Slashdot Mirror
Hearing on Hollywood Hacking Bill
DaveAtFraud writes "CNN says that Hilary Rosen and the RIAA are once again lobbying Congress for the right to sabotage P2P networks. Of course, Hilary says that the RIAA wouldn't abuse this capability. Luckily, some of the lawmakers are dubious. Also, Rep. Rick Boucher asked, 'What are the implications for the Internet's functionality when the inevitable arms race develops?' and pointed out that overzealous attempts to enforce existing copyright law had all too often targetted legitimate postings." There's also a News.com story.
hmm, i wonder what the commercial applications of this are? numero 5
..As long as the courts recognize the right to self defense for system administrators.
"They were haxoring my boxxen. I responded with deadly force, as per my rights. It's not my fault their servers couldn't take a link from Slashdot and exploded."
I would love to see a war between the RIAA and techies. I wonder who will win?
LoRider
I bet that my news submission from 2 days ago: 2002-09-26 11:58:06 Pssst... United Linux Public Beta has been released (articles,linuxbiz) (rejected) Gets a slashdot article today.
The ZD sites also have more on this story. Some more details of interdiction and spoofing are discussed, along with comments from the representatives who actually asked the questions. Zoe Lofgren (representing Silicon Valley) actually seemed to know what she was talking about.
Just don't go after my IRC...the network that has been provideing me with bootleg movies, mp3s, and warez long before napster
Pollute the P2P networks with genuine sex movies of Hilary Rosen? Arrgh.
[The boss from Office Space] Umm, yeahhhh. Good job guys, now If we could just get you to stop sponsoring DRM chips and bills that allow broad interpretation of "illegal" activity that infringe on fair use, that'd be great, yeah.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
Script kiddies won't be happy when they can't download their Britney fix every day... What about jurisdiction? If a P2P site if offshore, RIAA really doesn't have a right.
They tacitly approve of these nasty tactics from the RIAA, then turn around and sell MP3 players for their Clies and Playstation 2s? I don't get it.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
Wow!
Hopefully Rep. Berman (who is seemengly regretting his latest bill, or at least what he supported) will realise this won't do any good to his image or that of his fellow cronies images and not push for this bill.
In our world of technology and instant communication we must consider how the effect of abuse will cause the worlds network to degrade.
I propose a new infastructure based on intangible rights given to computers.
sir bard
Why no links to riaa.org? Did they complain about the slashdot effect or something?
C:\>
Does anyone else have a problem with the word suspect in that sentence. So this bill would grant someone the "right" to take away my pursuit of happiness (most definitely found on most P2P networks) without the due process of law?
...quite a bit about this subject, but I gotta quit eating up bandwidth by surfing so my copy of Star Wars Episode 2 can finish downloading over Kazaalite.
The next (il)logical step would be to allow bill collectors to hack into your bank accounts to collect on past-due accounts.
Say my DSL account got shut down one day and I found out it was because my daughter did a book report on a band and it had mentioned song titles in it. I use my connection for business, as I'm a freelancer. I wonder what legal action one could take against them. I have a feeling it would become quit expensive for them.
Hey, Do we have media police now, with special powers. Its like they are taking the law into thier own hands, but asking permission first.
would not abuse this priveledge in the short term ...
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I see in the RIAA a group acting out of desperation. I think they have been spouting on about piracy for so long that they have begun to believe their own propoganda. Until they restructure the way in which their business is conducted, they will be in constant fear of the internet bankrupting them. I think in five years they will have either changed or succumbed to their own shortcomings. Either way will, IMHO, be for the benefit of the listener.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
It's the end of the world as we know it... its the end!
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
..is a quick telling of why this would cause problems for even what the RIAA calls "law abiding netziens." The RIAA/MPAA claim that "law abiding" people wont be affected by the proposed legislation.
In actuality, if the RIAA were to launch a DoS attack against a P2P node, other nearby nodes (eg, cable modems) would also become affected from the influx of incoming traffic against that node. The reason for this is because of how computer networks work and operate.
