Inslaw

Infobox Company
name = INSLAW, Incorported
slogon = Software you can grow with

type = Private
genre =
foundation = Washington, D.C., U.S. (Birth date |1982|03 |00 )
founder = William A. Hamilton
industry = Information Technology
products = CJIS, MODULAW, PROMIS
market c

revenue =
homepage = http://www.inslawinc.com
location_city =
location_country =
location = Washington, D.C.
accessdate = 2008-08-26

Inslaw Inc. is a small Washington-based information technology company.

In mid-1970s, it developed "Prosecutor's Management Information System" (PROMIS) for the United States Department of Justice. The principal owners, William A. Hamilton and his wife Nancy, later alleged that the DOJ modified its contract with their company to obtain an enhanced version of PROMIS, but refused to pay for it once delivered. This allegation of software piracy led to three trials in different federal courts, and to congressional hearings.

Origins

Inslaw, once called the Institute for Law and Social Research, was a nonprofit business created by William A. Hamilton in mid-1970s. Inslaw's original software product PROMIS was a database designed to handle papers and documents generated by law enforcement agencies and courts.citeweb | author=Fricker, Richard L. |url=http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.01/inslaw.html?topic=&topic_set= |publisher= Wired magazine |date=1993 |accessdate=2008-08-28 |title=The INSLAW Octopus |pages=ppg.1-8] It was funded almost entirely by government funds; and therefore versions created prior to January 1978 were in the public domain. On January 1, 1978, amendments to The Copyright Act of 1976 took effect, automatically conferring upon Inslaw as the author of PROMIS five exclusive software copyright rights, none of which could be waived except by explicit, written waiver. The U.S. Government negotiated licenses to use but not to modify or distribute outside the federal government some but not all versions of PROMIS created after the January 1978 effective date of the copyright amendments. In 1981 after Congress liquidated the Justice Department's Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA), which had been the primary source of funds for Inslaw's development of PROMIS, the company became known as Inslaw Inc., a for-profit corporation created to further develop and market PROMIS and other PROMIS-derivative software product(s).

The newly created corporation made significant improvements to the original software. The resulting product came to be known alternately as PROMIS '82 or Enhanced PROMIS.

Enhanced PROMIS contract and allegations of theft

In March 1982, the Department of Justice awarded Inslaw Inc. a $9.6 million, three-year contract to implement an older version of PROMIS, which the government had a license to use, in twenty-two of the largest U.S. Attorneys' Offices.

While PROMIS could have gone a long way toward correcting the Department's longstanding need for a standardized case-management system, the contract between Inslaw and Justice quickly became embroiled for over two decades in bitter controversy.citeweb | author=Committe on the Judiciary | url=http://w2.eff.org/legal/cases/INSLAW/inslaw_hr.report |title=House Report 102-857:THE INSLAW AFFAIR, Investigative Report |date=1992-09-10 |accessdate=2008-08-22] The conflict centered on the question of whether the Justice Department owed INSLAW license fees for the 32-bit architecture VAX 11/780 version of PROMIS which the Justice Department obtained in April 1983 at the start of the second year of the three-year PROMIS implementation contract by modifying the contract and promising to negotiate the payment of license fees if the government substituted the new version of PROMIS for the 16-bit architecture PRIME computer version of PROMIS, which was the subject of the original contract.clarify |reason=This is a terribly confusing addition to a simple concept.

