Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Smacked by DoS
nekid writes "ZDNet is reporting that the RIAA's website was hit by a denial-of-service (DoS) attack over the weekend, most likely in response to their endorsement of legislation that would give them permission to do the same to personal computers that are pirating music (see earlier article). Seems to me that they are killing themselves with bad public relations..." But it seems to me that they don't care, and are instead
banking on the ignorance of the bulk of the world.
Too funny. Someone's been reading user friendly and decided to fight back perhaps?
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.
Give the media and the average American more reason to think the people the RIAA are against are little more than immature "hackers."
"All mankind is at the mercy of a handful of neurotics". - Norman Douglas
Yup, the best way to convince a large corporation/government office/anyone over the age of 20, is to act like a child.
Immaturity like this only HARMS what we are trying to do.
Grow up kids.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
If the RIAA is allowed to do a DoS attack, I don't see why individuals should be forbidden to do so.
In short: No one should be able to legally commit such a crime.
RIAA has bad karma. What goes around, comes around.
They deserve it.
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
Whats next? Somebody going to steal Fritz Hollings credit card numbers?
PS: Note to FBI - It wasn't me!
That'll teach those bastards. I'm going to start copy protecting my CD's, too. Two can play at this game.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
The DoS'ers were obviously trying to prevent the RIAA from distributing material copyrighted by the DoS'ers. Namely DoS software.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Userfriendly link for those who didn't see it :)
A tragic irony isn't it?
I wonder if we can start a campaign to keep the RIAA DoSed off the net. Not that I'd ever condone such a thing, but there are times when a little net abuse is so poetic.
Not intended to be a flame, but how many folks actually access their site? Quite a few people condemn their actions, but when was the last time you clicked your way to www.riaa.com ?
Thank you for posting that helpful link to the RIAA website. This is a pressing issue, and as such, I urge everyone to go immediately to this website and show your support. Now, more than ever, the RIAA needs our love. So everyone, stop hammering the SSH site and give the RIAA the affection they so sorely need.
do not read this line twice.
...only give the other side more ammunition.
Apparently the RIAA hasn't heard of this cool technology called "multitasking".
The only thing that will stop you from fulfilling your dreams is you. - Tom Bradley
Then they will claim the law is outragious.
They just got a small taste.
Fight Spammers!
Obviously the RIAA rep is not very tech savy. Of course, since their site was DoS'd, I would have to say that about the whole organization.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Exactly, they believe most people are stupid. They are, in essence, flipping the bird at every single citizen of every country they operate in.
Glad they care about their customers!
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
wow, didn't they get enough publicity when this story was announced last week...i'm not saying they should have ignored this DOS attack, but it seems to me the RIAA rep had a little too much attitude with quotes like "Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" and especially "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from stealing music."...talk about antogonizing the masses...couldn't they comment on this story without being blatantly condescending and arrogant???
on the good side, maybe the link to the RIAA website with this story will slashdot their site and bring it down again....
"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
The article cites no source for the information, besides the RIAA itself. Can we be sure that it actually happened, and wasn't just a way for the RIAA to make themselves look like the victim in this whole situation?
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" asked the RIAA representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from stealing music."
That's certainly a nice way to deflect the issue. It's like a mantra with these guys!
" On Thursday, the RIAA endorsed a bill written by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., that would authorize copyright holders to begin "blocking, diverting or otherwise impairing" peer-to-peer networks.
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen said in a statement that Berman's bill was "an innovative approach," adding that "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
Call me a skeptic, but that reads a whole lot more like a "Hey, those guys are bad, so side with us" thing than anything else. While I trust in the immaturity of script kiddies, I'm not convinced that this attack even happened. If it did, though...well...come on guys, this isn't helping us any.
Please please please tell me this is faked
-dk
If the RIAA downloads illegal MP3s, even to check to see if they're legit illegal copies, this in turn opens THEM of for legit DoS attacks. The person in question that is doing the "checking" for the RIAA better own the right to every single MP3 he downloads. They're going to need to have the artists themselves sit at the cpus and do the DoS's for this to even be legal, it can't be based around "trust". Quite an evil little repurcussion .. If this goes live, it will effectively DESTROY the RIAA.
Here's the right way to do this:
1) Wait until this insane law passes
2) Set up a webpage with a lot of "warez" & "mp3z" stuff on it. (Don't forget to include the popups!)
3) As content, however, include only songs for which you own the copyrights. Name the files to look like popular songs for which you do not own the copyright.
4) Log everyone who downloads those files and wait until someone from riaa.com downloads one.
5) Follow all the procedures laid out in the law for launching a DoS attack and do so.
6) Issue a press release. Get as much publicity as you can. "I hacked the RIAA website and it was COMPLETELY LEGAL!" etc...
Gee, the RIAA website is SOOOO important. Ever been to it? Taking down their website does not hurt them, because it's only provided as a marketing angle, it will in NO way hurt their business (like DoS'ing Amazon for example).
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
"Doesn't the RIAA have anything better to do than hacking into my website?" asked a pimply 15-year old who asked to be called "H@ckeR d00d." "perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from fucking over artists."
Engineers arn't boring people, we just get excited about boring things.
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack the P2P servers?" asked the hacker representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from their stealing money."
Geez, It's like listening to a bunch of children, eh?
~ kjrose
And in the other news: the US is setting up road blocks on all remaining functional roads in Afghanistan. All 5 road blocks have being successful at not letting any Usama Bin Laden followers in or out of the country. It is not clear though whether the road blocks were successful or whether terrorists have being unlawfully and actively avoiding the road blocks by taking alternative mountine and underground paths.
You can't handle the truth.
#!/usr/bin/perl
while (1){
`wget "http://www.riaa.com" -nc -r -l 0 -k -nH -o
}
# one of many many ways to do this...
Arguing that bad PR will make the RIAA think twice about doing something is like arguing that a fish won't want to get wet.
Things like the DCMS, RIAA, MPAA, all piss of the cracker community and the hacker community. (Hmm notice they are all 4 letter words .. guess they must be bad words ).
To me the DCMA says if you buy this then you don't really own it. I own my redhat cdrom. I can make copies of it and modify it. I can't legally do that in the US according to the above mentioned 4 letter words. That's why I use open source case MS and all the other MS vendors do that crap too.
Only 'flamers' flame!