When writing to your congressman, include this tidbit of info and why that it is the case. Include a short discussion of why it's the case in terms they will understand. Analogies work great for things like this.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
If the government decides to allow the RIAA and/or MPAA to pollute/attack/royally fsck the P2P networks, who's to say it won't get out of control? Hilary Rosen says that the right won't be abused, but who will enforce that? The government? I'm seriously not comfortable with that.
Onto the Mount Rushmore of geekdom.
What are the implications for the Internet's functionality when the inevitable arms race develops?
I love this comparison. This indeed seems like an arms race.
On one side you have the big corps armed with heavy lawyers and lots of money.
On the other side, groups of hackers, filesharers, IT-rights activists. We're armed with technology, innovation, and a whole lotta people
RIAA can probably buy the techs though, this evens things somewhat.
It's the case of the an army of the elite Vs the large army of gorillas. The elite may have a lot of neat tricks, but it will probably really hurt if the gorillas manage to close enough to make a few punches.
You;ll get a snazzy, streaming web site, dynamic generated from your collection. Keep it to yourself, or let your friends in. It's your choice.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Explain: how can you accidentally delete files? Where do you draw the line where it's accidental or not? --- You can't. To me, it can only be on purpose.
In many countries around the world (like the on I'm living in at the moment) a fee or tax is charged for every blank media such as CD or Tape, which is then paid to copyright holder organizations. I can coun't 20 disks on my backup spindle and about 4 in my garbage and today I brought some sources to my client and he burned some specs one one that I took back to my office. I hope the support is appreciated.
I submitted this same thing just a little while ago and it was rejected. Good going, moderators.
Im so glad when they publish articles like this, because it just reenforces the fact that Im not buying crap from these people. But the sad thing is, the people that Im boycotting are all bands and singers that suck and I dont listen to anyway....
Why not get the government out of this? Solve it with technology! End all IP laws and let technology work its wonder. But of course there's no libertarians on /. .
now all you file swapping theives will be hacked!
Doesn't RIAA see that there just so many more internet users with so much more skill arrayed against them that they're just going to lose? No matter what copy protection scheme they come up with, or P2P assault software they write, their targets will stay one step ahead of them. They can't possibly pay for enough bandwidth to attack everyone with files they don't like - or even find all the files.
You have to wonder how people this obvlivious to a free market managed to become an executive anywhere. It's simple: There is a demand to easily share music files. Users will use the least expensive means to satisfy that demand. As long as the RIAA's members insist on charging too much for access to an inferior system, users will refuse to use that system. It doesn't matter how many p2p networks or users you take down if the easiest solution is still to just set up another p2p network.
If the RIAA wants to make a killing on music sharing, they'd just offer a system that actually WORKS. People WOULD pay for a system that offerred reliable connections to the files they wanted. Don't sell the music, sell the connection to the music.
paintball
Let's say that they launch an attack on www.zyx.com/org/net. Would it be ironic if the admin would change the dns to point to 127.0.0.1, just like dal.net used during the latest DDoS :D
1. Copyright exploit and/or DoS script/function.
2. Sue RIAA for using unlicensed copy of said script/code
3. ????
4. Profit!
Under this sort of law, would it then be legal for companies (like Microsoft) to include nasty routines to disable your computer/network if it were to somehow call home and find out that it wasn't properly activated or that the activation was broken?
Hmm...nevermind.
*puts away the white-out*
The text of this bill doesn't prevent the RIAA from installing software/spyware on the computers they hack and doesn't give the site they hack any rights at all. Depending on the skill of their techies and how many computers they hack, the RIAA could easily use this power to set up a single point of ownership over the US portion of the internet and attack anybody anywhere with overwhelming force with their legion of commandeered computers. I would just like to say to any Congressmen reading this: This bill royally sucks.
Funny, I bet lots of Slashdotters know what bullet could solve this problem.
..If you can't get the flag right? /., and osdn.
Yeah, this is off topice and I will take a karma hit, but there is only 12 stripes on your icon.
I have emailed people at
Quite frankly, its embarrassing.
sure, I can mis spell somthing, and 5 people come down on me, but get the US flag wrong, nobody cares. Maybe it's not just the people in congress that need to get there priorities straight.
note to moderators: yes I am off topic, but is this so horrible you need to waste your point modding it down?
