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."
One can only begin to imagine what this will bring - an amendment to the bill prohibiting extradition of media company execs to Australia.
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...)
And please, don't quote the Gandhi 'First, they laugh at you' thing again. Without a concerted effort from other Western nations (at a minimum), the closest thing this approximates is a soggy spitball and straw against a tank.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Wouldn't the bill be considered lawful authority? If Australian law can be applied to US citizens, it's likely (though I ain't anal) that US law would apply to those same citizens.
Then again, Australia has a long and distinguished record of being a penal colony for the British, maybe it's time to reinstate that concept and ship RIAA and MPAA execs, all of Arthur Andersen, and all Fortune 500 CEOs to a remote part of the Aussie outback. We can even turn it into a spectator sport - Survivor 2.0 - broadcasting it live with free Internet feeds from ROVs orbiting the area. "Will Bill Gates eat Steve Ballmer? Tune in tomorrow on Survivor 2.0, same time, same server!"
Money for nothing, pix for free
The UK has similiar legislation, and I'm pretty sure most of the rest of EU has similiar legislation.
Does this mean that movie executives will not be able to travel outside of the US at all?! Cool!
Yeah, so I'm a dreamer. I know full well that Tony "Grining Laky" Blair would never arrest an American movie executive for something like this. It would make George Bush (His pal) cry, and we can't have that!
"Berman's bill immunises copyright holders from civil litigation or criminal prosecution if they invade US PCs connected to the international P2P networks to take down their own copyrighted materials."
in other words. a movie exec can, by us law, enter a computer to delete their own property. if that computer happens to be in aussie, then that movie exec is breaking the aussie law.
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure it would and I am pretty sure that Oz has an extradition treaty wiht the US.
Think of the reverse - if you live in Australia and hack into the Pentagon, I wouldn't consider yourself too safe from prosecution.
Same laws that prohibit entering and breaking in computer systems are in effect all around europe, and personally, I as a dutch person would love to see someone from the RIAA or MPAA hang in front of the new ICC in The Hague (That would be a laugh!)
DoS my gnut and come over if you dare!!!
So US American Movie Execs can face legal charges in Australia if a Bill is passed inj the US?
No need to pass the bill - the law against unlawful computer access is already present in Australia (or Victoria , anyway). If someone can prove that said media execs did indeed get unlawful entry into an Australian computer system, then regardless of whether it is legal in the U.S., they're still breaking Australian law.
Break pretty much *any* sovereign country's law (in their own country) and you can expect to face the consequences if they have an extradition treaty with your country, and they're irritated enough to go through the paperwork.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Things are right, wrong, or grey.
If something is wrong don't do it. Take cracking or DoS attacks. Totally wrong. Lock them up and throw away the key.
But you start to legislate that it's okay for some users (I don't care how much money Hollywood has, they are still users just like you and me) to crack and DoS others then you make it grey. So the next time you catch a cracker you've got a much harder job dealing with him. And the next time it's harder still. And fairly soon cracking just becomes one of those things you live with.
At least the Aussies are doing their hardest to keep it black and white.
But I don't think it makes much differance. The US Government doesn't seem to give a toss about what the rest of the world thinks. As long as those campaign contributions keep pouring in nothing else matters. (Don't you just love democracy.)
Do you mind, your karma has just run over my dogma.
How much does it cost te set yourself up as a recording company in the USA? If you are a recording company and this law passes then presumably all you need to do is to have a suspicion that the RIAA is stealing your copyright material and away you go.
the problem is that the australian authorities are unlikely to charge these americans under this law. the question is whether extradition is available for civil charges brought by (possibly many) autralians against said americans?
really? you have more fFaith than i. ....... and at this point the judge and everyone else stops listening, just sort of writing it off as some complex technical term. like "a 'denial of service', you say, mm-hmm. clogged ports. right. mm. indeed." the prosecution counters with "how many movies do you have illegally pirated on your system?" "case closed."
see, i would imagine them doing so without hesitation. and then when it goes to "trial", the defense (you) would claim your computer was shutdown by means of
sorry dude, i just dont think the guv'ment has the ability to understand really technical concepts. if they could, there would be no DMCA, fFor example.
i know that if i go pay a man to kill my wife that i can be charged with murder.
if Rosen pays someone to hack for her why shouldn't she be responsible for it in the same fashion
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
oh you're talking about australia right there, 'cos australia never fucked over the rights of the common people in favor of their poloticians.