Is when Mrs. Rosen said: "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
Oh, right, this isn't a new law granting vigilante powers to big media, it's a clarification of existing law! The laws already on the books meant to put enforcement of the law into the hands of the RIAA, it just wasn't worded clearly.
That's damn hilarious, but also sad, because she gets to have her insane comment quoted in a serious context. If the next line of the article was "A passing rational human was quoted as saying: 'Clarification of existing law? What the hell is she smoking?'" then we might have some balance. Oh well.
The enemies of Democracy are
1) This software is open source and can be used by any party, except: RIAA, members, and affiliates; MPAA, members, and affiliates; Fritz Hollings, members, and affiliates;....
Ad luna, Alicia! Ad luna!
What about all of the programmers who actually take the time and effort to establish worldwide networks where people can directly share information? Who is the RIAA to decide which person's effort is worth more?
We will have a difficult time escaping this problem. If it is a problem, that is.
Lasers Controlled Games!
Whether the RIAA site was truly DDoS'ed or not was not the point. The point is: it is now. THIS WAS THE EVIL PLAN!
They "hire" companies that run search spider programs that automate dns queries and instant cease and desist letters. Lets slashdot all the sites of all the companies that act as bounty hunters on the behalf of the RIAA. If not, then at least get their netblocks known and firewall them off to null. That way they cant find us or do anything
Of course this starts to bring up the classic question
"When is a group allowed to do something, when a member of the same group is NOT allowed to do the same thing? Answer this question, and you'll know what form of Government you want."
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
I have the feeling that the RIAA could have done this to themselves so that they could drum up support for their bill and what ever they try to pass. What better way to gain simpathy and support then to DOS or give the impression that you where DOSed? While I think the RIAA was immature with their comments and actions, a DOS gives off the impression that P2P users are really immature.
Not that I'd condone it, but the ultimate hack (or crack) would be rooting the RIAA servers and using them to host a very large MP3 collection, complete with a gnutella client to share them with the world.
________________________________________________
suwain_2
Shouldn't this have been filed under the "what might go around comes around" department? :-)
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" asked the RIAA representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took minutes away from stealing music."
/.ed.
The question is, doesn't the RIAA have anything better to do than disrupting our P2P networks?
This obviously proves the RIAA is a bunch of hypocritical idiots. They want to be able to DoS someone else, but they don't want anyone else to DoS them. Gee, go figure. Sorta like the kid who wants to hit other kids but doesn't want them to hit him back.
I think that CmdTaco should put a script in slashdot that directs all willing users to the RIAA & MPAA's web-pages (though doesn't display the web pages) when they visit slashdot. This way, every evening when millions of tech-savy people check out slashdot, the RIAA/MPAA will get
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=off&mo de_w=on&site=www.riaa.com&submit=Examine
The site www.riaa.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4/Windows 98. FAQ
NT4/Windows 98 users include ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd, Gillette, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd and Ernst & Young International
Microsoft-IIS is also being used by www.dellhost.com, www.datapipe.com, Ferrari and Intel Corporation
Do you want to look for an SSL site at www.riaa.com ?
Uptime Charts and Statistics for www.riaa.com
No uptime is currently available for www.riaa.com.
Netblock Owner
UUNET Technologies, Inc
They're using UUNET and Microsoft products ... hehehe I think a DoS should be the least of their worries ... I would almost go so far as to say it wasn't a DoS attack, but more a BSOD attack ... heh heh heh
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
I don't know ... I was joking ....
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Get a bunch of people to buy a CD (like the Spiderman Soundtrack that has PC features, but won't play on a PC... heh) and then return it the next day. With the # of Slashdot people around, it shouldn't be hard for the RIAA to take notice.
Here's the thing: If we're willing to spend the money to buy the CD in the fisrt place, it's kinda hard to accusse people of 'stealing' music on the web. It lends more credence to the desire to keep our rights in tact.
That really hinges on how you happen to define violent. I am apt to agree with you that this is rather non-violent, but some people like to think that the use of vulgarity constitutes violence. They have decided to see it as an assualt "on thier emotions" or some such nonsense. I personally think this is ridiculous, and hope that I have the opportunity to actually ridicule someone for this, but then, I tend to be somewhat of a bastard, especially when I disagree with someones ludicrously out of balance point of view...
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" asked the RIAA representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from stealing music."
I guess he didn't want to be identified because he makes such gross generializations about everybody... not everybody steals music (I don't). Generalizations like that are as bad as stuff like "If you see a black person in a nice car it's stolen" or the whole "guilty until proven innocent" kind of thing.
And what's to say that the person (or persons) who did the DoS did not have anything better to do?
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen said in a statement that Berman's bill was "an innovative approach," adding that "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
what? so who actually owns the copyright? I thought those artists had to sell their souls to work for these companies... and now they own the copyrights? er... unless the riaa actually creates the artistic works... in that case we now know why these new songs and singers are so similar in style and such
November, 2002 WASHINGTON, D.C. (AP) -- In a massive Denial-of-Re-election (DOR) attack, Mr. Bermen, Mr. Hollings, and all the other RIAA-linked Congressmen have been apparently booted offline by a massive surge of votes for the opponents.
The attack has been described as a write-in vote for an unidentified third party candidate known only as "CowboyNeal". No information upon the identity of this third party candidate are yet known.
-- We live in a world where lemonade is artificial and soap has real lemon.
Job Application for the post of Director of 133t Hacking, RIAA
Relevant Experience: DoS-ing RIAA servers on 30/07/02 d00dz!
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
And that's even if it makes it past CNET or ZDNET and into the mainstream press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, L.A. Times, etc. more of the people who vote still read newspapers and watch news programs for their news, so they'll read a pro-RIAA spin and agree with them.
Yikes! I'm not sure how to change the views of the general public, but I know that I already wrote my congressmen to let them know how I feel from a professional and personal level. Will that change my congressmen's point-of-view? Maybe not, but at least they know how one of their constituents feel, just like how the democratic process is suppose to work.
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Where will I find information on new artists?
Where will I download popular music?
Where will I look up lyrics to that song that's stuck in my head?
Whoever did this may have made a point, but they've hurt us all in doing so, as both listeners and artists no longer have access to the vast array of valuable services provided by that fine organization.
This kind of thing, short of FLYING over to their HQ and having a sit in, is the only means you have of expressing yourself.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
But the RIAA might be in for some trouble if the bill is passed.
