you for monetary damages, but that's it. Technically "criminal libel" is a crime in several states, but I can't remember any recent case of a person actually going to jail for defaming someone. Tempshill 17:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
How about Keith Henson's conviction for "interfering with a religion"? If he didn't go to jail, it's only because he fled. Cathy Linton 21:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
If you don't cough up the cash, you go to jail. That's how they enforce civil damages, as far as I know. Generally you can't get in trouble for defaming an abstract group of people, such as 'church goers' but you can get in trouble for defaming a specific entity, such as 'the congregation of such-and-such-a-church' if that entity is incorporated in some way under law. This is all afaik and IANAL and I have never even been to USA. And it's OT too. :) -- Wikipediatrist 23:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
*sigh* Incitement to Riot. Nitjanirasu 21:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
yes, it IS true - "Beschimpfung von Bekenntnissen, Religionsgesellschaften und Weltanschauungsvereinigungen" (§166 StGB) is as much an offense in germany as it is in austria (with similar anti-neo-nazi propaganda laws, too) --Snottily 19:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
A link to the Strafgesetzbuch §166 text, which confirm's Snottily's assertion. --139.76.128.71 13:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
If you read the text of the law carefully you'll see that you only can get accused if you defame a congregation or whatsoever in a way which disturbes the public order and peace. All other things are a matter of civil law even in germany - meaning you can get sued for monetary damage. Thats all. --84.161.112.130 07:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Tron trademark? LOL, what? I doubt they have a trademark on the name, that's just silly, and even if they did it means nothing to us, as you can mention the names of trademarks for news and educational purposes. DreamGuy 11:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I think Disney would have something to say about anybody else claiming a trademark on the name "Tron"... *Dan T.* 01:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Well... multiple people can own thw same word as different trademarks. Like, say Sun laundry detergent, the Sun newspaper, etc. But in this case there doesn't seem to be any reason to think any member of the Floricic family has a trademark on their name or on tron, and if they did it (huge if) it wouldn;t matter to use anyway. DreamGuy 03:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
The trademark is registered. #39952658.7 Deutsches Markenregister (German trademark registry). The owner is Floricic, Ivo, Berlin. Source: https://dpinfo.dpma.de/
84.160.220.48 has written from Germany:
$ host 84.160.220.48
48.220.160.84.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer p54A0DC30.dip.t-dialin.net.
The domain t-dialin.net is used by "T-Online", the internet dialin doughter of the german Telekom. This guy is writing "We should be glad that Germanys judiciary has no clout over here." - whatever that means. 62.216.196.1 21:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
You mean VoiceStream/T-Mobile? --02:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
T-Mobile is another subsidiary of the Deutsche Telekom. T-Online is the IP provider. AFAIK T-Online is only active in Germany.
Deutsche Telekom/T-Online operates some routers and leased lines in the US to provide international connectivity to its own customers, but as far as i know thats all they are doing in the US. -- Pedewikia 19:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe is a hacker? -- Wikipediatrist 00:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, it's up to Jimbo and the Wikimedia Foundation legal people (whoever they might be) to decide whether it's best for legal reasons to comply with this alleged court order or not. Other editors shouldn't be suppressing the name on their own (or putting it back in if Jimbo decides to edit it out). *Dan T.* 20:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - Tempshill 17:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Bah. It's a wiki. Do what *you* think is right. -- Wikipediatrist 00:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

German article on this topic in pseudo-English

See German article in pseudo-English here DreamGuy 11:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The link fails.
→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 11:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


Well, crap.... Google or Wikipedia must not like it when I direct link to a translation... here:

Tron (hacker)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Changes too: Navigation , search

Tron (* 8 June 1972 ; † in October 1998 in Berlin ), with civil name Boris Floricic, was a hacker . Tron busy itself with attacks on commercial coding - and Authentifizierungssysteme like e.g.. Pay TV and calling cards . 1997 it developed a new technology for the coding of Sprachtelefonie and demonstrated it in its " Cryptophon ", which it developed in the context of its thesis (diploma). The advancement of the "Cryptophon" to the " Cryptron ", which should be promoted to the commercial mass product for the use in the InterNet, was prevented by Trons early death. Over the officially clarified death circumstances climb to today different speculations.

When desired parents became in German-language media the name usually with "Boris F." shortened. Some in and foreign reports (for instance a message of the computer week of December 1998 [1] or an article of the Guardian of 2002 [2] ) called however also the full surname.


Table of contents [Verbergen]

  • 1 Career/development
  • 2 Interest areas
  • 3 Cryptophon
  • 4 Death circumstances
  • 5 Literature
  • 6 Web on the left of

Career/development

Tron buildup with its nut/mother in the Gropiusstadt in the south of Berlin. Already at school times Tron was interested much in technical topics, whereas its achievements in are designated other subjects than rather on the average.