Since the most important company information, and indeed in many cases the company assets are stored on electronic media, I'd say that cracking a company's computer network is a more intrusive crime than smashing in the door to their offices and stealing the hard-copy.
I don't think even our politicians in the UK are quite corrupt enough to consider passing a law to allow this kind of behaviour from corporates with big pockets. Hopefully it really is the sort of thing we'll only see going on in the US...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
It should be from the butt-butt-butt dept.
I expect that bad things happen in Aussie jails...
"G'day, mate! Wouldya like jelly or syrup?"
(((shudder)))
Talisman
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
They will be able to, after they change the law so that it mandates that you use the next generation Windows running on the next generation Intel chip.
There's no need to. If you have proof that a computer is used to infringe copyrights, then under the laws of several European countries, you can ask the judge for the right to destroy or seize the computer.
If you don't have proof, you're not likely to get anything out of a judge except an invoice. I would hope that even under that silly US law, the record company would need to have proof before hacking into someone's computer.
If you think about it, all it takes is the following:
An Australian ISP suffers an attack originating from Sony Entertainment in the US. A Sony spokesman claims the attack was a legal application of the Berman Law*, directed at a "pirate" on a peer-to-peer network. The ISP files suit, as its legitimate customers suffered from the bandwidth-flooding as well as the accused "pirate".
As for getting the executives, if they try to hide their attacks behind the Berman Law, then they are assuming responsibility for their company's actions, and thus culpable. It could also well be that one of the programmers hred to carry out the attack could blow the whistle.
*Yes, I know that Berman's bill isn't a law, but it's a mental exercise. And of course IANAL, but you knew that already.
"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.
I envision Steve, the Crocodile Hunter, sneaking up on a Recording Exec and sticking his thumb up his bum hole. Ah, this one's angry! Look at his markings. He's a beaut'. Now ordinarily we would let him go. But, as it turns out this is one of the most dangerous creatures in the world. Up there with Lawyers and US Congressmen. No, instead, we're going to take this one back with us. We'll put him in a nice safe place where he can listen to Britney Spears all day long.
Someone hates these cans.
This isn't the first case where copyrights versus consumer rights have been clashed (often with the consumers winning):
1) Jukebox CD burner machines are legal
2) A small video chain wins case with respect to rental vs retail DVD prices
3) Use of Mod chips in Playstations ruled to be legal
4) DVD zoning currently under investigation by the local consumer protection watch dog
5) Watch this space.... (probably a few more)
Is there something culturally different between the two continents?
Or is it that some people in Australia believe that all this extra copy protection (real and legal) does nothing for the problem and harms the legitimate users?
[Coward hiding under his rock]
apparently they simply inform the DoJ that they are going to do it, and if they don't hear a "no" within 7 days, they go for it.
I dont want to be trolling, but come to think of it most countries have laws which Prohibit breaking into computer networs. I cant seem to get the point in this story. Of course of you crack a EU computer, you will be punished as soon as you go to EU. Whats happening to slashdot.. This is no news! Whats Next "Stealing Illegal in germany....Murder illegal in sweden..."
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
In the case of LoTR, the dude behind it, Peter Jackson, just happens to be a New Zealander. It's made here because Jackson is doing it at home instead of overseas.
BTW: Weta Studios are using Linux - oooeee I mentioned Linux on /.
You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
Another poster in this forum suggested that Canadian extra-territoriality law has some relevance (as a Canadian, I'm inclined to agree) -- to wit, our laws to do with your Cuba embargo (Helms-Burton being the most recent example) specifically hold the American act and its provisions to be invalid in Canada. I imagine the Aussie law to be much the same sort of thrust. Then again, how many of you Americans are aware of the Canadian law? Do you know how many cases have been brought to trial? The number of cases can be counted on one hand with a couple of fingers missing. And, truthfully, how many of you could care less?
Anyway, this is all a moot point. All this talk is not going to force US-based 'meeja' executives to resort to e-mails and conference calls only, no matter how much the constituency here wants to see it done. Unfortunately.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Yes, and they can be exicuted if they traveled to China.
But, they won't be.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
In 2007, a stealth bomber drops a laser-guided glide bomb on the Sealand platform, destroying it. The White House announces the successful destruction of a major terrorist cell/child pornography syndicate. As usual, FOXNews and CNN don't question the party line, though various lunatic fringe sites soon reveal that evidence of such activities was fabricated.