Think about it: The RIAA has (and still does) sell works created by independant copyright owners. They don't keep perfect track of their signings with artists and are, sometimes, selling records which they don't hold the copyright to. Artists have come forth in the courts and said this.
Given that this is the case, an artist can give a group (in this case the public at large) permission to attack any server network participating in the distribution of their copyrighted works. This is not limited to riaa.org. If CDNow.com is selling the CD that the RIAA is distributing illegally they're open to attack too. I mean, just look at how loose the wording is:
"...use of technologies to prevent infringement of copyrighted works on peer-to-peer computer networks"
Translation: any copyright owner can technologically attack anyone infringing upon their copyrights as long as the target of their attack can be described as a "peer-to-peer computer network."
Besides that, the RIAA is acting no less childish than the people that DoS'ed them. Their current actions in regards to this legislation are equivelant to signing onto a Cult of the Dead Cows message board and proclaiming a hacker war. It doesn't matter if it's legal or not you can't expect them to just sit there and take whatever you throw at them.
It's childish to declare a hacker war.
It's foolish to declare a war on all hackers.
It's pure ignorance to believe you can win.
I like that the bill requires them to NOTIFY the Attorney General before they do anything... I don't like that they don't have to wait for approval.
So I started to think... "How would I feel if I was faced with 1000's of people scattered covertly across the country violating my rights?" Then I realized that I do... SPAMers. Sure, if I had the time, money, and expertise, I could take them each to court. But the reality is that even if I get SPAM, the best I can do is report the SPAMer to their ISP and hope they're not SPAM-friendly and will shut the account/network connection down.
So either they should allow us to DoS or hack SPAMers' computers, or they should require the RIAA or whomever to get ISPs to shut down illegal file sharing internet connections.. just like the rest of us.
after clicking on riaa link...
HTTP Error 403
403.9 Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
This error can be caused if the Web server is busy and cannot process your request due to heavy traffic. Please try to connect again later.
Please contact the Web server's administrator if the problem persists.
[alk]
Besides, I think it's good to give one decent dDOS as a 'shot across the bow' so the RIAA knows what it's playing with. Should the legislature be approved, I somehow don't think the RIAA site will stay online very long anymore; there's relatively few people who control so many computers that they can dDOS at their leisure, but there's enough. Had the dDOS's started after the bill was approved then it would have been next to useless. Now it's still next to useless, but it sparks up a lot more discussion.
Jynx
The RIAA is still a group of fools, though; the boomerang is swinging back to hit them in the face much in the same way US citizens are being screwed for doctor support because everyone's sueing them. US legislature just goes too far in that respect.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it well worth the effort.
So, since obviously, we all want to know when it will be back up, I strongly recomend everyone just run a generic ping process in the background and wait for a reply! Then we can flock back to the RIAA's website and feel at ease again.
:)
After all, we don't want to DDoS them, we just want to check to see if the site is running again. A simple process executed by the slashdot masses out of concern for the RIAA....
Timed at 17:58:00 GMT
:-)
HTTP Error 403
403.9 Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
This error can be caused if the Web server is busy and cannot process your request due to heavy traffic. Please try to connect again later.
Please contact the Web server's administrator if the problem persists.
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
I have to admit that while I agree with you 100% that we should use more mature responses, however you've given me my smile for the day with the "mob rule" line.
::smile::
I could easily picture it being very effective to see a mob of people crowding the streets outside RIAA headquarters with Torches and Pitchforks (with similar outcome to a certain castle located in the old country).
Not advocating people go inflict bodily harm on anyone else over this nonsense, or burn down property... just saying its worthy of a Far Side cartoon with Hillary Rosen playing the part of Dr. Frankenstein, and perhaps the mob would be carrying an effigy made out of CDs with a wig on it
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
The RIAA doesn't need to care about bad press and PR. Your average consumer will acknowledge how evil that organization is, but still purchase happily from its members. They aren't called "RIAA" and there is no connection obvious to the consumer. -lj
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
From the article:
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen said in a statement that Berman's bill was "an innovative approach," adding that "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
Since when does the RIAA create *anything*??
I think what Hilary meant was "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that the RIAA can continue to steal money from the copyright owners..."
In all of this law making, the RIAA has not realized a few basic facts. Most of these are relative to me, but I'm sure I'm not alone:
1. When Napster was big, I purchased 75-100 CDs in two years and enjoyed about 80% of them. Since then, I have purchased about 10 CDs and enjoyed about 20% of them. I would rather gamble $15 on a blackjack table then buy a $15 CD when I have only heard one song I like on it.
2. I don't own a plain-old CD player. I have a MP3-CD player, a laptop, and a desktop. If I can't listen to or convert the CD I won't buy it.
3. I'm not a fan of the MPAA either, but which would you rather purchase: A soundtrack CD of a given movie for $17.99 or the DVD of the same movie for $14.99? To me, a music CD is worth about $8, and at least 25% of that should go to the people who actually created those sounds(artists, songwriters).
4. I don't believe the DoS on the RIAA last weekend was necessary, but it will be a preview of what will happen if that new law passes. (Just a prediction)
5. What ever happened to "The customer is always right"? All of this copy-protection, "everyone is stealing our music", "we need tougher laws" stuff can't possibly be in the consumer's best interest. Sounds to me that they are trying to maintain a monopoly. (Hmmm... now where have I seen this before?)
Anyway, I dig into my current music collection, books, magazines, and a few select internet sites for my media these days. I've just about had enough. Everything in this post is my opinion based on some facts and is probably in need of some correction. Have a nice day.
When I first saw this news over on C|Net, the first thing that came into my mind was that the RIAA had DoS'ed their own website to make the "hackers" look even more malicious as the "RIAA Protection Bill" wends its way through congress. Nothing like being the victim of a crime to garner more post-9/11 sympathy from our gun-shy, privacy-trampling, constitution-overthrowing government.
And I will believe that's exactly what happened until someone gets arrested for it. And even then I will have my doubts. These people, the RIAA, are a black hearted lot.
No uptime is currently available for www.riaa.com.
Sounds like netcraft is right on, afaict.
It's refusing connections now...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
That's funny...
You guys must have put up the wrong address for the RIAA website.
I tried to go there to get their side of the story, but www.riaa.com doesn't work for me.