It left after school the 10. Class and completed a three and a half-year old professional training to the communication electronics engineer , field information technology, at the technical University of Berlin . After successful conclusion of the training Tron retrieved the specialized Abitur at the upper stage center in Berlin Wedding and began afterwards a study of computer science at the technical professional school Berlin .

During the study Tron completed a practical course at a company for electronic safety solutions. In the winter semester 1997/1998 Tron locked its study with its thesis (diploma). In this developed it the Cryptophon , a ISDN telephone with integrated coding. Since from another student to furnishing payments in advance were missing, it could finish the telephone however not finally, went however nevertheless far beyond the original setting of tasks, which planned only the implementation of the coding component.

After its conclusion Tron applied with at least one enterprise, found however no employment. In its spare time busy it itself among other things with an advancement of its termination work.

Interest areas

Tron busy passionately with electronics and safety systems of all art. to its interest areas counted themselves among other things attacks on the German calling card and Pay TV systems. In the context of its research and development he exchanged himself with other hackers like also respectable scientists.

On the mailing list, a closed group of Pay TV hackers, writes Tron "tv-crypt" 1995 over itself that its interests cover among other things microprocessors, programming languages, electronics of all kinds, digital radio and data communication and in particular a cracking of allegedly safe systems. It states that it provided among other things an emulator for smart cards for de-energising the British Pay TV system, and with the Verschluesselungsystem Nagravision/Syster, which at the time at that time among other things by the German Pay TV offerer PREMIERE was used, would be concerned.

Later Tron was occupied among other things with one of scientists from the USA only theoretically outlined attack on smart cards for the mobile telephone standard GSM . Together with other hackers from the chaos computer club succeeded to it the successful simulation of a copied map.

Tron was likewise successful with the attempt to manufacture simulators of calling cards. These simulators were accepted by map telephones like a correct calling card, could be abused thus for free discussions. Trons motive was however only the overcoming of the protection; it did not try to use its realizations financially. Parallel such simulators were developed in addition, by criminal ones and abused substantial. Since the Telekom this abuse came on the schliche and amended minutes, Tron with a friend tried to dismantle a map telephone on 3 March 1995 by force with a suggestion hammer, in order to be able to adapt its simulators. They were taken up by the police and condemned later Tron to a 15-monatigen detention, which was suspended however on the probation.

Cryptophon

Cryptophon is by Tron themselves selected the name for a ISDN telephone with integrated coding, developed of it as prototype. 1997/1998 in the framework its thesis (diploma) with the title "realization of a coding technology for data in the ISDN b-channel" developed in the winter semester. Special attention of the development was a favourable price and the simple reproduction barness for hobby amateur handicraftsmen. The telephone codes discussions with the symmetrical cryptoalgorithm IDEA . Since this algorithm is patent-protected, the coding on a exchangeable module was made. Like that it would have been possible to select procedure later another (not patented). At a later time the system should be supplemented around a key exchange on basis of the asymmetrical cryptoalgorithm RSA, in order to achieve a higher security also against compromised receiving stations.

The Cryptophon on basis 8051 of a compatible microprocessor , which takes over the controlling of the whole system and the periphery (like ISDN CONTROLLERS, waehltastatur or display, is developed). For the actual coding Tron selected inexpensive Texas Instruments - DSPs , which he won by development from old modems, which were low-priced available available in addition. Since this DSP type for the complete coding is not efficient enough, Tron used two DSP per telephone. Here a DSP responsible for those which can be sent and the other DSP are for the received data. Tron developed both the system software for the microprocessor as well as the coding code for DS HP here developed it an elegant method for the efficient implementation of the ID I/O algorithm.

Major item: Cryptophon

Death circumstances

Tron was missed since 17 October 1998 and found on 22 October 1998 in a park in the citizen of Berlin district Neukoelln erhaengt.

The determinations by the citizens of Berlin public prosecutor's office were terminated in the summer 2001. The official determination result is expressed in Suizid . Parts of the chaos computer club accused errors to the determination authorities, but efforts toward a resumption of the case failed finally in October 2003.

This result doubted up to the today's day by friends and used by Tron as well as by representatives of the chaos computer club. Particularly Andy Mueller Maguhn , a speaker of the chaos computer club, spread the theory, Tron in several also in the chaos computer club disputed lectures and press conferences is victim of a murder by a secret service or circles of the organized criminality . As possible motive Trons research in the areas of the Pay TV Hackings or the language coding are called.

The journalist Burkhard Schroeder published 1999 a special book with the title "Tron - death of a hacker". The author was criticized by parts of the chaos computer club like also by Trons parents, since Schroeder represents the view that Tron probably killed itself.

Beyond that different further myths and conspiracy theories exist . In the meantime death Trons was processed also in several fictitious works.

Literature

  • Burkhard Schroeder: Tron: Death of a hacker . rororo, 1999, ISBN 3-499-60857-X

Web on the left of

---

The copy and paste of text lost links but I put the major ones for sources back in. It's a mess but should give an idea of what's going on and some sources and etc. DreamGuy

He had an unfrequent familiy name.