One month after the April 1983 contract modification, the government began to find fault with some of Inslaw's services, and with negotiated billing rates. The government then began to withhold unilaterally each month increasing amounts of payments due Inslaw for implementation services.citeweb | last=Hamilton|first= William A. |url=http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/2945207/ |publisher= Nachrichten von Heute |date=2006-11-17 |accessdate=2008-08-28 |title=FBI's Incapacitating Cover-Up] The Justice Department agent responsible for making payments was a former Inslaw employee, C. Madison Brewer. According to published reports, "Brewer was aided in his new DOJ job by Peter Videnieks.Peter Videnieks was the Contract Officer who oversaw the PROMIS contract for the Department of Justice Management Division.] Videnieks was fresh from the Customs Service where he oversaw contracts between that agency and Hadron Inc., a company controlled by [Ed] Meese#tag:ref|"At the time of its inception, PROMIS was the most powerful program of its type. But a similar program, DALITE, was developed under another LEAA grant by D. Lowell Jensen, the Alameda County (Calif.) District Attorney. In the mid-1970s, the two programs vied for a lucrative Los Angeles County contract and Inslaw won out. (Early in his career, Ed Meese worked under Jensen at the Alameda County District Attorney's office. Jensen was later appointed to Meese's Justice Department during the Reagan presidency.)"—"Wired", Richard Fricker|group=nb and Reagan-crony Earl Brian.#tag:ref|Once a member of California Governor Ronald Reagan's Cabinet, Earl Brian in 1980-90s owned United Press International and Financial News Network. He was later convicted in 1996 on ten of thirteen counts for bank fraud, lying to auditors and conspiring to cover up financial problems at UPI and FNN. He was then sentenced to prison. During the Inslaw Affair, it was alleged that Earl Brian received PROMIS from Peter Videnieks. It was further alleged that Brian then contracted a shadowy character named Michael Riconosciuto to install a "back door" into the database in order to enhance U.S. intelligence operations around the globe. [citeweb|author= |coauthors= |url=http://nl.newsbank.com
title=Ex-UPI chairman's convictions upheld |publisher=Associated Press Archive |date=1999-10-04 |accessdate=2008-09-14 (Search using Advanced Search, news article: title and date.)] [citeweb | url =http://web.textfiles.com/politics/og102196.txt |authorlink=James Orlin Grabbe| title =Earl Brian Convicted in California| last =Grabbe | first =J. Orlin | date =1996-10-21 | accessdate =2008-09-14 | publisher =webtext.files.com |pages=] |group=nb Hadron, a closely held government systems consulting firm, was to figure prominently in the forthcoming scandal."

At the same time that the government withheld payments, the government decided to substitute the 32-bit architecture version of PROMIS for the 16-bit architecture PRIME computer version of PROMIS originally specified in the contract. However, the government failed to negotiate the payment of license fees as promised in the April 1983 contract modification, claiming that INSLAW had failed to prove to the government's satisfaction that it had developed the 32-bit architecture version of PROMIS with private, non-government funds and that the 32-bit architecture version was not otherwise required to be delivered to the government under any of its contracts with INSLAW. The 32-bit architecture version of PROMIS was eventually installed in a total of forty-four dubious|reason=It is clearly stated in most references that the number is ninety-four. Please cite a reference.clarify federal prosecutors' offices following the April 1983 Modification 12 agreement, as found by the federal bankruptcy court in Janauary 1988 and confirmed by the federal district court in November 1989.

By February 1985 the government had withheld payment of almost $1.8 million for Inslaw's implementation services, plus millions of dollars in Old PROMIS license fees. INSLAW filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. [citeweb | url =http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives | title =Computer Firm Hired By Courts Has Money Woes | last =May | first =Patrick | date =1985-02-16 | accessdate = | publisher =Miami Herald |pages=2BR ($fee)]

.

Federal investigations

Two different federal bankruptcy courts made fully litigated findings of fact in the late 1980s ruling that the Justice Department "took, converted, and stole"INSLAW Inc. v. United States, Ch 11. Case No. 85 00070, Adv. No. 86-00069, transcript of oral decision, p.9 (Bankruptcy. District of Columbia. September 28, 1987). ["took, converted and stole"] ] the PROMIS installed in U.S. Attorneys' Offices "through trickery, fraud, and deceit,"INSLAW Inc, v. United States, 83 B.R., 89 (Bankruptcy. District of Columbia. 1988), p.158. ["trickery, fraud and deceit."] ] and then attempted "unlawfully and without justification"INSLAW Inc. v. United States, opinion of U.S. District Court Judge William Bryant, at p. 52A. ["acted willfully and fraudulently"] ] to force Inslaw out of business so that it would be unable to seek restitution through the courts.