Can somebody please find the right URL for them so that we can all go and get their side of the story so othat we can make reasoned and informed opinions on this issue.
(giggle giggle)
Oh wait, that is the right URL?
Nevermind
LongTail SSH Brute Force analysis tool is here!
From riaa.com's "What is Piracy" pages:
"4. Online piracy is the unauthorized uploading of a copyrighted sound recording and making it available to the public, or downloading a sound recording from an Internet site, even if the recording isn't resold. Online piracy may now also include certain uses of "streaming" technologies from the Internet."
Sorry, did I miss a memo? When was streaming declared illegal? Shouldn't someone notify Apple and Real that thier streaming server software is facilitating illegal activities?
Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
Since it's not, we might as well throw the petulant Anonymous Coward RIAA rep a pity party, 'cause they've certainly got their streamers up! Ok, 1, 2, 3... I still can't quite believe that article isn't satire.
I'm not a geek, I'm just a clever script.
.... yeah call it immature, call it childish, call it hacker, call it what you want.......but man I would've loved to do it myself...we're all just too legal to get into trouble annoying someone even if they deserve it.
Give the lil script kiddies a break, they were just venting all of our frustration for us.
"Wasn't me! Don't sue me!" (but I'm enjoying watching)
Sigs pose an operational security risk and help the baddies aggregate data. I guess commenting does too, oops.
If the RIAA is allowed to do a DoS attack, I don't see why individuals should be forbidden to do so
Because it's illegal, that's why.
Bullshit.
If a crime of aggression (ie. attack or subversion, physical or informational) is 'legalized' for a special group, but illegalized for another group, there is nothing ethically wrong with the attacked group fighting back using the same means, regardless of what the law might say.
To take an extreme, but historically accurate, example of the same sort of thing, if it is illegal for a black man to shoot a white man, yet legal for a white man to shoot a black man, there is nothing ethically wrong with the affected black man in question defending himself and his family from his attackers, and most certainly not if he is using the same means they are using (projectile weapons in this case), regardless of what some corrupt and morally bankrupt laws might say.
The only real difference in these two cases (cyberattacks allowed by one group against another, but not visa versa, and physical attacks allowed by one group against another, but not visa versa) is the magnitude of atrocity (vastly greater in the second instance), and the fact that, at one time in the United States, the second instance was in fact actually the law at one time, while the first example (cyber DoS attacks) have not (yet) ever been legalized for one group over another.
However, should DoS attacks by media cartels be legalized, there will be absolutely nothing ethically wrong with those attacked retaliating in kind. Indeed, the ethical breakdown appears to be almost entirely on the side of the copyright cartels, who have just been given a taste of things to come if these foolish laws should be passed.
I will not participate in such activities, but I will excercize my dwindling freedom of speech to openly cheer those who do.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
That's an interesting concept - if we plan a day in advance to something of the effect of "at 5:00EDT, everyone go to the RIAA site" - that would create a very effective, yet very legal, DoS.
:-)
OK, everyone, tomorrow, July 31, 5:00EDT, attack.
We don't need legislation.
Maybe the RIAA's webmaster had an outstanding parking ticket, and in the United States, we punish illegal activity (or the suspician thereof) by DoS'ing servers.
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
Is there any evidence that this really happened, other than claims from the RIAA? Or any info about it? Or that it wasn't just some WorldCom outage? (The RIAA is a WorldCom customer.)
OK, I don't believe it either. (For one thing, it is too subtle and clue-ful, not to mention tech-savvy.) But the thought was there...
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
add this:
/ www.atomintersoft.com/products/alive-proxy/ proxy-list/ :)
--user-agent="MSIE/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)" --execute="http_proxy=xxxx:zzzz"
where xxxx:yyyy is the IP:port of a HIGH ANONYMITY web proxy, which you can get from one of several online lists, such as:
http://www.stayinvisible.com/page1.html
http:/
etc.
The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face.
What is your stand on MP3?
This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That's not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail.
So why do they go out of their way to make sure I can't rip my CD^H^H "blank shiny CD-lookalike disc" to mp3 or other format?
Wankers.
Play Hattrick
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
(they'll go against congress with a "see? This is what we are trying to stop!" attitude, and congress will agree).
No. . . this is what the RIAA was attempting to legalize, albeit only for their own benefit. If they can't take what they want to dish out, maybe they should reconsider their attempt at legislation.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
A valid point, but ...
:)
Kinda makes you wonder how we can go around yammering about how every person on the planet should have the wonderful democracy that we do when the groups seeking the most power and influence on our population don't have an ounce of public accountability (other than 'the market', but that argument isn't going to fly with this poster, so stop reaching for the reply button you pro-freemarket economist wannabes), nevermind don't give a flying fuck about PR!
Just another example of how companies truely are the new government. Where's the accountability when it comes to groups who are not mentally connected to the product being purchased in most consumers minds at the point of sale?
"Old man yells at systemd"
If our Corporate Government keeps up this pace, it'll be time for our own boston tea party, Internet-style.
Do you complain that thugs don't get the same firepower, communications, and transportation support that police do?
If the police were allowed to break into my house, guns blazing, and mow myself and my family down (they are not allowed to do this) with no due process of law (analogous to the vigilatism inherent in the DoS law the copymonopoly cartels have proposed), then, yes, there would be nothing unethical about me defending myself and my family in kind, by doing unto the cops what they would do unto me, and doing it first. Regardless of what the law might say.
Now do you begin to grasp why vigilanti justice is such a profoundly bad idea?
As for file traders, since when is trading files illegal? I trade files of my vacation pictures with friends and relatives all the time. I even use P2P services to trade ISOs of GNU/Linux with friends all the time (P2P in the form of FreeNet reduces my own bandwidth requirements drastically over a client-server setup like ftp or http).
Your 'solution' is tantamount to saying "if you don't like it, get off the internet or become a passive user of our Approved(tm) Content."
The comparison with similarly unbalanced, historical laws holds. An unjust law such as the one proposed demands to be violated, and violating such a law is in no way unethical. Indeed, doing so as an act of defense against an attack by another, DoS or otherwise, is really quite unimpeachable in any reasonable ethical framework.