If you want a secure data haven, build it underground. Deep underground, out of reach of bunker-busting nukes. Or distribute it in orbit, as a network of millions of tiny, highly redundant satellites, so that killing them all without damaging "legitimate" satellites would be next to impossible. Or a global mesh network of nanobots, running a FreeNet-style protocol of some sort.
For the record, in 1732 England opened Georgia as a penal colony.
I am a Karma Library.
"The whole POINT of the new bill is to GIVE them 'lawful authority to do so' so how does this law apply?"
By your logic, some country could make it legal to kill americans. Then a citizen of that country comes to USA and kills dozens of people. As the cops try to arrest him, he'll just show them the law-books from his country and say "see, according to our laws, it's legal to kill americans. Therefore I haven't broken any laws. As I haven't broken any laws, I'll be going now. Ta-ta!"
What's that? It doesn't quite work like that? That guy has to obey US laws when he's in USA? So... Wouldn't that mean that the movie studio fat-cats must obey Australian laws if they operate in Australia? That's what I thought...
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
The Australian federal government is currently controlled by the Liberal Party, which is sort of like the Republicans except without the Christian Coalition. I.e., a socially conservative, pro-corporate party. In addition, the Prime Minister loves Bush and would do anything for him, from unconditionally committing Australian troops to any U.S. military campaign to neglecting to raise agricultural trade issues when visiting the U.S. If the U.S. asked him to, he would push hard to indemnify MPAA/RIAA cracking/DoS attempts in Australia, under the guise of "protecting movie industry investment" or "harmonising computer crime laws".
The upper house is dominated by the Liberals, but they don't have a majority; the balance of power is held by the fashionably left-leaning Democrats, who would probably oppose a Bermanesque law here. Though if the Labor opposition (think like Tony Blair's mob in the UK) is persuaded to get behind it, the Democrats are irrelevant.
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").
The conduct complained of here would also violate computer crime laws in most states. Thus, while Valenti might avoid federal prison for violation of the CFAA, he might still have to face charges and related civiil actions for violation of State laws in Florida.
Absent an express preemption clause, the bill would not have the desired effect for its authors -- and if they added an express preemption clause, the bill might become defective as unconstitutional under a host of theories.
Lawful authority means lawful in terms of jurisdiction. USA != Australia, therefore if the law doesn't overlap (as it doesn't in this case), it's not lawful. No-one will read this post unfortunately, but the courts here in Oz do not always follow governmental preference. Witness Mabo for an example. If they don't like the law, think it's unjust, or think it's encroaching on their territory, they get pretty pissed.
This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time.
However, I think putting media moguls in prison is a great idea.
So, on with the madness.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
I vote we start a slush fund to send all RIAA and MPAA mangement to Aussieland..just to see the expression on their faces when they go to jail..
I got $5 is anyone else in?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Generally not, most extradition treaties require that it be a crime in both places, and since it would be legal in the US they would good.
This is the same way that various gambleing site work, the owners all live in places where a gambleing site is legal, but as soon as they would return to the US they would be in trouble.
It could be interesting if the australian law allowed for payment of monies because then I presume you could sue in the australian courts for the money and since most large corporations have an office in australia the could get money from that.
The other thing is now some countries have started to be stupid and pass law that say that will arrest people who have commited crimes anywhere in the world. Now if they ever actually do that could cause alot of problems.
It comes as no surprise that Australia doesn't take too kindly on massive wastings of bandwidth.
I don't know if this $/kb is standard for internet access or not, but I'm fairly certain it is at least common in some parts. My uncle has been trying to get a flat rate service plan for the past year and it just isn't offered in his area, nor is it scheduled to be.
Indeed, this would also be illegal in the UK under Section 1 of the 'The Computer Misuse Act 1990' ;
0 01 8_en_1.htm
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if--
(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.
(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at--
(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Ukpga_1990
As for the possibility of Tony Blair (UK Prime-Minister), some how excusing this, that is not likely. There is plenty of separation between the UK Judiciary and Politicians. UK Judges are not elected but appointed and once appointed are nearly impossible to remove. UK Judges also seem to regularly take delight in giving politicians the finger, when the latter attempt to step on their toes. i.e. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162940.stm
...for making all those crap films/music in the first place.
Anyway, this is great if it means that they can not leave the US for fear of being prosecuted!