Three months after the initial verdict, George F. Bason, Jr., the federal judge presiding over the [http://www.dcb.uscourts.gov Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia] , was denied reappointment to a new 14-year term on the bench by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the appointing authority. Out of 136 federal judges due for reappointment, Mr. Bason became one of four not reappointed.] His replacement, S. Martin Teel, had been the Justice Department Tax Division attorney who had unsuccessfully argued before Judge Bason for the forced liquidation of INSLAW, shortly after Judge Bason had announced his oral findings about the Justice Department's malfeasance against INSLAW.citeweb | url =http://washingtontimes.com | title =Inslaw's lawyer slams Justice investigation | last = | first = | date =1993-06-21 | accessdate =2008-09-11 | publisher =The Washington Times |pages= ] [citeweb | url =http://cache.zoominfo.com/CachedPage/?archive_id=0&page_id=50855240&page_url=%2f%2fwww.washington-weekly.com%2fBua.rebuttal&page_last_updated=7%2f24%2f2001+4%3a09%3a58+PM&firstName=Earl&lastName=Brian | title =The Bua Rebuttal | last =Richardson | first =Elliot | date =2001-07-24 | access date =2008-09-11 | publisher ="Washington-weekly.com" (a "ZoomInfo" cached page) |pages=]

Leigh Ratiner (of Dickstein, Shapiro and Morin, which was the 10th largest firm in Washington at the time) was the lead counsel for INSLAW, Inc. who filed the suit against the Justice Department in federal bankruptcy court.. He was fired in October 1986, reportedly after the Mossad arranged a payment of $600,000 to his former firm, which was used as a separation settlement.#tag:ref|"The INSLAW Octopus", Wired magazine. 1993. See subsection "Who Fired Inslaw's Lawyer?" p. 8 [] |group=nb In September 1991, the House Judiciary Committee issued the result of a three-year investigation. "House Report 102-857: INSLAW: Investigative Report" confirmed the Justice Department's theft of PROMIS. The report was issued after the Justice Department convinced the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on a jurisdictional technicality to set aside the decisions of the first two federal bankruptcy courts.The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals chose not to address the merits of the lower courts rulings.] [citeweb | url =http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/8476758.html?dids=8476758&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS&fmac=&date=May+8%2C+1991&author=Potts%2C+Mark&desc=Justice+Department+Wins+Appeal+in+Inslaw+Case | title =Justice Department Wins Appeal in Inslaw Case | last =Potts | first =Mark | date =1991-05-08 | accessdate =2008-09-05 | publisher =The Washington Post |pages=C8 ($fee)] The House Committee also reported investigative leads indicating that friends of the Reagan White House had been allowed to sell and to distribute Enhanced PROMIS both domestically and overseas for their personal financial gain and in support of the intelligence and foreign policy objectives of the United States.citeweb | url =http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1DD163DF932A15753C1A967958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all | title =A High-Tech Watergate | last =Richardson | first =Elliot L. | date =1991-10-21 | accessdate =2008-09-05 | publisher =New York Times ] [citeweb | url =http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/conspiracies/inslaw.htm Inslaw/PROMIS | title =Real History Archives Inslaw/PROMIS collection | last =Pease | first =Linda | date = | accessdate =2008-09-10 | publisher = |pages= ] The Democractic Majority called upon the Attorney General to compensate INSLAW immediately for the harm that the Government had "egregiously" inflicted on INSLAW. The Republican Minority dissented. The Committee was divided along party lines 21—13. The Government ignored the recommendations.