So that´s why the article is rather on top in the search engine result pages. In fact, the whole case is more than strange, but the article is so tiny, and he was never known as B.F., only as Tron. He was rather a legend, but only in some small communities. Why don´t we just respect the wish of the family ? It´s rather ill to make such a trouble about. Tron is tron, there is no reason to change that after his death. Steffen Kaufmann

"Respect for the family" is not an encyclopedic reason, especially when what the family wishes for "respect" is censorship of public knowledge through draconian legal threats. So they are upset that the guy is dead, fine, but their actions show lack of respect for everyone and everything but their own unrealistic expectations. DreamGuy 23:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I will second that, however not the "...so they are upset that the guy is dead, fine..." part of it which I consider to be in bad taste. However it is also more than likely that the family has been encouraged to sue against Wikipedia by those in the German legal system that want to extend its influence far outside the borders of Germany. The logical thing to do (and which might have yielded a wiable injunction) would have been to sue against Wikipedia Foundation Inc. in a court in Florida. As such, this has backfired, as the court order is being ignored and Germany has no way to enforce it in the United States. (Though I would not recommmend Whales travelling to any EU member until this is taken care of). Personally I can not see what the parents of Boris Floricic have to gain from this, as now there name is all over the internet again. I have great sympathy with them losing their son, I have no sympathy whatsoever for them trying to get information removed from net.

to whoever wrote this above, and did not sign: What is so difficult to understand? The parents have a buisness, and their custumers finding out on the net that Tron was their son, feel uneasy about how to "handle" it, and stay away. So they are loosing money. They were just trying to protect their buisness...of course, that backfired totally and they might very well get the opposite of their goal now. 81.201.224.13 08:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

this is just another blatant example of "I would never have heard the name if they hadn't made such a fuss about trying to hush it up". This sort of thing just doesn't fly on the Internet, and the parents were either acting on horribly bad advice, or in the face of sound advice :) Except, of course, they actually are looking for publicity. Maybe B.F.'s memoirs are coming out or something. dab (ᛏ) 18:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

the bad advice comes from germany's self proclaimed leading hacker organization, the Chaos Computer Club, one of whose speakers (Andreas Müller-Maguhn) adhers to a conspiracy theory - floricic was killed by one of various secret service organizations, etc. unfortunately, the influence of that club extends into the german wikipedia, as some admins are members of CCC, too. --Snottily 15:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

No, its not! The CCC has offically distanced itself from all that stuff that´s been happening. They don´t want to have anything to do with it. Freddy 84.155.242.210 19:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

from the CCC statement: "Verschiedene Mitglieder haben privat versucht, in diesem Streit zu vermitteln." (="various members have tried to privately mediate in this conflict"). unfortunately, those members are not NPOV, which in their function as wikipedia admins they SHOULD be.

in addition - if you're a spokesperson for an organization, and publicly known in that function only, you shouldn't abuse that positions for private crusades, since they will reflect badly on your employer. a classic conflict of interest there. --Snottily 11:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

preliminary injunction

Quotation of the article: although it does not mention Tron whatsoever. Tron isn't mentioned, so why is this paragraph in the article? ElRakı ?! 01:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

From Wikimedia Deutschland about the preliminary injunction: „Wir bitten um Verständnis, dass wir aus rechtlichen Gründen bis auf Weiteres keine weiteren Stellungnahmen in dieser Sache abgeben werden.“ (due to legal grounds, we can not make any statement about this) --ElRakı ?! 01:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The connection is obvious. Its from the same court, its about the same time (and german wikipedia did not get threated by injuctions before), and such steps where already predicted / announced before. Everyone and his mother draw this connection. Most certainly the respected Heise Verlag does it in their newsticker report. -- Pedewikia 02:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, to be honest, didn't Heise Verlag mention this very article as a source? Ausir 02:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Heise says that there is no more forwarding wikipeida.de -> de.wikipedia.org and mentioned en.wikipedia as source for the connection to Tron.
I have no source where anybody who really knows it, have announced that wikipedia.de will get an injuction. So, for me thats just a speculation, maybe a presumably speculation but not more. --ElRakı ?! 02:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Now it is still the same court, and it is safe to assume, that this is about the same case. Of course some claims are only based on what can be seen as gossip. It would be a strange coincidence, though, if the same court issues two injunctions against wikipedia in different cases in such a short time, given the fact, that there were no injunctions before. One injunction is against the Wikimedia Foundation. That first injunction is probably powerless in the meanwhile because it was not delivered to the defendants (Wikimedia Foundation) in the timeframe required by german law (1 month). The plaintiffs already learned earlier that a german injunction against Wikimedia Foundation is pretty worthless in terms of enforceability. Now the month is other, injunctions against Wikimedia Foundation does not work, now we have a injunction against german Wikimedia Deutschland. Sorry, but it needs about no fantasy to draw the connection between the two injunctions. The paragraph should stay in the article, but might be modified to tell that this is not a verified fact as of now. -- Pedewikia 02:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