Your entire "cop" example underscores exactly why vigilante justice is such a bad idea, and the DoS attack against the RIAA, by whoever these people were, underscored very well exactly why this law is such an appallingly bad idea. It will, in all liklihood, destroy the internet's usability for some time, perhaps a very long time. Interestingly enough, those that are promoting such legislation have everything to gain, and nothing to do, by destroying the internet, and it is really a stretch to believe they are really so stupid as to not realize that.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
*
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Seems to me that they are killing themselves with bad public relations...
Seems to me that the public doesn't know. I'm probably the only person I know that is even aware of what's going on. Go ask some random people, not people who read slashdot.
Ask them first what p2p is, what the implications of this bill are, and if they really care if their privacy is violated.
That sleazy bitch Rosen said...
..."
"...copyright owners -- those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work --
Guess what Hilary? The artists don't hold copyright on their own music. The artists don't have control over their creative output, either past present or future. YOU do!
Oh, you knew that? Then why are you LYING about it?
As a non-violent person, I'd like to see Hilary Rosen and her evil cohorts tragically drive off a cliff in a bus with a broken axle.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
By 5:00EDT I'm assuming you mean 5:00am. I won't be awake at that ungodly hour, so I've already set up a cron job to take care of this task for me. Glad to be part of the greater cause.
do not read this line twice.
from http://www.vigilante.com/inetsecurity/hacktivism_1 .htm
There is an important corresponding technical dimension that reinforces hacktivist claims of populist support. Hacktivist DoS attacks must be executed using client side or individual browser based tools. The prototypical Zapatista Floodnet tool, (which other groups have continued to develop) requires downloading and installing a Java applet. Moreover, these tools need to be consciously scheduled and aimed at a specific web address; actions that presumably demonstrate solidarity and commitment. To some hacktivists this distinction is all-important because it differentiates their activities from the nihilistic and anonymous February DDoS attacks on the CNN, Yahoo, and eBay e-commerce sites. During those assaults, allegedly orchestrated by "mafiaboy" and a few other apolitical participants, DoS "zombie" servers were surreptitiously placed on unwary host systems and triggered en masse. In fact, the utility programs used for swarming attacks, rooted in performance art, are far less powerful than hardcore "smurfing" weapons like Trin00, Stachaldraht and TFN2K.
Flood attacks can be used as a useful form of civil disobedience if used correctly in a *focussed and organised* way.
This is actually an incredibly interesting way of looking at the situation. While the war for independence itself was perfectly "legal" as far as things go, the initial revolts did not fit within the framework of then ruling government laws. The tea party was done as a sign of direct protest against the ridiculous taxes and excises being collected, so the people attacked an icon of the grievance.
However, this was done after several attempts to smooth things over employing legal methods. Have we done this yet? People are calling for us to contact our congressmen... have we? As citizens, we must follow the established legal means first, then pursue other possibilities only if those channels were unrightfully blocked. Yes, even if we try the legal ways, and it doesn't accomplish our goals, it still doesn't give us to right to illegally protest. Only when our right to legally protest is infringed can we in good conscience use other methods.
The DoS is an example of knee-jerk, immature reactions that come from people who don't oppose this legislation due to it's possible implications and precedents, but rather because they want to continue in their illegal activities... which is wrong.
The whole "don't bring yourselves down to their level" cliche is one that you can count on to be trotted out each and every time someone counter-attacks a person, group of people, or corporate or govt. entity using something other than journalism.
In reality, most wars get fought on many levels. The teen hacker who takes down a web site is that person's way of protesting the situation. Nobody said it has to be *everybody's* way of protesting. If you have the "clout" and the intelligence to write constructive critism of the RIAA and get it published - then do it! That's your own personal "trump card" against them. If you happen to be a teacher, then teach your students about what's going on. You're the one who can give them education on the rights and freedoms they're losing. But if you're a young hacker who has nothing else to offer but your hacking skills (and can use your age as an advantage to avoid getting caught/getting in serious trouble), then maybe defacing or DoSing their web site is your own best method of protest.
I have a rather silly question but....
If the RIAA DOS's someone, is that not also causing annoyance to the victem's ISP, and all the people who use the same routers and bridges?
I mean, if my ping times go up because the RIAA is off hammering a p2p user, I will be extreamly annoyed.
Nothing like automating civil disobedience. :P
before Congress, which will allow me to cut the hands off of anyone I want, because those hands could be used in a crime, such as robbing a music store or holding up the local hollywood video. I mean look at how many people already commit theft every day! I say we stop any further theft by cutting off hands!
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
I am detecting someone's mucking with the javascript....
/title >
// done hiding -->
.02c (Note: by reading this message and the text within you agree not to hold, this user, this user's ISP or slashdot responsible for any of our actions....
You go to this site http://www.riaa.comand you get the generic error:
HTTP Error 403
403.9 Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
This error can be caused if the Web server is busy and cannot process your request due to heavy traffic. Please try to connect again later.
Please contact the Web server's administrator if the problem persists.
However..... if you rightclick and go to "View Source" you see the source page for their index.htm like so: (note: code mangled to prevent rendering... Don't want to fsck Slashdot by accident!)
< html >
< head >
< title >Recording Industry Association of America<
< meta HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" >
<meta content="ISRC, International Standard Recording Code" >
<script language="JavaScript" >
< !-- hide from JavaScript-challenged browsers
function openWindow() {
popupWin = window.open('Glossary.cfm', 'glossary', 'scrollbars,width=500,height=300')
}
function openPrintWindow() {
printWin = window.open('Printing.cfm', 'printing', 'scrollbars,width=500,height=300');
}
</script>
<script LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
<!--
NS4 = (document.layers);
IE4 = (document.all);
ver4 = (NS4 || IE4);
isBlueberry = (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("Mac") != -1);
isPC = (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("Win") != -1);
isCool = (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("X11") != -1);
isMenu = (NS4 || (IE4 && !isBlueberry));
function popUp(){return};
function popDown(){return};
(damn lameness filter, place an <hr> here)
Just my
Partnership for an idiot free America!
My take is slightly nicer:
/dev/null ; sleep 30; } done;
while (true) do { wget --quiet -p 'http://www.riaa.org/' >
It will emulate an eager slashdotter hitting the "refresh" button every 30 seconds. However, if we all start one, I bet that'd be enough to overwhelm them!
Stop the brainwash
The RIAA is an industry consortium. No one cares about their site. Hit all of the member company sites. Imagine if member companies who are already kind of annoyed by how the RIAA is handling this started getting attacked because of their stupidity? That would definitely cause some internal pressure.