P2P is the greatest thing that came out of the net these last years, those guys should be shot just for trying to stop it.
Anyway, whatever they try will just makes the movement stronger, and in a few years, we will be able to download any film or music from the net. Everybody will have 500Gb disks shared with broadband...
Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
Mad Max 4 is out of the question now
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
Surely whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Who has no clue of the morass his bill would cause. What this guy simply doesn't understand is that if this bill passes, it's open season for hacking...and the hackers know 10,000 times that of the RIAA and MPAA'S 'experts'. This is yet another example of the technologically clueless setting technology policy. What this guy is doing is setting up a technology 'cold war'... You'd think that they would have figured out by now that the cold war was a failure...but I guess you can't teach lessons to the stupid.
IANAL again, but the law that would be broken in Oz would be that of hacking a computer system. The US has laws against that (rather draconian ones now as well).
Does the get out clause for RIAA/MPAA apply? If the laws are now not reciprical, does this mean that the US cannot extradite an Australian for hacking into a computer system in the US?
Another thing I want to ask is if the new US law gives anyone the right to hack&remove material copyrighted by them, or just the MPAA/RIAA? Hasn't there been rumours of MS using portions of GNU software in Windows?
It's different because of where the actions occurred. Dimitiri was doing his thing, in Russia, under the laws of Russia, which don't criminalise him. No illegal activity was taking place in the US - the only shaky argument the US officials had was that ElcomSoft was making the software available for US citizens to purchase (even though the server itself was in Russia).
Now if the RIAA hack my computer (which is right here in Australia), the crime is taking place in Australia, and thus falls under Australian law's jurisdiction. They have committed a crime within the nation of Australia, and they can be arrested for it.
** Windows has detected a mouse movement.
** Please restart Windows so changes can take effect.
ROTFLBTCASTC
He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
So, what's the benefit of declaring war? AFAIK, congress still hasn't declared war over the World Trade Center attacks -- that's why it's still a "war on terror". Can you only declare war against a nation?
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
American movie, recording and software executives could be prohibited from entering Australia or extradited to face criminal charges if a copyright protection bill before the US Congress passes into law.
The difference is that this bill allows the executives to face charges for acts made by anonymous employees at their companies. I really don't see that this has any prior legal precedent in any country and strikes me that it's unlikely to be passed as it would mean that people would be charged for crimes they themselves didn't commit. Ozzie law already allows for the companies themselves to be tried, although as they are US based in this case and you can't actually extradite a company, the law is effectively useless as it stands only allows daughter companies that are based in .au to be tried.
I think.
But whatever, I think charging someone who you know did not personally perform the crime, simply because you don't know who did, is wrong.
The DMCA is an unethical law. There's nothing morally wrong with disobeying it. Or are you saying all laws must be obeyed, no matter how evil?
(Trying hard to refrain from invoking Godwin's law here.)
I thaught that a jury had to be made up of your Pears.
keep challanging the Jury untill you get 12 geeks
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
Well yes, the executive always has controlled the armed forces, and even much of foreign affairs. However, the legislature could always just pass a law forbidding military action against X nation, and that'd be binding on the executive.
No it isn't. The president can invoke the War Powers Act of 1973. It allows for 60 days of war-like activity without the intervention of Congress. The president is required to consult with Congress first but that usually never happens. The issue of a president causing a war is only a problem when there is enough backlash to stop him/her from doing so. I'm not trolling but there won't be much backlash against a war ever since the Vietnam War caused so much division in the country. Anti-war advocates are generally written off as anti-American by the public and their cries for a halt to aggressiveness is largely ignored.
Blame the 60's and early 70's for america's war-like culture. Well, you can also blame other countries/organizations for trying to kill Americans just because they're Americans but people don't like to talk about that.
They [RIAA/MPAA] are using copyright as an argument to introduce Berman's law. However they don't need to prove anything; it gives them a blanket immunity.
Having a good 'motivation' is no defence against breaking the law, indeed it would make the prosecution easier because one of the three pillars (means, motive & oppportunity) of a successful prosecution is handed over on a plate.
