Slashdot Mirror
American Movie Execs Could Face Aussie Jails For Hacking
pegacat points to a story in the Melbourne Age which says that "American movie, recording and software executives could be arrested if they travel to Australia, could be prohibited from entering Australia, or could be extradited to face criminal charges if Californian Democrat congressman Howard Berman's copyright protection bill, which allows cracking
of computers, passes into law." That's because "Under section 9a of the Victorian Summary Offences Act (1966), 'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'. The penalty if convicted is up to six months' jail."
Well, since a lot of movies are being made in Aussieland, maybe wel'll get to see a lot of visiting MIAA and RIAA people being thrown in the slammer!
Go Aussies Go!!!
or maybe they'll blackmail the Australian government into passing similar legislation, on the threat that there won't be any more films made in their country (so: bye bye dollars...)
yeah, like the chief of staff needs a vote in congress (a law) anymore to go to war. the constitution has long gone out the window...
those are the problems that can, and will arise more and more, the more we communicate and exchange globally. remember the Yahoo! lawsuit where a french court ordered them to block french people from access to neonazi sites? Same problem. In the us, there is no law that would block you from viewing nazi stuff (I'm not from the us, but I think that's covered by the 2nd amandment to the constitution), but in france, it's illegal. Or, the story about the italian police shutting down an us-based website because of blasphemous content. It's the same in realworld-land. say, you go to holland, smoke a joint in a coffeeshop, and then go to a land where the consumation of marijuana is illegal. eventhough you smoked it in holland, where you are allowed to, you can still get fined for drug abuse elsewhere. we live in a global word (sorry for that buzzing), with laws that apply to local groups. this will be a problem for quite some time. just think, there are probably lands where child porn is legal, or where critical writing about politicans is illegal.. all sorts of problems. the only solutions I can think of would be "one global law" (which is pretty much impossible before there is one global land), specific "net laws" that state that "analog laws" do not apply to the internet anymore, or anarchy. don't ask me what would be best, I'm a geek, not a philosopher. :)
Karma
"Under section 9a of the Victorian Summary Offences Act (1966), 'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'. The penalty if convicted is up to six months' jail."
and"...if Californian Democrat congressman Howard Berman's copyright protection bill, which allows cracking of computers, passes into law."
Well, it seems to me that if the American bill does become a law then it will not be a long journey to find sympathy among the Australian government. Keep in mind that Australia and the US have good relations, particularly when it comes to law enforcement. The pasing of this law by the American Government may be all the "lawful authority" that the Australians require. The important thing is to write your congressman and senators, to anyone you can. Point out that this law would be like allowing business owners to booby-trap their places of business. It would also open a loophole by which ANY vicious hacker would gain the "right" to viciously hack, simply by releasing an album on his own label and then "finding" mp3's being shared on peer-to-peer.
For the record, in 1732 England opened Georgia as a penal colony.
I am a Karma Library.
The way I see it, the Australians are calling the game right. What the law is essentialy allowing is vigilante vandalism within the US. It's the same as if the MPAA/RIAA sent goons over to whack your home entertainment system with baseball bats.
Now even if this were allowed in the USA, it ain't allowed in Australia*. Even if the target is an American, as soon as the goons start vandalising Australian property, they're subject to Australian jurisdiction. Their corporate masters could aso be charged for giving the orders ("taking out a contract").
Bit more complicated if the box/complaint were north of the border since they'd also have to talk the Scottish parliament into nobbling the procurator fiscal responsible. that might prove a bit more tricky.
I thought that this went for any country other than Australia. I mean, if you commit a crime in another country, you can be charged there if you ever go there. Is Australia the only country speaking up, or are there other countries talking too?
Xaotik Designs
Make a small bitmap file. Use a hex editor, if you must, but call the image your own, copyrighted work. Then put it on your website, with an EULA stating that the visitor agrees that the image must be deleted from the visitor's machine within 5 minutes from loading of the page. Write some program that logs visitor ip's, waits for 7-10 minutes, and launches an attack, if the visitor ip is "good", whatever that means. If you have a large enough site, some representative of the abovementioned corporations will certainly visit it sooner or later. And, hurrah, you have the right-to-attack.
:) And make sure the EULA is at least 3-4 pages long, with all sorts of legal bullshit on it. It has to work!
Just prey this bill gets passed
What if the P2P hackers (coders) were to include a clause into the EULA about no profit organization can use the software, make it a license violation if the mpaa or the riaa use the software. I'm not saying it's a solution, however, it may buy some time. That or we can pay the kids at their isp to null route them into an intranet
--fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
Unlike mafiaboy, these are supposedly adults. They won't get the benefit of going through the juvenile court system.
404 Error:
International law, however, has tried to put Kissinger on the stand to testify in regard to his relation with Pinochet. He was served with a summons in Paris, but skipped town on the first flight available.