And if not, at least you get John Ashcroft to come on TV and vow vengeance against the cyber terrorists. If you're going to commit crime, at least go all out. Crime is the only unspoiled artform left.
This is what we are trying to stop!
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
And only gives the RIAA more ammo. Frankly, the RIAA is so shooting themself in the foot these days that ignoring them and watching them implode is probably the best thing to do. This organization is hated by just about everybody especially in light of the greed involving corporate America that's surfaced of late. I believe that there is an implicit boycott of CD's going on. I know that I'm not buying CD's this summer, nor is anyone I know. People have simply had it up to here with greedy corporations. As an example, in my condo we're discussing changing the rules to allow a common outside antenna. Why? because three out of the five owners here are so pissed off at Adelphia that they want to get rid of cable!
Is everything looking like a nail to you, cuz you're sure hitting them on the head...
I agree with damn near every point you bring up. I got tired of paying premium for a song with one hit and the rest filler. I got tired of using the same ol 20 per track CD format when I could have 100's of songs of nearly the same quality on one disk and I got tired of the labels raping you on every purchase.
And since you brought it up, I'll pose an interesting question, using myself as an example, though it'd apply to anybody. It's generally accepted that if you own the copywrited material, you can make as many copies as you want for personal use, right? So let's say I buy a DVD (as per parent's supposition). Tomb Raider. It obviously has the same music that the audio CD will come out with. Some DVD even have a seperate option to listen to the soundtrack seperately. Now, especially in the latter case, don't I own the rights to the content of the DVD (keeping the studios EULA in mind), including all features, music and "bonus material"? And since I now effectively own the soundtrack on the DVD, in many cases the same music, I shouldn't be violating any clause prohibting "illegle use". One copy is as good as another, right?
That's where the fun begins >:)
As to customer service, that only flies with companies who care. Most of the labels have proven they are nothing more than parasites. And the DoS? Heh. You could see that one happening 50 miles out. If they are going to use an easily availible "script kiddie" hacker tool to deny service, then they should have seen the consequences. I mean really. But then, maybe this is what they were hoping for... (Cue Twilight Zone music). Can we now associate illegle music downloads with "hackers"!? OMG!! Ahem. Either way they're idiots.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
And promise you've destroyed all the copies. that should make them happy.
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back." -- Robert Heinlein
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." --Martin Luther King, Jr.
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced Patriots to prevent its ruin." --Samuel Adams
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power." --Benito Mussolini
""I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." --Thomas Jefferson 1812
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavour to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." --Abraham Lincoln 1865
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism -- ownership of government by an individual, by a group or any controlling private power." --President Franklin D. Roosevelt
"The goal is to keep the bewildered herd bewildered. It's unnecessary for them to trouble themselves with what's happening in the world. In fact, it's undesirable -- if they see too much of reality they may set themselves to change it." --Noam Chomsky
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
Remember that the "ridiculous tax" on tea that led to the Boston Tea Party was a whopping... ONE PERCENT.
:(
How times have changed...
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Quote by Hilary Rosen -- "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
Is Rosen saying that is it the RIAA that actually takes the time to create the artistic works? GOD that woman makes me sick to my stomach.
Technoli
If they're running on a 386 with a 14.4kbps dial up modem, a DoS attack means 3 people tried to connect.
Who went there and even noticed? Why? I can't think of a single reason to bother 'em or with 'em. Just ignore 'em. They're like bad breath after a realy good pizza. Garlick happens.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
HTTP Error 403
403.9 Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
Gotta love it!
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
I just checked and got in...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
It seems clear that corporate copyright holders are going to keep pressing through draconian legisation from various different angles until we have no rights to any ideas (what they call "content") or devices capable of holding them at all.
We may have managed to stop some of this stuff through judicial review, but for every one of those partial victories, they push though 3 more pieces of bad legislation.
The only way I see to possibly get back the initiative and stop this nonsense is to separate the MPAA and the RIAA from their pet legislators. What's making this legislative payola so effective is that there is no big downside to it for Congressmen. What we have to do is to make that downside.
I don't think we can achieve results by just complaining to our individual congressmen like we have been doing. Force spread out that diffuse just amounts to random heat. Instead, we should focus our attacks on just one target, and take it down. We have to make an example of one legisator, so that the others will sit up and take notice.
So I believe the only possible way out of this situation is to pick a good example congressman (Fritz Hollings, the "Senator from Disney" would do nicely), and do what we have to do to make sure he doesn't get re-elected.
I'm not talking about just billboards, bumper-stickers, and small paper signs (although those need to be there in abundance too). Radio ads need to be bought. TV ads need to be bought. Ads talking about his attacks on the freedoms and the consumers in his home state, and the US of A. Ads bordering on the distorting and unfair (because you can bet that's on the nice side of what the MPAA and RIAA will retort with).
And yes, it will take money; a lot of it. We'd have to do something that is anethma to a lot of us; put our money where our mouths are. But if we could succeed, then everyone in Congress would be afraid to take us on again. We might never have to spend another penny fighting off this crapola. In the long run, this would be far cheaper than sending in small amounts of money to the EFF every year, and paying jacked-up prices for approved playback devices and protected media for the rest of our lives.
That's it! Throw all your CDs into Boston Harbour!!
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Just because something has the potential for criminal use (ie; everything in life), doesn't mean certain organizations should be given a blank check to use quasi-hacker tools against it as they see fit. I mean really. Hey! I know! Let's disrupt the entire internet since it has the potential for criminal use! Or the freeway! Burglers and rapist use it ever day!
Face it, this is the lazy way out. And so I ask you, who commited the crime? The freeway or the person speeding over the limit on it? By your response, we'll be DoSing every major roadway in the nation.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
We have a tradeoff here:
One one hand, untraceability.
On the other hand, effectiveness. You do this, you will effectively DDoS the anonymizer proxy and not your intended target.
These are plain-jane web requests - They're not illegal anyway, at least not in a way that's provable in court.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
That'll help, however it won't stop them from making it illegal for you to create and distribute your own music. Nor will it stop them from getting your money.
Everytime their sales slip (or everyone in the country doesn't buy the latest "pop sensation"), they insist it is because of piracy, not the economy or the public refusing to buy from RIAA companies. They may do a similar thing that Microsoft did. (section E) The feds didn't even try to prosecute MS for this, even though I think it is their worst anti-trust violation!