I won't complain if you do, but there are usually worse thing outthere.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Aren't we all libertarian here? If they want to hack you, then deny them access to your machine. Use technology, not "morals" or laws.
they are wanting to resrict the use of the MLS information to non realtors over the web.
again its a case where the net is helping industry but the industry doesn't want to "lose control"
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
What about the other customers of the ISP that the suspected criminal is using? A denial of service attack will obviously affect the ISP's bandwidth and the Internet as a whole.
If someone is breaking the law shouldn't they be charged with a crime and shouldn't we use the judicial system and due process?
If someone steals something from my house I don't have a right to break into their house and steal it back, or burn their house down.
This is outrageous.
LoRider
This article on CNN gives good voice to the "anti" side of things. In fact, the "anti" quotes were much better. I would never have expected that, when you consider who owns CNN. Hillary Rosen sounded quite false. "I can't foresee any scenario where it would be in our interest to go into anybody's computer and delete a file," but you want a law written so that you could get away with that? Does she think Americans will believe any corporations now that say "Trust us"?
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
I'm glad our Senate could take the time to focus on a real issue, instead of silly things like the war on terror and national security. Internet Piracy affects everyone!
I am no Californian, but isn't Hollywood where they make movies? If you're bitching about the RIAA, then you probably mean "Motown."
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
If I Syn-flood or smurf or interfere with the internet service of the RIAA, that's illegal. I wouldnt want that done to me. The law is fair in this regard.
However, on suspicion, guilty upon innocent vigilantism that flies in the face of fair law in the interest of protecting an old business model is pure crap. If My ISP doesnt stand up to this, I'll take my money elsewhere.
Fire Hilary Rosen
they are to busy posting repeat stories...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
One of Rep. Boucher's examples is of an ISP being asked to pull the account of a child who wrote a book report on Harry Potter. Not conjecture, but things that actually occured. Better get that netzero dialup as a backup!
Which is useless and ignored by the courts.
...then I'm sure that a small handful of "hax0rz" will. While I'm not advocating that option, it is a very real possibility. If the RIAA is allowed to disrupt P2P networks, they're going to gain themselves a very nasty counterstrike. Their networks could very easily be targeted by the so-called "black hats." When the RIAA crys foul, it won't look very good to say "We can do it, but they can't." Once that filters down to the general public, look out...
This is a very real possibility:
Much of the PTP swapping happens on university networks.
Universities often have medical facilities, and share the network.
Say the RIAA launches an attack which inadvertently damages a medical database -- someone gets the wrong prescription or diagnosis and dies as a result of the RIAA.
Or the RIAA launches a DOS attack which just happens to deny service to an important medical service, as a result some patient's treatment is delayed/denied and dies.
Deaths would be acceptable "collateral damage" to the RIAA perhaps, but I have to wonder WTF legislators are thinking when they give even one picosecond of consideration to this bill.
This isn't as unlikely as it sounds. Despite what one might think, university hospital systems are more often than not NOT FIREWALLED and NOT PROTECTED and suffer from the same poor security as the rest of the university networks.
Sony is, like most major conglomerates, dozens of businesses in one heading. No matter what happens one part of sony will lose something and another part will gain something. By tacitly supporting this (or rather not coming out against it) they avoid pissing off the other music publishers (Sony is one). While their electronics division makes a profit off of the current state of affairs. If the laws don't get passed they continue to make money off of the clie and their publishing arm takes a hit. If the laws do get passed then they move in to making money off of "secure" players taking a hit for sales of old rios, and the publishing arm does fine.
Eaither way they're still standing, and still making money.
As much I dislike the idea, the **AA should be free to put up anything on P2P services, including fake songs. If the idea of P2P is to share files, these are legitimate files to share. Just because you are looking of the full (illegal) version of the file, and you happen to find their fake version doesn't mean it is any less a legitimate file to be shared. It's the double edged sword of file-sharing. If you claim you have the right to share any file, then they also have the right to share any file.
Now as far as havking people's system (which they have seemed to smartly back away from) or even blocking file-sharing to people's systems, that is just plain wrong. They do not have the authority to perform a DOS (which is basically what they are doing) to a system or to kick that person of the P2P network.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
Say I record an album (make it really bad so noone wants to listen to it). But it accidentally gets leaked onto a filesharing network.
