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.
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!
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!!!
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?
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
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
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.
The pasing of this law by the American Government may be all the "lawful authority" that the Australians require.
The break-in would be occurring in Australia, not the U.S. If such international authority of U.S. law existed, there would be no law besides U.S. law. Remember the Helms anti-Cuba act, which let the U.S. sanction any foreign business doing business with Cuba? That didn't go far because the EU (which does lots of business with Cuba) didn't like the U.S. trying to extend our laws onto their turf.
Claiming immunity under the Campaign Contributor Hacking Permission Act might have just the same effect.
Contrary to calling congressmen to stop this thing, I'm thinking of calling them to keep it going. It's a gamble, but this law is sooo bad on both sensible and constitutional grounds (14th Amendment) that maybe it'll be the one to finally raise public awareness as to what's going on.
Aussies, time to amend your act to say that if someone performs hacking as a company employee, all officers in that chain of command are liable for jail terms up to the level the general action was even informally approved. We know Rosen loves the idea, so bye-bye.
Interestingly enough, Valenti is backing off because he realizes the bill allows any copyright holder to hack, not just the big guys.
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.
I have doubts about that. The Dems supported the Copyright Act Amendments (Digital Agenda) Act 2000 (i.e. the Australian DMCA) and, like the Labor Party, tend to support the entertainment industry. Given their courting of the corporate dollar before last year's election (publicity of which they tried to avoid by holding fundraiser events at undisclosed locations), they're just a little too close to the vested interests in this issue for my tastes.
It's entirely possible that any sort of Bermanesque bill will pass without any significant opposition, which, given that the media tends to only report issues about which there is political conflict, means that there would probably not be much coverage at all.
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
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
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.
Another big reason is the scenery. In NZ i have heard that there is great varaity of scenery. I.E. it goes from grassy plains -> forest -> rocky etc very quickly. Good for making a movie that has many different environments. Also, much of the land looks very "ancient" so it is ideal for movies such as LOTR.
/usr/games/fortune
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.
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