In fact, if you live in the US (and some other countries), you pay "royalties" to them on every CD writing drive you buy and every blank music CD you burn. It doesn't matter if it is your own music, or music you are legally allowed to copy--they still take it.
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" asked the RIAA representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from stealing music."
...and bitch FOR YEARS about the free trade of music online? ...and push for stupid legislation? ...and file lawsuits? ...and...
Don't they have anything better to do than to DDoS P2P networks?
Why bother.
But I'm willing to bet that Coble's political career is toast.
Note that in one article on the situation (can't remember if the linked one had it), it mentions that the bill is sponsored by Coble (R-NC).
North Carolina.
I have three words for Mr. Coble: Research Triangle Park.
NC is becoming a tech hotspot, and he probably just lost a significant number of votes in the Durham/RTP region.
WTF was he smoking?
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Oddly enough, the list doesn't contain Website links.
I mentioned this because several people have mentioned that the RIAA exists to take the heat for the rest of the old-model record industry.
The list on the site is the traditional record industry.
Tech Public Policy stuff
I was able to load the RIAA page quickly. Just to make sure, I hit reload over and over. Each time it came up quickly. I guess I should try a few more times later to day, just to make sure. ;-)
'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
You are speaking, of course, about the dorks who launched that DoS attack, thus ensuring that anyone not already familiar with RIAA sees this as a case of a legitimate professional organization persecuted by teenargers who would rather take out their frustrations on the internet than pay for their CDs.
Build stuff. Stuff that walks, stuff that rolls, whatever.
Poster puts on BIG CONSPIRACY HAT (TM)...
Think about this.
The RIAA has recently got the DDOS idea.
Then they copmplain about DDOS attacks.
Then they go to the authorities for help.
Attacking all the while.
Who's to say it wasn't them doing it to their own useless site and makign their own examples all along?
They can now effectively make their own crisis, and propagate it as much as they want. Manufacture their own real world crisis and make a million examples of it. Bolster their own statistics. Take down the net until we all have to have a new, copyright secured internet.
Inoshiro opinined:
This kind of thing, short of FLYING over to their HQ and having a sit in, is the only means you have of expressing yourself.
But I like this a lot better:
This kind of thing, short of FLYING over their HQ and having a shit on, is the only means you have of expressing yourself.
... at least, when I was taking a networking class, TCP/IP was describe as a peer-to-peer networking protocol. What does the internet run on again? ;)
--Parity Odd
--Parity
'Card carrying' member of the EFF.
Here: RIAA does not represent artists directly but we do work on behalf of such artists' rights as freedom of speech and the right to control your own music.
Here: When asked, most consumers describe CDs as a good value. ...the most significant cost of a CD today is the marketing and promotion of that music.
My Favorite FAQ:
What is the RIAA? The RIAA is a membership organization. Our members are record labels who pay membership dues to have the RIAA represent them on different issues. This includes everything from speaking out in support of free speech -- and against attempts to pass legislation to censor music, to traveling the world in support of free trade, to defending artists and record labels from pirates who sell and distribute fake copies of their music. We also work with our members on issues of new technology and how that technology can best bring artists together with music fans.
Lots to think about there. Amazing how the RIAA talks out of both sides of its mouth. "We support artists rights, prevent censorship of music, and help Santa out every Tuesday...." Yet they are busy trying to take away my legal abillity to create and distribute my own music.
If irony was a drink, I'd be wasted.
If you truly want to stop corporate greed, support the guy that's been fighting it this whole time.
If your fed up with corperate crime:
vist this link
http://www.citizenworks.org/
To most of the population, this kind of thing will simply confirm the view that hackers are criminals or terrorists. Non-violent direct action is one of the best way to get things done in a democracy. (Just behind, say, voting.) But confine this to simple things that ordinary people can understand.
Call your congressman. (Forget about writing: anthrax has doen to snail mail what spam did to email.) Hold a protest. (The "Free Sklyrarov" demos got covered favorably in the media, and most importantly, they worked.) Or propose a ballot-measure in your district that guarantees fair use.
I'm sorry, your CD license forbids you from sharing music with fishies.
Please come with me, sir.
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
What would happen if someone created a page that would redirect everyone looking at that page to www.riaa.org at a given time? I couldn't see the blame fall on either the web author or the host. It would simply be a massive amount of people looking at a page who would simultaneously be redirected to www.riaa.org. No one would be exploiting someone else's connection; it would be freely chosen by all. The only requirement would be that a lot of people leaving their web browser open on that specific page until the designated time. Seems completely legal and feasible.
IWARS.
People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
I don't know if this was said tongue in cheek or not but that is exactly what needs to be done. An organized protest where people take the cd's they have and have them destroyed in a public ceremony. Thousands upon thousands of cds being crushed or melted or whatever as thousands more gather round with anti-RIAA banners. Get speakers to give fiery speeches about a consumer driven economy and get a variety of musicians and artists to give speeches on how they've earned more money because of file sharing (janisian.com). Get lots of news coverage and one or two articulate spokespeople.
Rally Against The RIAA [RATRIAA}.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
In other words: if you DoS us citizens, we'll see to it you're never able to do business on-line again.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
if they really want to help curtail piracy they need to aggressively pursue DVD audio. Make it sound so good no one will want mp3s and the files will be so large it will take forever to download.
That is a very good idea. If they provide added-value (over MP3s) then I will be more likely to buy their products.
cpeterso
while (true) do { wget --quiet -p 'http://www.riaa.org/' --referer='http://slashdot.org/' > /dev/null ; sleep 30; } done;
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen said in a statement that Berman's bill was "an innovative approach," adding that "it makes sense to clarify existing laws to ensure that copyright owners--those who actually take the time and effort to create an artistic work--are at least able to defend their works from mass piracy."
And all this time I thought musical artists were the ones creating music and not the RIAA. Now we see what Hilary really thinks of the people she's supposed to be representing... Lets not forget that when you sell your soul to the RIAA, you no longer own any music you've created. Here's the proof. Or is Lars readying to "pilfer the grabasses"?
What if this thing gets passed and all of the RIAA stuff gets put up on foreign sites? Are they going to DoS those too? The EU might really get pissed at that.