Inslaw Affair divides into two separate issues

On November 13, 1991, Attorney General William Barr appointed a retired federal judge Nicholas J. Bua as Special Counsel to advise him on the allegations that high-ranking officials had acted improperly for personal gain to bankrupt INSLAW. [citeweb | url =http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE6DF163CF934A35751C1A967958260 | title =Justice in the Inslaw Case | last =Opinion | first = | date =1991-12-07 | accessdate =2008-09-11 | publisher =New York Times |pages= ] By June 1993 the Bua Report was released, clearing Justice officials of any impropriety.cite book |title=Return of the Buffalo: The Story Behind America's Indian Gaming Explosion |last=Lane |first=Ambrose I. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1995 |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |location= |isbn=0897894332 |pages=174] Inslaw's attorney, Elliot Richardson wrote INSLAW's rebuttal with evidence suggesting Bua's report was riddled with errors and falsehoods. In May 1995, the United States Senate asked the U.S. Court of Federal ClaimsThe U.S. Court of Federal Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over copyright infringement claims against the U. S. Government.] to determine if the United States owed Inslaw Inc. compensation for the Government's use of PROMIS. On July 31, 1997, Judge Christine Miller, the Hearing Officer for the U.S. Court f Federal Claims ruled that all of the versions of PROMIS were in the public domain and that the government had, therefore, always been free to do whatever it wished with PROMIS. [citeweb | url =http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1997/August97/323civ.htm | title =Justice Department Successful Against Inslaw Claims in Federal Claims Court| last =Office of Public Affairs| first =press release #323 | date =1997-08-04| accessdate =2008-09-11 | publisher =U.S. Department of Justice |pages= ] [citeweb | url =http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/1997/09/22/focus3.html | title =Judge says Justice Dept. didn't steal from Inslaw | last =Katz-Stone | first =Adam | date =1997-09-17 | accessdate =2008-09-11 | publisher =Washington Business Journal|pages= ] [citeweb | url =http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/INSLAW.pdf | title =INSLAW v. THE UNITED STATES, No. 95-338X, 48 C.F.R. § 3.101-1 | last =three-judge Review Panel | first = | date = 1998-05-11 | accessdate =2008-09-13 | publisher =Court of Federal Claims |pages=] The appellate authority, a three-judge Review Panel of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, ruled the following year, however, that the Hearing Officer had erred in ruling that PROMIS was in the public domain. The Review Board found that INSLAW, as the author of PROMIS, was automatically vested with the exclusive copyright rights to PROMIS, and, furthermore, that INSLAW had never granted the government a license to modify PROMIS to create derivative software. The Review Panel also ruled that the United States would be liable to INSLAW for copyright infringement damages if the government had created any unauthorized derivatives from PROMIS, but noted that INSLAW had failed to prove in court that the government had done so. The Review Panel refused INSLAW's request to re-open discovery in accordance with the correct legal standard of copyright infringement, terming the Hearing Officer legal error as "harmless." The Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims sent an Advisory Report to the Senate in August 1998 on INSLAW, noting that the court had not found that the United States owes INSLAW compensation for the government's use of PROMIS, and enclosing the decision of the Hearing Officer and the decision of the Review Panel.

On the other hand, according to William A. Hamilton, the Government flatly denied during all court proceedings what it later admitted, "i.e." that agencies such as the FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies used PROMIS to keep track of their classified information.

Later developments

In early 1999 the British journalist and author, Gordon Thomas, published an authorized history of the Israeli Mossad entitled "Gideon's Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad". The book quotes detailed admissions by the former long-time deputy director of the Mossad about the partnership between Israeli and U.S. intelligence in selling to foreign intelligence agencies in excess of $500 million worth of licenses to a Trojan horse version of PROMIS, in order to spy on them. [cite book |title=Gideon's Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad |last=Thomas |first=Gordon |authorlink=Gordon Thomas |coauthors= |year=1999 |publisher=St. Martin's Press |location=New York |isbn=0-312-25284-6 |pages= ]

In 2001 the "Washington Times" and "Fox News" each quoted federal law enforcement officials familiar with debriefing former FBI Agent Robert Hanssen as claiming that the convicted spy had stolen copies of a PROMIS-"derivative" for his Soviet KGB handlers. used the software to penetrate database systems to move funds throughout the banking system, and to evade detection by U.S. law enforcement. [citeweb | url =http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200110/msg00237.html | title =Excerpt of Fox News Special Report with Brit Hume of October 16, 2001
last =Cameron | first =Carl | date =2001-10-16 | accessdate =2008-09-08 | publisher =Fox News |pages= ]

In May 2006 a former aide in the Office of the Vice President of the United States pleaded guilty to passing top-secret classified information to plotters trying to overthrow the president of the Philippines. Leandro Aragoncillo, an FBI intelligence analyst at the time of his arrest, was believed to have operated his deception using archaic database software manipulated by the FBI in order to evade the 1995 U.S. Court of Federal Claims finding with regard to Inslaw's rights to "derivative works". [citeweb | url =http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/05/washington/05spy.html | title =Former Marine Admits Passing Secret Documents | last =Smothers | first =Ronald | date =2006-05-05 | accessdate =2008-09-09 | publisher =New York Times |pages= ] citeweb | last=Dastych |first= David |url=http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/dastych013106.htm |publisher= Canada Free Press (CFP) |date=2006-01-31 |accessdate=2008-08-28 |title=Promisgate: World's longest spy scandal still glossed over ] Additionally,