I can take pride in the fact that the Australian courts have in recent times said "no, I don't think so" to a lot of the bullshit that the xxAA organisations have tried to foist upon us re: DRM. Unfortunately our Prime Minister (who we recently re-elected because he distracted us with the whole "Tampa crisis" and the "shadow" of illegal immigration) rarely takes time to remove his lips from the arses of the United States and US corporations in order to make such an independent decision, which would require vision (and more importantly - balls). So I'm not holding my breath for something from government protecting consumer rights. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), who handles most consumer complaints, is unfortunately pretty much a toothless tiger. They still haven't got Telstra into line over their virtual monopoloy of the telecommunications market, which is responsible for high prices (of Telstra and their competitors, who use Telstra's backbone and hence must pay their so-called "wholesale" prices) of local calls and DSL.
----------
When the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is no longer our friend.
know what you are talking about. The censorship was to score political points and does not actually change anything..
As for broadband, DSL is widespread here and becoming reasonably priced - eg US$25-40 a month - hardly unreasonable.
It's the cable that sucks, but that's only in Melbourne & Sydney.
--JQuirke
The RIAAs and MPAAs plans were to use DOS-attacks on the sites/networks which (they claim to) distribute their copyrighted content. Flooding the networks with faked mp3 or bringing servers down to their knees with faked download requests isn't breaking into systems. Not that i would consider waging DOS-wars over the internet a good thing, and yeah, i'd love to see some music exec locked away in a stinky jail (although that will never happen).
But wouldn't the proposed US-law only allow the copyright-holders to use DOS-attacks, and aren't DOS-attacks considered a lesser offense in most countries (especially if you don't break into thousends of foreign systems to misuse them but buy the necessary bandwith)?
Also who would sue those execs and set the lawyers and the police into motion to catch that evil hacking RIAA-exec? The owner of that site who probably did infringe on copyrights? The provider who only thinks about business and anyway doesn't like customers which use more bandwith than others who pay the same?
It'd be better to use political leverage: since every action has to be allowed by US-officials those officials (and thereby the USA government) can't free themselves from the responsibility for such attacks. Thus other countries can respond politically. That would be more of a threat, if those countries took it upon them to make the internet a place that can work without the US-backbones.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
It is no wonder the USA is so opposed to the International War Crimes Court, the international ban on land mines, and joins somalia as one of the only nations *not* to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Subverting emerging democracies, funding, training and arming terrorists, providing safe havens for the world's worst criminals, running drugs, raping children, defrauding pension funds, bombing prisoners, 'dissapearing' many thousands of people within the US and many tens of thousands of people outside of the US. is all part of a days work for the new emerging world order.
To me it's hardly a sustainable plan, but then maybe they know things I don't know.
maybe i am just too prepared to think the unthinkable.
I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
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
Dear [Michael Eisner]:
You have been selected as the winner of this month's fabulous appliance giveaway! You may claim your free Koala-brand washer/dryer set, Antarctic Refrigerator or Shrimp-On-The-Barbie barbecue set! Your plane ticket for coming to claim this prize is included in this envelope. Simply fly to Australia round-trip on us, and be available for us to capture on film as we photograph the winners*.
Don't delay - act now to claim your prize.
Sincerely,
Australian Bureau of Law Enforcement and Consumer Marketing
*In front and side shots
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
According to atleast one article I saw, but which was hinted at in others, ElcomSoft did distribute copies of the software before or after the demonstration within the U.S. That was a significant mistake. Although, nortmally that would have simply resulted in confiscation...
As long as we have a Congress (tm) that can be purchased with campaign contributions, we are not going to see the end of inappropriate corporate actions.
Corporations are in it for the money, pure and simple. Since they are recognized as having individual's rights, they are given far too much leeway in their behavior. Who goes to jail? Some pigeon. And you and I, the American (consumer) are left holding the (empty) bag.
The U.S would *never send corp. execs to Austrailia to be imprisoned or even sternly spoken to. Remember, this is the one country that 'excused' itself from they Kyoto Treaty (reducing pollution). GW said it'd be 'bad, bad bad' for the enconomy. 'We' also spoke out against the world's war crime tribunal. Why? 'Cause the good 'ol US of A knows it would be a prime target for the court. The prez don't wanna go.
Easy as pie. You gots the gold, you make the rules. You don't play by the rules and you gots the gold? Make more rules, make more gold.
Sure, but how do you go about proving who gave the order to do it? This article suggests that the bill doesn't care who was responsible, instead just arbitrarily assigning guilt to any exec who works for the company.
If we're gonna start being that anal about laws.. Dubya better keep his ass out of Australia, or we'll chuck him in jail for failing to prevent the deaths of every person executed while he was governer of Texas.