BTW, assuming their new proposed legislation gets passed, does the RIAA plan to do their own denial of service only on USA machines, or internationally also? Although the RIAA will feel all smug about it, other countrys may call it terrorism. If a company from a country currently in USA disfavour did that to the RIAA, that's what it would be called.
Demonstrant's Open Source Tools
Open and leave open all day.... How about that for a cross platform solution.
This guy is totally right. Who cares if no one can get to riaa.org? Now, suppose there were no riaa, and DOS went after sony.com .... on second thought, I doubt that would really have much effect.
This way the entire thing will get another approach and also affects the backbones and ISP's. Do they need to find a ISP where they have legal status to DOS another (ISP's) user ?
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
The RIAA doesn't have the knowledge or the skill to do it themselves so they hire companies who do this sort of thing for a living. They pay a certain amonut per song as a base, so many cents (usually about 1.5 cents) per scan, per protocol, then pay the same amount again when they find the files, then so much to send a Cease and Desist Letter. They scan about every 15 minute, or determined by the label. They can run up huge numbers in just a couple of days for popular acts. Who pays? The artist of course, as it goes into their recoupable account, that never shrinks.
DMusic.com has an article with audio of the California Senate Hearings if you want the lowdown on the labels accounting. (Streaming MP3)it can be found Here especially enlightning is Don Engel's and Fred Wolinski's testimony.
Tongue in cheek, but... actually, I think nothing would make the RIAA happier than for people to destroy millions of CDs... that's that many fewer CDs that will ever make it to the used CD market, and that many more CDs that someday someone just might have to replace. Either way, the RIAA would doubtless see mass CD-destruction as a potential profit-generator. :(
:(
The problem with melting CDs, burning books, crushing guns, etc, is that it doesn't LOOK like a protest. It LOOKS like the reaction of radical nutcases. Which isn't the public response we want at all!! A protest, to be effective, has to be something Mainstream America can join into without feeling more pain than is caused by whatever the protest involves. Destroying your own property isn't exactly something most people can support, because they see it as money down the drain (if not at the time, then after the surge of emotion has faded). It's easy to say you can give up or destroy stuff when you're a kid or young adult and don't own much of anything. It's a lot harder after you've worked half your lifetime for everything you possess, and have a family to keep happy, etc.
For a really effective demonstration -- I dunno what would work. If we stop buying CDs, that just gives the RIAA even more ammunition for their "Look! Piracy hurts sales" bullshit. As both citizens and consumers, we're in a no-win situation, where every move we can reasonably make hurts our cause and enhances the RIAA's cause.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
In any sort of combat situation, there are only two types of people. You, and your enemy. Is that clear? Perhaps our society would do better to not listen to the likes of Gandhi ...
Speaking of Ghandi - are you aware of his suggestion for what the Ashkenazi should do to protest the Third Reich's oppression of Jews?
Mass suicide in protest.
Sorry, but that's not on MY agenda as a way to resist oppression.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Too funny. Someone's been reading user friendly and decided to fight back perhaps?
I wonder how long until somebody DoSes reps Berman and Coble (and any other cosponsors of the legislation)?
It's not like the DoSsers can drive them any further into the RIAA's camp than they already are.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Please begin to call this by it's proper term.. Copy Prevention.
Once people start using this term en-masse, awareness is sure to increase along with it.
Copy Prevention , not Copy Protection . Just remember that.
Yes, California is tech-savvy.
Unfortunately, California is also the home of Hollywood, which more than balances this out. I have a feeling that (especially with the current tech economy) Hollywood brings far more money into the state than Silicon Valley does.
North Carolina is a different story - They have RTP, but they have no Hollywood to balance it.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
That sums up their whole agenda rather than just the specific issue of copy prevention.
A plea to everyone here: refuse to use the term "Digital Rights Management" in any setting.
When someone uses it, ask them what they mean, and respond "that looks more like content control." Continuing to use their invented term "DRM" keeps them continually ahead in the PR game, making it look like those trying to exercise their fair use rights are violating the rights of the corporations advocating "DRM."
Okay, this refreshes, but images, etc., will still be pulled from cache on subsequent shots unless your turn off your cache. Is there any way to do an effective ctrl-F5 (absolute refresh) automatically? More images = more bandwidth.
Why just two frames? Pick pages from multiple areas throughout the sites, especially database-generated ones -- have a whole load of frames running, constantly pulling pages.
I do not comment on the ethics or morals of this action or other such actions that will ensue; I merely comment on the inevitability.
The RIAA and the MPAA, along with Microsoft, have worked hard to give themselves such an atrocious reputation as oppressive monopolists that it is inevitable that those who believe themselves oppressed by them see them as evil tyrants, to be resisted by any and all means. Every attempt by the RIAA/MPAA/Microsoft to use punitive measures against their ostensible customers and bystanders will simply worsen their own reputation.
The more oppressive they act, the more people will feel justified in treating them as tyrants and enemies: use any means necessary to defeat them and depose them from power. In a war against an enemy, one does not worry about the enemy's property rights, or feelings, or legal niceties. You destroy the enemy.
As more people regard the RIAA/MPAA/Microsoft as enemies rather than legitimate societal organizations, fewer people will have any moral compunctions about stealing from them, crippling their businesses, destroying their propery, ruining their individual and corporate reputations, and worse. Why should they? It is not immoral to overthrow a tyrant; in fact, it is immoral to leave one in place.
I am not saying that this is a good or right thing, nor am I saying that it is bad: I am saying that it is inevitable . Every abuse of the law by such monopolistic organizations to suppress competition and extort their would-be customers will only cause more and more people to view them as enemies and tyrants, with all that goes with it.
How long before every new movie and studio website is DDOS'd into oblivion the day it is hosted, never to be seen by the public? How long before every record company has to shut down its online store because it is DOS'd and hacked into oblivion? How long before every Microsoft and Adobe product are floating around on the Internet, free for the download, with special patches to disable all license keys and "product activation" checks? How long before every new album and movie is available before it is publically released? (I know, already happens).
How long before enough of the general public finds this morally acceptable for the reasons discussed above, and thus puts the monopolists out of business?
Most people are honest, and don't steal--but when the target is seen as a rich, oppressive tyrant who can only be hurt by theft, how long before theft becomes socially and morally acceptable--and done by everyone?
Somebody, somewhere needs to take a sanity check, because the implications of the inevitable are terrifying.
---dragoness