Now to investigate and track down who is using my IP I have to go an hack into AOL, MSN.
You get a convesation like this:
Cracker: "But officer I was only looking for illegal copies of my cd"
Cop: "Oh, OK. Want an officer to help?"
Steve Griffin, who watched from the audience as lawmakers and witnesses castigated his Morpheus peer-to-peer service, said Congress would do better to establish a per-song royalty rate to compensate copyright holders
Steve Griffin? The same guy that thought it was ok to rip off Amazon affiliates is making suggestions on how to be fair?
Pot, this is kettle. Come in kettle.
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices
I vote yes with one amendment:
I waste 2 hours watching a crappy film, I get to break into the box office and steal $100 (2hrs @$50 ea). The term were are missing in this arguement is Vigilante. Heck let's make this kind of selfhelp the law of the land! If someone breaks into your house you can find them and beat the crap out of them, protected by law. We promise not to abuse them that are not criminals,
CD
âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
Twice in the same day we've had examples of our digital freedoms under siege (see this morning's discussion).
Help make the EFF as strong a lobby as the NRA and this stuff will be stop! Gunowners protect the tools (guns) they think help keep them free. We should too.
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
She described the P2P scene as a harbor, where everyone has their "house" on the shore. There's a lot of traffic in the harbor, and the RIAA is going to "interdict" in this traffic to prevent illegal file transfers from taking place. She completely glossed over the fact that this involves interfering with my property and privacy. She assumed that there was some reason that the citizens of the United States should transfer police duties to a corporate funded self-interest group.
Unfortunately, the EFF spokesperson wasn't much of a match for her. Her argument was too soft. If you're going up against a corporate self-interest group, go for the throat, go for blood, and go quickly. She should have pointed out that this sets a legal precedent to commit digital vandalism from afar with legal immunity (terrifying to the average person). She should have mentioned that there is no way for the RIAA to differentiate between American citizens legally exercising their fair-use rights and criminals (uninteresting, but...) and she should have likened this to burning books if the RIAA doesn't know how you got it (terrifying). She failed to represent the loss of privacy and liberty in the name of closed-market corporate profits.
She should have pointed out that TV studios don't sell TV shows for $18 each to consumers, newspapers don't derive their profits from selling content to readers, movies sell an in-theater experience for a reasonable price, and radio is free. We would need legislation to sell each of these to the consumer for $2 a song/article/episode, because doing so would artificially prop up a broken business model. Nobody complains about bands' merchandise and concert ticket sales - because consumers feel that there is value in these products. Take the hint - consumers do not want to pay $18 for crappy CDs.
Is this not an American market economy, where failing business models and unpopular products fail due to a lack of demand? It's looking more and more like a command economy where useless and unpopular products are perpetuated by beauracracy.
In summary, I was horrified to see Hilary Rosen acting like a complete fool, mocking the EFF name, spreading untruths, and all the while being accepted by the anchors as someone trying to do the right thing, while the EFF spokesperson was treated as some sort of hippy wacko. The EFF person should have been more cunning and critical, and she should have immediately and unquestionably taken up a stance as protecting the American people from corporate corruption, a very effective angle these days.
I'm not happy when I can't download my Britney fix either! This is getting serious....
From Berman's quote in the News.com article..."There is no excuse or justification for P2P piracy. Of course, consumers would like free music at the click of a mouse," he said. "They would also like gasoline for less than $1 dollar a gallon. But we don't confiscate people's property and pass it out because people want it for free."
A more legit comparison would be if I were to steal gas. Lets look at that, shall we...
I pull up to a gas station and fill up w/o paying.
What happens now?
Does Texico come by by house and slash my tires? Does Chevron sneak in and fill my tank with water? No. They call the cops.
The Way It Should Be!
I still don't get why the RIAA thinks that age old method should differ for them.
Obviously, technology is our first line of defense when we can't count on the law to be on our side against the RIAA. That doesn't mean that what they are doing is right or okay just because they can, though. That kind of thinking is what makes people believe that "might makes right" and leads to abuses of the powerless in our society.
Also, waging a technological war on the RIAA will only be possible if we are afforded the same legal advantages they are, in order to make the playing field level. I can guarantee if you are caught r00ting the RIAA's site that you'll be branded a terrorist and thrown in jail.