According to Antragsteller der einstweiligen Verfügung sind die Eltern des Hackers Tron, wie von Seiten der Wikipedia mittlerweile gegenüber Golem.de bestätigt wurde. Man kündigte gegenüber Golem.de zudem an, gegen die einstweilige Verfügung vorzugehen. Man sieht die Persönlichkeitsrechte des vor rund zehn Jahren Verstorbenen nicht verletzt und kann auch keine Belastung der Eltern durch den Artikel erkennen. Zudem argumentiert man von Seiten Wikipedias unter Berufung auf die Pressefreiheit - nicht zuletzt sei der Tod von Tron bereits zuvor in mehreren Büchern thematisiert worden und Tron selbst auch öffentlich unter seinem bürgerlichen Namen aufgetreten. [3] the connection between Tron and the injunction is now clear. --Historiograf 10:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Translation

Could someone translate the German Wikipedia article here? We could use some more information about things he did while still alive - this article focuses too much on controversies after his death. Ausir 03:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Scroll upward on this page. DreamGuy 04:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear friends of knowledge,

due to an injunction of the district court of Berlin-Charlottenburg from January 17th, 2006, the German Wikipedia Foundation is prohibited to forward this domain to the free German-speaking version of Wikipedia Encyclopaedia. (wikipedia.org)

Currently, we have our lawyers invesigate all kinds of steps, in order to reestablish uncomplicated access to the free German-speaking version of Wikipedia Encyclopaedia. We ask for your understanding, that we cannot make further statements on legal grounds.

Wikimedia Deutschland - Association of the Foundation of free Knowledge.
Berlin, 18. Januar 2006

English is not my native language, thus the translation might need some revision. 134.99.37.95 14:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Now thanks for your effort, but you misunderstood. What was asked for was a translation of the article about Tron in the german wikipedia, not a translation of the text from wikipedia.de. The article was in the meanwhile loosely translated and merged in with the article here. -- 15:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
This is a Google pseudo-translation. hydnjo talk 20:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Can you read? The article was in the meanwhile loosely translated and merged in with the article here.. -- Pedewikia 20:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

User:Pedewikia is not allowed to manipulate the event especially the neutral report

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tron_%28hacker%29&action=history --IAAL 17:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Stop trolling. Your pamphlet is of bad quality and destroys the article. All the "facts" in it are already mentioned in the article. We don't need your help or (next to threatening) advise and would prefer if you just leave as alone. Thank you for your cooperation. Failure to do so, will likely lead to a new block of your account. -- Pedewikia 17:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Real Name of Tron

Please, show a little piety here. When the parents who buried their 26-year old son do not want the real surname to be used, why should the wikipedia not concur? Is there really ANY difference for the reader, except for public curiosity and voyeurism, whether it is an article about Boris F., Boris Federov, or Boris Fisher? The Police uses "Boris F.", so this name is sufficient for reference and validation of the facts. If some sneak discovered the real surname of Tron, this is so; but to use it without the consent of his family is yellow-press style.

I think there are enough wounds ripped open by now, and enough public voyeurism in things not anybodie's business satisfied. Please imagine how you yourself would feel if nobody gave you a break to overcome such a terrible ordeal; I am very sure you would not want it, either.

The real name is irrelevant information. There is no reason to include it. Since his parents object, there is reason to not include it, now. --Dingo 19:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC) (the previous comment is posted as 85.181.49.33 (talk · contribs))