Clinton was here a few months ago as a private citizen, ie, no diplomatic immunity, and I didn't see him getting booked for failing to prevent the execution of an Australian in about 1994.
Yes I have. Har har.
From reading other articles on online law issues, AFAIK, the way current US law (and that of most other countries too) sees things is that the content of a server is under the jurisdiction of the country that the server is located in. To try and make an analogy to the offline world, outsiders were coming into Russian 'online territory' to buy, rather than Elcomsoft going out into other countries (other countries' servers) and selling it there. Perhaps if Elcomsoft had put it up for auction on ebay, or started a Yahoo! shop or something, it would have been quite different.
The point I was making is that Dmitry's case is quite different and much less cut-and-dried than outsiders coming in and willfully damaging an Australian's personal property on sovereign Australian soil.
Record and movie execs have gotten foreign nationals invovled with DeCSS, who have not even stepped foot in the US, arrested and brought over here for trial for violating the DMCA.
If this stupid "rich campaign contributors are allowed to hack you for no good reason" bill passes, I hope that the Aussies bust the media companies, just so that these execs get a taste of their own medicine.
Of course, they'll probably just "donate" money to some powerful person over there to avoid this situation, but it is nice to dream...
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
When flying into the country, and the customs man asks if you have a criminal record, ask innocently, "Is that still a requirement?"
Infuriate left and right
The law as written didn't even allow for a "no". Just the 7 days. So if the DoJ says no you can tell them to screw themselves, and still be within the law. Berman is slowly steering us towards anarchy with this vigilante law.
Study history a bit more. However tragic, it still won't open people's eyes. Does it cause the Isralli to stop attacking the Palestinians? On the contrary. The human reaction is "Make them pay!", and we rarely see our part in initializing the actions.
If someone has attacked you, you quickly hate and fear them. You may have provided the cause, you may not. It does't matter. This can easily escalate into intercine violence, where the only solution appears to be either one side or the other wiping out it's enemy. Then they had better hope that their prior enemy didn't have any close relatives, and that they don't have any nervous neighbors. It's really a *whole* lot better if conflicts can be resolved without introducing violence. But there are always bullies around who make this difficult. And they rarely have the insight to realize that they are turning their entire environment into a more and more dangerous place for them to live. Until eventually someone tries to kill them. Then they go all virtuous. And they still don't understand why.
Sometimes people are quite depressing. Almost everyone is well meaning. Nearly everyone is helpful and even reasonably friendly. But those few who aren't can sometimes do so much damage, that it can wipe out the positive contirbutions of thousands over years in an eye-blink.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
And here's why:
n -government hacking that's taking place halfway around the world?
A whole bunch of studios are working out of Australia these days. Fox, if memory serves, recently built some huge, state-of-the-art production studios down under, because the cost of doing business there as opposed to L.A. or even Vancouver is considerably more attractive.
The average big-studio Hollywood production is costing somewhere in the $60 million range (IIRC). And the kind of things they're shooting in the outback are the big damn blockbusters that require the large studio space the new Australian locations provide, so the work they're doing down there is probably even more costly stuff.
Does anybody really think the Australian government is going to throw away literal PILES OF MONEY so that they can toss a few suits into prison for six months? What do they care about some wrong-in-principle-but-okay-by-our-shifty-America
(Besides, it can't be too urgent to them anyways; if my memory of the Princess Bride serves me, Australia is entirely peopled with criminals in the first place.)
Here's a URL to find out if you are in Berman's district:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
I'm sure we can't change his mind, but at the very least he can feel some heat from his constituents.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Crikey!
There goes my hopes for Crocodile Dundee 3. Of all the rotten luck....
Misuse of computers is covered in Canada's criminal code.
Part IX -- Sections 321-378 ("Offences Against Rights of Property")
Part X -- Sections 379-427 ("Fraudulent Transactions Relating to Contracts and Trade")
Specifically, s342.1(1) and s430(1.1) talk about misuse of computer systems own by other people.
A good break down of the pros and cons of s342.1 right here.
As another poster mentioned, I'm sure every country in the world has laws regarding (mis)use of computers without permission. Does this stop the RIAA? Does the DoS attack count as misuse of the RIAA owns all the machines DoSing? Are these laws clear enough on denied access to services as well?
Considering the large numbers of legal systems involved, that's really hard to say.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Except not many people will put "free Rosen" or "free Valenti" banners on thier websites....