These people are not about fairness and freedom, so we need to do everything we can to constrain them legally.
I hat the way the RIAA/MPAA is paying for their own laws. The US is not my country, so I cannot stop them, but I will do all that I can in my own country if they try their tactics on me and mine. That said, we are all advocates of supporting independent OSs, so why not music? I have happily subscribed to EMusic.com for the enormous fee of $10/month. I can download as much good quality MP3s as I want at great speeds with the knowledge that I am supporting independent music and the RIAA can kiss my European a$$ as they won't see a penny.
I just looked at this site and, while having a laugh at some of the "artists" that quoted about the evils of sharing music I came accross a few comments that seemed pulled completely out of context for this site:
Trent Reznor, member of Nine Inch Nails: "Just because technology exists where you can duplicate something, that doesn't give you the right to do it. There's nothing wrong with giving some tracks away or bits of stuff that's fine. But it's not everybody's right. Once I record something, it's not public domain to give it away freely. And that's not trying to be the outdated musician who is trying to 'stop technology. I love technology."
Scott Weiland, Lead Singer of Stone Temple Pilots: "There should be some way to compensate the artists. Because obviously they wouldn't be providing a service if they weren't getting compensated, it's not a free service, it's not like it's done just to please fans. Everything that's done is done for a profit."
Looks like, at least to me, that many of these quotes were part of much larger discussions. The Trent Reznor quote is more along the lines of the rest of the page, but the Scott Weiland quote doesn't really fit very well. Do these people know that they are being quoted on this website?
"They would also like gasoline for less than $1 dollar a gallon. But we don't confiscate people's property and pass it out because people want it for free."
Maybe this only stikes me as funny because I'm from Chicago, but I seem to think that this has become the main function of government.
And what about the CDR tax in Canada and the blank tape tax here in the US? Record companies wanted more money so they lobbied the government to confiscate ours and pass it out to them. I don't see the difference.
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
This was a very interesting hearing, and by interesting, I mean distorted half-truths and the like. It was a full packed room, and the people around me could barely contain their scoffing of some of the dramatics.
Prior to the hearing, while waiting, I talked to an MPAA lobbyist (brand new to the game, he was complaining of having to stay up the prior night and bone up on the subject). When I said, half in jest, so you guys support this bill--he responded by saying it does not have all they would like, they really want to go after irc channels as well. I hope there is never a hearing on irc, with videod demos showing irc channel traffic (as there was showing a d/l of "save the best for last" off of KaZZa).
The two main contradictions I saw were this:
1)RIAA described how big the IP industry was, and how important it is to preserve it with these laws. However, she then bemoaned the fact that they are engaged in litigation with Verizon who is much bigger then them, in fact bigger then the whole RIAA member companies. Umm, so shouldn't we then focus on the ISPs, if according to her logic, we need to help the big industries? Also, she characterized the lawsuit as just a disagreement over a minor legal technicality (you know, the LAW is a minor technicality--the case revolves around RIAA demanding names of Verizon subscribers that they properly need subpeonas to obtain, but are not getting, it is to protect subscribers privacy).
2)Rosen also said that they need this bill to stop piracy b/c the DoJ is too busy with other matters to enforce the laws, and civil suits cost so much money, more than the recoverable damages. YET, she claims that they would be under bigger restrictions with the bill passed, b/c there are remedies for users that they can bring up in civil case (which I guess would not be expensive to do????) or the DoJ can enforce criminal sanctions (which they have a lot of time to do over a few missing files, or whatever--no one would say what they want to do with the powers granted by the bill). Just such distortions.
On the plus side, Boucher was great when he brought up the letters referring to the harry potter book report (again a stupid RIAA response: "our members would not do that." Boucher responded, "it was done by the copyright holder"--AOL/TW, which I believe is a member of RIAA). Also Zoe Lofgren pointed out the meaningless aspect of the remedies for innocent hacked users. I gained a new respect for her, and I am on the other side of the aisle.