  • Tron isn´t the real issue here anymore, the more important issue is press freedom, and the freedom of wikipedia (if only the german part of it) itself. If they get thru with it, then anybody who finds something he doesn´t like in de-wikipedia, would be able to have his on injunction..it could lead so far that no german site (on a german server) will be allowed anymore to link to the german part of wikipedia in anyway. Wikipedia loosing in a precedence case, THAT´s what´s the real problem. The whole Tron-real-name-thing, has become secondary if you view it like that. 84.155.242.210 19:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC) Freddy
  • If Tron is notable enough to be in this encyclopedia (which he clearly is) then his name should be able to be published. I don't know about the laws in Germany, but this wouldn't fly in Canada. He was a criminal, and wasen't a young offender, therefore fair game. Mike (T C) 01:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • While I think that getting a count injunction again Wikipedia is the wrong way of going about things, especially since it's perfectly legal at least under US freedom of the press laws, I don't see any problem in complying with the parents wishes when the issue was first brought up though now that a court case has been brought I think it best to hold our ground and keep the full name. And wouldn't it make more sense to bring a court case against the author using his name? While Wikipedia may be fine under freedom of press if they're using his name in a work of fiction it seems like it might violate other laws by associating his name with the ficticious character, thus I would assume why it says "The events of this movie are a work of fiction. The characters are ficticious and any resemblance to any person, living or dead, is entirely coincidental." at the end of a lot of movies, though it seems questionable as to how 'coincidental' this usage of his name was.--Chiklit 01:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry. Freedom has its boundaries where it violates the freedom of others (Rosa Luxemburg). Freedom of press is to be allowed to describe the Tron case, or to describe people who acted under their own names. Freedom of press is not to expose or to slander. The Tron case was described, and relevant informations can be found. Like I said, the real name of him, as he did not use it, does not exist in public, safe perhaps as the abbreviation "Boris F" the police uses.
Wikipedia, eg, describes Curt Cobains suicide or Dahmers execution; but it does not post photos of Cobains body or a video of Dahmers execution. The facts the public are entitled to, ie the facts relevant to TRON, do not include his surname. What do you need it for? Oh, in de.org.ccc, a poster answered this question: as this surname is very uncommon in Germany, he discovered the address of his father (who holds a business and must operate it under his real name under German law) and suggested to demolish the windows. Is that what wikipedia is for?
The compliance with his parents' justified wishes by the english wikipedia is honourable; however, if the parents tried to get a common-sense aggreement with the admins of the German wikipedia, I doubt it was to any avail. I more than once critisized the German wikipedia for its ruthlessness with things important to other people. The answer was time and again "If we did this, everyone could come and in a day, wikipedia would be empty" ("We function automatic... Wir sind die Roboter!" by Kraftwerk). I quit because a troll was blocked after a "mediation process" where he was first thing accused of Holocaust denial (which he did not do) and quit the process therefore. He sure deserved blocking, but if I was accused of a crime under German penitentiary law - or any other calumnity would have been made against me - I also would have called upon the law.
Law is there to protect the just rights of people where an amicable agreement cannot be reached, as in this case. A German court decided that the rights of the parents in this case for protection of their personality rights and those of the deceased were violated. Wikipedia did not comply and made a "Flag of Convenience"-stunt we know from dubious telemarketing firms. Now the thing escalated. Either the wikipedia shows that it takes it seriously with the "honourable global community to collect the knowledge of the people". Or it says "Sorry, if you want your money back, you must sue us in 'St.Kitts and Nevis'". Then, why the USA? I am sure there are other FoC-countries where laws are even more lax. Just upload the pictures of Cobain, or intimate pictures of everyone, and tell them "this is perfectly legal in Maluku Selatan, where our servers are situated!" Where's the border? Articles about pederasts? Just include some child porno into the article, it will sure as hell make it more interesting!
This, then, will be where every refuse of mankind will find its way into the Wikipedia. Of course, this scenario is exaggerated. But so is the scenario to cry "Freedom!" (anyone know the meaning this has in Harry Turtledove's Southern Victory series?) in this case and fear censorship and abolishment of the freedom of the press. Like Karl Rahner said: "Real Freedom is not to do this or that, but the ability to decide for oneself and do to oneself". And this may mean not to do this or that in a specific case.
Just imagine: If one of Jimbo's relatives where killed under such circumstances and, as Jimbo wanted some piety to be observed, his full address would be posted with the phrase "Unfortunately, I am no deglasser and do not work in Florida" (to deglass = extreme-socialist "Antifa" word for "to throw in the windows"; this style is often observed by people wanting to request things to be done but think this form had less legal relevance), I do not think that the discussion here would follow the same tracks as it does here as the subject are complete strangers.
Summa summarum, I am beginning to regret the time I spend in wikipedia when I see the (yellow-press) tracks it more and more seems to follow. --Dingo 02:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC) posting as 85.181.1.184
  • Give it a rest "Dingo" -- you made your case, and the editors here strongly disagree with you. You have to accept what the majority of editors here want. Your little arguments for self-censorship and kowtowing to threats and etcetera simply will not fly. DreamGuy 03:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, "DreamGuy" - I still strongly disagree with most of the editors. Is this a problem for you? Apart from freedom of information, there is freedom of speech you have to accept. Apart from that, your little argument against all censorship would fly better (or even leave the ground) if you would stop censoring yourself. What's your real name? Where are you from? What do you do? Where can I verify that?
The real issue seems to me to be freedom of information vs. the right to privacy. --85.181.1.184 12:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It's not a problem for me if you strongly disagree, but wasting your time posting here to complain when you are so overwhelmingly overruled is just a waste of everyone's time. You're also getting into the realm of just being annoying for the sake of purposefully annoying others, which is never cool. "Censoring yourself"... cute. DreamGuy 12:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This is Common troll tactic #237, ie "do not argue against the overwhelming odds with which you are currently presented because to do so is immoral and a waste of time (which is immoral .. recurse)". -- Wikipediatrist 03:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: The most common tactic trolls use is to call the normal people trolls to try to justify their own trollish behavior. He and you (if indeed you aren't the same person) can be upset all you want, but there is an overwhelmingmajority of editors here who disagree with you, and we follow a little thing here called consensus. So make whatever snide remarks you want, but know that it won't help you one iota, and it will in fact just make your side look bad. DreamGuy 09:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • "The facts the public are entitled to, ie the facts relevant to TRON, do not include his surname. What do you need it for?" that is a particularly stupid argument: if you apply it ad absurdium then you get "Why do you need to know about Tron?" Tell me one good reason we need to know about this guy. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The issue is certainly moot now, as Tron's real name is all over the American press. Kaldari 04:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I am no deglasser and do not work in Florida:
<> (personal info removed)
  • All public records... - O^O
  • We have never condoned the publishing of someone's home address on the website. It has always been removed. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • "The real issue" is ethics. You want to talk freedom? Does wikipedia have the ability to act ethically, of its own free will, or will a court determine for it that it should act ethically. I don't know the story, but there is not just one issue at stake: freedom of information. There is also the balancing ethical responsibility that wikipedia, including its users, has just like any other publisher.
Is the guy's real name meaningful to readers of Wikipedia? I doubt it very strongly. Does it add anything to the story? I doubt it very strongly. Has its publication done real harm to someone? Very likely. Forget any further speculation on what motives other people involved may have for becoming involved, that is a seperate issue, I don't see how the motives of a bunch of lawyers influences your decision of whether to shout this guy's name from the roof-tops, or whether to simply tell the story of Tron the hacker.
Please if you can give a good argument why his real name should be published against express wishes of his relatives, and why wikipedia should also try to 'get around' the express direction of a court (even if it is not a multinational like wikipedia is), then put them here. I am not going to revert the publication of his name, sincce I am a Johnny Come Lately, but certainly I am not shy about my opinion. Ambulance chasers bring wikipedia a very bad reputation. -- Wikipediatrist 03:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • "Like I said, the real name of him, as he did not use it, does not exist in public, safe perhaps as the abbreviation "Boris F" the police uses." - It didn't exist in public until the parents sued over it and made it public. What an irony. Ausir 14:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The claim is a lie. The truth is, that Tron used his civil name in his diploma thesis (as required by the rules). And whats more: Tron distributed copies of the thesis including his civil name amongst equals and in the internet (which he were absolutely not required by any rule). Therefore Tron himself showed by his very own actions that he did not care about his civil name becoming public.
  • Tron at that stage did not know what harm this might do to his parents, since he had not at that stage died suspiciously. -- Wikipediatrist 03:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • What also should be considered: While nowadays lot of people claim to have been best friends with Tron, most of these claims are utter lies. Tron mostly worked on his own and only had very limited contact to hackers of the CCC. It has been proven that most of his selfproclaimed friends do not even knew basic facts about Tron like the fact the he owned a car. I'm really getting sick of all the trolls claiming to know how Tron behaved and what he wanted etc. Most of the people who are now very vocal knew so little about Tron that reading tea leaves gives more accurate information than listening and believing them. -- Pedewikia 19:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree that the real name should be removed:

  • if he used an alias evidently he did not want to make public its name
  • to confirm that the parents sued Wikimedia Deutschland to ask the removal
  • the right to forget a criminal exists, from the legislative point of view to the ethical one
  • it does add no useful information, since under its civil name it is unknown

--Trek00 03:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

What he or his parents did or did not want is immaterial. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's purpose is to convey cold, hard facts and the name of someone is entirely pertinent to any entry on them - both their nicknames and their real name (or names). The facts of his death are very sad, but suppressing information about it changes nothing. That his surname is uncommon is not relevant. What the police in Germany choose to call him is irrelevant - in most other (sensible) places in the world he would be named. And whether it is useful or not is really down to the user of the encyclopedia to decide. I mean, how much more basic can you get than someone's actual name??? I come to Wikipedia to find out about a whole range of stuff and I don't expect it to be edited or censured for anything other than relevance, taste and decency by a bunch of self-appointed moral guardians. There is nothing irrelevant, distasteful or indecent about pubilshing a 'famous' person's name, regardless of how they became famous or the wishes of their parents. I mean, the entry for Sting gives his full-name - even his middle name (Gordon Matthew Sumner), yet you could argue that it's not relevant as he's always been known as Sting. Likewise Gary Glitter (!). Why make an exception in this case? That is what this whole naming malarky amounts to - making an exception for someone for no adequate reason. The German court's decision is immaterial and rather pathetically pointless. --palecitrus 12:01, 23 January 2006

How you can compare a showman like Sting, that he would love to be faoums, and an hacker, that you can't know what he wanted? What the real name will add to the article? Something of useful? --Trek00 02:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

related to crime

In the article was said, that the article was a stub related to crime in Germany. This is not compeltely wrong, but it should be known that Tron never used his abilities to earn money, in opposite, he developed a saver technology after his illegal research work. Steffen Kaufmann

semi-protected

Whoa - that's a crazy edit history - I've semi-protected it at least for a while. As a side note I think the suicide category may not be the best idea for the moment since it is controversial... WhiteNight T | @ | C 01:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Real name