In 2006 there were further allegations of the misuse of PROMIS. Writing in the "Canada Free Press", the former Polish CIA operative and now international journalist, David Dastych alleged that "Chinese Military Intelligence (PLA-2) organized their own hackers department, which [exploited] PROMIS [database systems] [in the] Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories to steal U.S. nuclear secrets"; however, the "prima facie" value of that allegation was lost in a realization that the U.S. Government could not convict the suspected 2001 spy. [citeweb | url =http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EEDE113EF936A35751C0A9679C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/E/Energy%20Department | title =Prosecution Unravels: The Case of Wo Ho Lee | last =Purdy | first =Matthew | date =2001-02-05 | accessdate =2008-09-12 | publisher =New York Times |pages=ppg. 1-9 ]

The U.S. Government has never paid Inslaw Inc. for any of these unauthorized uses of PROMIS.

"Inslaw deserves to be compensated," wrote nationally syndicated columnist, Michelle Malkin, in "The Washington Times". [ [http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=WT&p_theme=wt&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_text_search-0=PROMIS&s_dispstring=PROMIS%20AND%20date(01/01/1990%20to%2001/01/2006)&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=01/01/1990%20to%2001/01/2006)&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no Washington Times Web Archive (Registration Required)] ] "More importantly, the American people deserve to know the truth: Did government greed and bureaucratic hubris lead to a wholesale sellout of our national security?"

Deaths allegedly related to the Inslaw case

While investigating elements of this story, journalist Danny Casolaro died in what was twice ruled a suicide. Prior to his death, Casolaro had warned friends if they were ever told he had committed suicide not to believe it, and to know he had been murdered. [citeweb |author=Lewis, Neil A. |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9D0CE2D8153AF934A2575BC0A967958260&scp=1&sq=%22Dr.%20Anthony%20Casolaro%22&st=cse |pages=1-2 |title=Reporter Is Buried Amid Questions Over His Pursuit of Conspiracy Idea |publisher= New York Times |date=1991-08-17 |accessdate=2008-08-27] Many have argued that his death was curious, deserving closer scrutiny; some have argued further, believing his death was a murder, committed to hide whatever Casolaro had uncovered. "I believe he was murdered," wrote former Attorney General Elliot Richardson in the "New York Times", " but even if that is no more than a possibility, it is a possibility with such sinister implications as to demand a serious effort to discover the truth." Kenn Thomas and Jim Keith discuss this in their book, "The Octopus: Secret Government and the Death of Danny Casolaro""The Octopus" was the name that Casolaro had intended to title his book.] Writing on behalf of a majority opinion in "House Report 102-857", Committee Chairman, Jack Brooks (D-TX) wrote, "As long as the possibility exists that Danny Casolaro died as a result of his investigation into the INSLAW matter, it is imperative that further investigation be conducted."

References

Notes

Footnotes

Further reading

* "The Octopus: Secret Government and the Death of Danny Casolaro" by Kenn Thomas and Jim Keith (Feral House, US, 2005, paperback ISBN 0-922915-91-1)
* "The Attorney General's refusal to provide congressional access to "privileged" INSLAW documents" : hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic and Commercial Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred First Congress, second session, December 5, 1990. Washington : U.S. G.P.O. : For sale by the Supt. of Docs., Congressional Sales Office, U.S. G.P.O, 1990. Superintendent of Documents Number Y 4.J 89/1:101/114
* PROMIS : briefing series. Washington, D.C. : Institute for Law and Social Research, 1974-1977. " [A] series of 21 Briefing Papers for PROMIS (Prosecutor's Management Information System), this publication was prepared by the Institute for Law and Social Research (INSLAW), Washington, D.C., under a grant from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA), which has designated PROMIS as an Exemplary Project." OCLC Number 5882076

External links

* [http://www.namebase.org/main2/Inslaw-Inc.html Inslaw Inc] at NameBase
* [http://www.pinknoiz.com/covert/inslaw.html The Inslaw Affair]
* [http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/bugs.html "The PROMIS software, used by police, is bugged"]