The american flag has been hung on ever piece of real estate on earth, its on the moon, its been painted on walls, draped over coffins, worn as clothing, burned, tatooed, planted in flowers to be visible from space, improvised from shirts, rags, and drawn in dust with blood. It is probably the most recognised symbol on the planet, second only to the cross. You dont need to get it perfect for people to recognize it and understand what it stands for.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
How can industry-fronted CD clubs give away fifteen CDs in exchange for the promise to buy two CDs at regular price over the next two years?
Inquiring minds want to know...
The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected. -- Will Rogers
"There has been a lot of misinformation about this bill," said Hilary Rosen, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America. "Some have characterized it as allowing copyright vigilantism or letting record companies and movie studios hack into people's computers and crash networks. These irresponsible descriptions at best reveal a misunderstanding of the text and purpose of the bill, and at worst purposely cloud the real issues."
Nice try Hilary. I think we all see what happens to artists who sign a contract with you.
I'm sure it doens't say anywhere in your contracts that you're allowed to make indentured servants out of your artists, but you are able to get your lawyers to do just that!
I envision a dream parody where all the senators are lined up to sign this bill. And afterwards Hilary cackles in glee, "All your future bills are belong to us!"
And then we see congressmen having to actually PAY money at the end of the year, just to stay in office. They propose bill after bill, but the RIAA denies all the ones they don't like. And then someday on slashdot, we'll all be asking, "Dude, why would anyone want to become a politician?", and we'll all answer, "Because the Big-5 lure them with big $$$ and fame!"
According to the P2P Crime Prevention Act, property owners would have the right to disable, interfere with, block, or otherwise impair an individual that they suspect is using their property without permission. The bill doesn't specify what techniques--such as baseball bats, brass nuckles, lawn inplements, or pits full of sharpened sticks--would be permissible. It does say that a property defender should not kill, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an assault to sue if they are accidentally killed.
SD
âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
Wouldn't a move like this essentially allow the RIAA free reign to develop their own viruses, perhaps embedded in mp3, that would track a user's p2p usage and target those that swap more? That might also open the door to have hackers produce viruses that imitate the RIAA viruses and perhaps do more damage. Anti-virus software might be required by law to allow these RIAA viruses through undetected which would open the flood gataes for copycat viruses... just a thought...
big brothers are usually pretty mean.
I saw Hillary on CNBC saying that legislation was no longer being considered. Might have been the day before... Two-faced lying little daughter of a ....
(side note: isn't it supposed to be innocent until proven guilty? that's not what is happening nowadays
I bet your agreement says that either party can cancel service for any reason; typically you need to give 30 days notice, and they don't need any notice. Thus, it is true, they are innocent untill proven guilty, and chances are you would not have any recourse. So, I say, you've signed a shitty agreement (as 99.9% of cable users) and untill you unionize to have collective bargining for a *FAIR* and not one-sided agreemnet, tough luck. It's your fault. We here in the US are by the companies for the companies; companies are there to enrich their owners and employ the populus at the smallest wage possible, not necessarly to provide public good.
Where does it stop then? If the RIAA can break into my computer to verify I "stole" copyrighted materials, and disable my computer (but not damage it) then where will it end? Can I say then if i suspect someone stole my property, can I break into their house to verify it was stolen? And then render their house unusable until my stolen items are returned?
This essentially allows the RIAA to take justice into their own hands, by-passing due process, and presuming suspects guilty rather than innocent. I highly doubt this will fly, and if it does, it just confirms who's lining who's pockets with cash.
America - Land of the tightly controlled free.
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
"...Of course, consumers would like free music at the click of a mouse," he said. "They would also like gasoline for less than $1 dollar a gallon. But we don't confiscate people's property and pass it out because people want it for free."
And I think that this argument shows that Texaco should be able to inhibit the use of somebody's car since they have "reasonable suspicion" that that person pumped gas yesterday without paying for it.
DA's office: Hello, This is [enter name here]
Texaco on 3rd and Main: Yes. I had a red SUV pull up yesterday and pump gas without paying for it
DA's office: And what is the address of the suspected offender
Texaco on 3rd and Main: [etner address here]
DA's office: Ok. I'll file a report.
*Texaco owner puts up cement baricade to stop the usage of the vehicle that might have been used to "pirate" his gas*
Now.. does it get any more ridiculous than that?