Is it true that we have recorded his real name, beyond a shadow of a doubt? - Ta bu shi da yu 02:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Tons of sources say so, as cited in the article. Like with anything in the encyclopedia, I suppose it's possible that every source in existence is wrong, but encyclopedias go by what the sources say. DreamGuy 03:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Beyond a shadow of doubt. -- 84.176.233.33 09:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Would we be sued otherwise? Ausir 14:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Rename to Boris Floricic

This may be really bad timing, with this article's current level of controversy, but I'm wondering: wouldn't it be better to name this article after Boris' full name rather than his hacker alias? Tron may be more well-known, but Boris Floricic is more encyclopedic, in my opinion. --Michiel Sikma 07:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Nah, I don't think so. Musicians at least have their articles under their popular, not real, names, e.g. Eminem or Madonna. On the other hand, I'd love to see the legal fireworks of not only putting his full name in but also making it the title of the article. It's oddly satisfying to see the page blatanly defying a court order. --AK7 08:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
There is no court order forbidding Wikimedia Foundation to tell the civil full name of Tron. 84.176.233.33 09:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia naming conventions say that we always go with the most famous name as the title... so if you admit that's Tron, Tron it stays. DreamGuy 12:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The article was at "Tron (hacker)" before this mess started, and it would be rather spiteful to move it now. However, "Floricic" may end up as the better known name if they continue like this. My suspicion is that this is a publicity stunt rather than a bona fide effort at keeping the name out of public consciousness because, as always, they're succeeding at the exact opposite :) dab (ᛏ) 17:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Boris Floricic is already a working redirect to Tron (hacker), which is sufficient for most purposes. Frankie

Well that name already redirects here as is, so it's of no benefit. --^demon 17:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as the German WP is down because Tron's full name was displayed, shouldn't the English WP try not to use it? --Anthony5429 03:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
The German WP was nerver "down", what was down was www.wikipedia.de which was only a redirect to de.wikipedia.org. Most people know and use the direct adress anyway. So the damage for the German WP was almost nothing. 81.201.224.13 09:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. --Anthony5429 22:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Please clarify nationality

As a newcomer to this story (linking in from Slashdot), I found an ambiguity with regard to the subject's nationality. The first sentence of the "Life" paragraph is ambiguous. It states "Tron grew up in a suburb in the south of Berlin." From 1949-1990 (which encompasses the subject's upbringing), there were two Berlins; East and West, and they were in different countries. Would some kind soul familiar with this story please edit the main page to accurately reflect his nationality?

The German article states, that this suburb was de:Berlin-Gropiusstadt, which, as part of Neukölln, was part of West-Berlin during the Wall Years --(Taxman) de 17:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
It all depends on the view point. Regarding to the viewpoint of West-Germany (and many other countries), the eastern part of Germany was always Germany, and the people living inside were germans (and are nowadays anyway), this was also written in the lawbook. -- 80.139.63.246 18:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


Place for troll posts

Who cares about this issue. The entire thing would vaguely be considered 'educational' and is mostly self serving. Do the right thing and leave these poor people alone. This is a publicly provided service and open to anyone, show some courtesy to his parents.

An encylclopedia is supposed to be enlightening and informational. This article does neither. And if you going to cite yourself it should be kept in a distinct section as not to confuse anyone that the observer is part of the content. This is like having your thumb in front of the camera lens.

In your POV it is neither. After reading about this on a news site, I found the page both (in the original, intended way). If Wikipedia started deleting pages out of “courtesy” to someone/something, there would be very little content in it. --Bky1701 10:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Croat

He was a Croat boy, who lives in Germany with the parents. i don´t believe he kill himself. Its not normal for Croat people. Peace

Yeah, that sounds like a strong argument. LOL. -- Pedewikia 19:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Let me surprise you - for some cultures it is very unusual to commit suicide --Prokoudine 21:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Translation

This link is a Google pseudo-translation of the German Wikipedia article. hydnjo talk 19:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

So what? The german article has already translated into english and merged into the english article. Manual translation, not this machine bullshit. Just click on "article" above, and you can read the translation. No need for shabby machine translation. -- Pedewikia 20:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey! Be nice! I'd like to thank Hydnjo for the translation, even if it is in this article. - [[User:Ta bu shi

da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 01:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't ment to behave like an ass. However: The user has added the link also to another section above, right after a message (by me) that the text was manually translated, and a translation is not needed any longer. In my opionion it can be required from users to at least read what they are replying to... -- Pedewikia 18:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Link

Here's a link to two (alleged?)pics of tron: http://hackersnews.org/hackerhistory/index-2.htm

One of these was already uploaded and is on its way to deletion. We have no use for copyrighted (or at best of unclear copyright) images here. There is no need for a picture anyway. -- Pedewikia 20:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, apart from the slightly non-standard situation, there's no reason why we wouldn't want to illustrate this biographical article with a photograph. We would, of course, want to attempt to get a freely-licensed image. However, I'm not sure of the likelihood of obtaining one. I presume writing to his parents asking for a GFDL photo would be out of the question ;-) — Matt Crypto 21:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, the image is a darn sight more useful than the name! He looks exactly (to my mind) like the character Tron from the movie!
The tribute site I see doesn't need his real last name in order to be able to pay its respects ... why do people want to mention it here? -- Wikipediatrist 04:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Uh, because this is an encyclopedia, and not some tribute site using leetspeak names and hacker codes? Was that a trick question, or are you really not following along? DreamGuy 09:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Surely the parents names are now public record?