The irony would almost be worth it.
Ever since the media execs imprisoned Skylarov (oh, I'll never be able to spell that) I figure they've gotten enough bad karma that it's gotta come back and bite their ass sometime.
Personally, I hope some media execs head down to Sydney for some Matrix 2.0 publicity stunt and get arrested and thrown in the slammer for six months.
That would be poetic justice.
fifth sigma, inc.
because it took almost 40 years to complete, creating two generations of distrust in the process. It caused oppression to a large part of the world's population. It caused an unprecedented build up of weapons, an environmental nightmare, huge deficits (on both sides) and many shadow and puppet governments. It almost caused nuclear destruction of the world at least once (the Cuban missle crisis, but how many others DON'T we know about?). Finally, we'll be cleaning up it's mess for another 40 years. All in all on balance, a dismal failure.
Australia: A horribly sunny, horribly beautiful, horribly warm place to spend the rest of your life after commiting crimes in England.
Time to put the tinfoil back on your head.
(Obvious sarcasm) I Juuust cannot belieeeve that a message like this one got a +5 on slashdot.
Since when did a little thing like fact ever stop a powerful government from saying whatever the hell it wants to?
Dyolf Knip
To those who are ignorant - who do you think worked in those tobacco planations before the American colonies got slaves? Why do you think Australia was set up as a penal colony in the first place - it was because convicts could no longer be shipped to America. Hence the chip.
The proportion of the population descended from convicts in both places is trivial.
NO the Aussie's are the ones with their heads on correctly here. It us damn'd Yanks and our farked up government that is MOST CERTAINLY in the wrong here.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
They are a party with very few members (as in people outside parliment, in branches etc.)- mostly drawn from the upper middle class (again different from the Republicans - who appear to be from much wealthier folk), and odd little quirks that the Republicans would never accept. Things like you can be a citizen of another nation and be chosen to run for parliment - and you don't even have to be an Australian citizen or resident to be a member and choose who is going to run for parliment. It's founder, Robert Mensies, formed the party after he was thrown out of his previous party. In the foundation speech he said that the profit motive is the greatest positive force in society (would a republican dare say that now afer Wordcom and Enron?). The Liberal party will do anything to stay in power - in Tasmania they even formed a coalition with the "greens", who are at the exact opposite of the political spectrum (those in the US would call them tree hugging commies, here we simply call them tree hugging socialists). Federally the Liberals hold power in coalition with a framers party called the National party.
The Nationals are a million miles from communism (and would almost happily burn them), but can be defined as "agrarian socialists" - that is, they work for farmers as a communitity, not for specific rich businessmen (apart from a few Nationals, which have been kicked out or have done some jail time). They tend not to have much to do with "city" issues except in simplistic policies, and don't cope well with the seperation of judiciary and government - hence a lot of laws with "mandatory" sentences.
The Liberal coalition holds power federally, but do not hold power in any state (they don't have enough seats to form a coalition with anyone). About the only aspect of law enforcement that the federal government has is dealing with refugees, hence the current fracas (they want to look tough - and they want ro do it by kicking heads).
The ALP shares a lot with the British Labour Party (eg. Tony Blair), even members it appears (why are Union spokesmen usually British?). Unions in Australia bear no resemblence to odd things like the US Teamsters union and all those weird little Hollywood unions.
Have a care! At least one of them expressed a desire to roll naked in money (possibly because rolling naked with a man didn't appeal to her). Be certain to not use valuable jellyfish, lest they enjoy it... bluebottles would probably do. Would stonefish or blue-ringed octopi be classed as permitted fillers?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Most of the outback, modulo a few large deserts and salt pans, is quite pleasant and hospitable compared with most of Afghanistan, which seems to consist entirely of dry, shattered rocks.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
`Good stuff. I'm keeping this for later.'
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
The proposed law is very explicit in that it only applies to copyright violation. The law explicit says they cannot do any kind of damage to anyone else. In other words, if they mess up just once and hack an innocent bystander, they are looking at a long jail term (if they get caught).
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
No, it's more like if I were to send a mail bomb to australia, when the bomb kills people, I become a wanted man in australia. If the country of my residence has extradition laws, then I get sent to australia for trial. If you living in NZ were to hack into a computer here in america, and proceede to do damage to it, you would then become wanted for computer crimes in america.
Xaotik Designs