His parents' names are missing from this article. As parties to an actual lawsuit against Wikipedia, they have [1] made themselves newsworthy public figures; and [2] made their names a part of the public record. Do we have their names yet? - Nunh-huh 00:10, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

At least the name of the father is known from the trademark registration. Freddy 84.155.244.41 09:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Since these are on public record, surely anyone who needs to know them can look them up? What value do you suppose they would add to the article or to Wikipedia? What might be the cost, legal, reputative, or otherwise? Do you know when to stop? Do you know what stop even means? There are *plenty* of interesting factoids that could be added to wikipedia, both to its and to the contributors merit. The names of the bereaved parents who asked that you not publish the name of their son, because it being publicised is doing them physical harm, is not one of them. -- Wikipediatrist 04:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I don´t think the parents names belong into the article. Leave them out of there. We don´t want to make matters even worse then they already are. 81.201.224.13 09:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The names need to be there, as parties to a lawsuit. It's essential information extremely pertinent to the case. What reason would there be to not have them? Fear of legal action people people in another country who can't touch us? Respect for people who have no respect for free speech and threaten ridiculous lawsuits for no reason? Come on, get real. DreamGuy 09:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know about the US, but at least in Sweden it's illegal to handle names of living persons without their permission (dead people is okay though).

new translation (IT)

i've translated (part of) it to Italian. Since the article is locked i cannot add the link. Lo'oris - ロホリス 21:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Its only locked too new and anonymous users. You can edit it. Mike (T C) 22:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
No, it's just plain locked. To everyone but administrators. - Nunh-huh 03:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not an admin and I edited it, as long with others. Its a fuckup on someones part, it was only semi protected despite what the tag on the edit page says. Mike (T C) 23:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the screw up is actually the message that admins get when they try to edit it, which says "WARNING: This page has been locked so that only administrators can edit it. Be sure you are following the protected page guidelines." It would be good if someone changed it to reflect reality. - Nunh-huh 23:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Protection

The current level of protection is not reflected by the current tag (which proclaims the article is semi-protected, rather than protected). One of the two should be changed, and there should be an indication on the article's talk page of who protected it. When it actually is unprotected or semiprotected, someone should translate "Verein" to the English word "Association". - Nunh-huh 00:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I can edit it just fine and I'm not an admin. As explained above, the message you get when editing the thing is misleading. (To misquote a certain Finnish president: "Well, let's try, shall we?" (writing to a certain wall with a gate that reads "abandon all hope all ye who enter") --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 23:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
If it was under full protection there wouldn't be a edit this page tag, instead it would say view source. Mike (T C) 04:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

See Also -

I was going to recommend somebody put a link to Censorship in Germany but apparently nobody's made the article yet. 68.88.76.100 03:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe because the article is trash and should be disposed. It is very POV and also reflects only the situation in the former german democratic republic. The title of the article is misleading at best. -- Pedewikia 18:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Just renamed it. -- Kju (de) 19:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Injunction against Wikimedia Germany temporaily revoked, injunction published.

The injunction against Wikimedia Germany has been revoked until after the court case somewhen the week after next week. Also wikipedia.de has published the complete text of the injunction.

see: www.wikipedia.de

Not the complete text, but a version with the litigant's names redacted. - Nunh-huh 05:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Pedewika

Hi Pedewika, whats Your strong argument for the death of the Croat boy???? To intelligent for the live????? Yeah .LOL. ;O)

Sorry

Sorry it is "Pedewikia".

wrong link

the link to "Deutschland e.V." does not work - shouldn't this only be wikimedia.de? -- -fin 16:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. Kusma (討論) 16:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

patents don't exist in Europe (for IDEA encryption)

There is mention of the patent on the IDEA encryption algorithm. Please note that software patents exist only in the USA and Japan, not in Europe and in Germany.

The article should be modified with the precision that IDEA is not patented in Germany, so it should not be a problem for "Tron".

With respect, please check your facts. IDEA is currently patented in Germany and Europe. Our current article on IDEA asserts that the algorithm is patented in Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, (European patent EP-B-0482154), the United States (US patent #5,214,703) and Japan (JP 3225440). See also [4]. — Matt Crypto 16:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

bad link

Sources, link 8: futurezone: "'Einstweilige' gegen Wikipedia.de", by unnamed author, 19 January 2006 (in German) should link to the ARTICLE, not the forum discussion (with no backlink to the article) correct link: http://futurezone.orf.at/it/stories/83747/

Fixed. --Avatar-en 06:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tron_(hacker)/Archive_1&oldid=1089155644"