"The door (would be) wide open for abuse by the copyright owner and harm to computer users," Sohn said. "For example, the limitations on altering and deleting files...conceivably would not prevent a copyright owner from cutting a user's DSL (digital subscriber line) or even his phone line or knocking his satellite dish off his roof."
Not only that, but this opens the door for all kinds of shady business practices (Not that this is a big leap for the Big-5)
They could look around your computer, find other legal mp3's (from non-RIAA) and delete them. Or more likely corrupt them so it mysteriously doesn't work. They could plant Trojan Horses on your computer so that whenever anyone in the FUTURE connects to your computer, they can then track that person.
It doesn't have to end with RIAA and MPAA. It could open the door for Software companies. Root around your computer and see if ANY application is pirated. If so, then fubar your whole machine.
Wow, this is just so ridiculous that I can't even find words for it. ('course we have to pay an extra 'duty' to the record companies on blanking CD's but that's another /. story...)
This flies in the face of due process so much that it's insane! Ugh stupid governments always making more and more and more laws - even when there's perfectly cromulet (hehe) laws around to cover situations.
Unauthorized copying of music etc., is already illegal, they need to use those laws. And if they can't keep up, then tough crap. Cops can't keep up with all of the speeders, but that doesn't mean they can shoot the tires out of parked Ferraris because they suspect that the owners might use them to speed (of course they are using them to speed, but you still gotta catch 'em and ticket them).
Well, one or two. I agree, companies should be forced to fend for themselves without actions that would be illegal under other circumstances. Of course, that would involve actually spending more of their money on new encryption technology and other nifty gadgets. Why do that when you can lean on the government and Intel?
Rain falls on everyone... lightning strikes some. -Maria Doria Russel
it reads such that rights not given to the federal govt are given to the people or to the states. this latter is significant, because it provides for the states to curtail individual rights in whatever manner they please, unless those restrictions actually conflict with rights specifically granted by the constitution.
hehe, you gave me a chuckle with that one. Cheers.
You're right on though with the analysis that you can't just go making new laws because the old laws don't work efficiently enough. Why doesn't the government just slap a *REQUEST DENIED* sticker on this whole thing and tell those a$$es to use the current laws like everyone else has to.
Has anyone wondered why the RIAA and music labels don't figure out why people continue to download, and not buy CDs? It seems to me that P2P file sharing would decrease if we all had more incentive to actually buy CDs. I think the issues here are music quality (currently the majority sucks) and CD price (way too expensive). If the RIAA just took a short term hit, lowered CD prices, and produced higher quality music, people might go back to buying CDs, which would in turn make the record companies make more money again.
As a confessed UK geek, I can only look on in wonder at what the RIAA are trying to do. I also shudder at the thought of what happens when they extend their threat into other countries. I for one would consider an attack on my PC as an act of war, - no I'm not an 3l33t h4x0r but I'm, willing to learn. RIAA - if you get this power and use it ........... Be like the Boy Scouts and BE PREPARED FOR WAR !!
I remember back in the day when IP 'phones' were the hot shit being sold for a 'fortune' (ie, being sold).
Today, you can launch any of the most primitive online games (such as CS or even HL), and use voice commands to hear your whole team.
You're already sharing files on a p2p network by playing the game since maps and sounds get downloaded and uploaded.
Fuck, the internet is peer-to-peer when looked at from a certain perspective. This RIAA shit really scares me.
I've never used a P2P or Gnutella client -- I'm on dialup, and although I'd love to impact the RIAA's profits by downloading songs it's just not technically feasible for me.
But one part of the story intrigues me. The RIAA is making spurious files on P2P networks in an attempt to fool users, so that 'nine out of ten versions on a peer-to-peer network may be empty shells'.
So am I to understand that there is no moderation or filtering on P2P networks? Doesn't any of the clients out there allow users to vote on a file's usefulness, so that other users can highlight files known to be good and filter out files known to be bad? I'd think that would be a basic feature for any peer network. 90% of everything is crap, after all, and nowhere is that more true than on the internet.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
-cmh
I would say that it has, I find it extremely difficult to find valid mp3's these days particularly on kazaa.
However I don't think this is right across the board, there are very few spoofed videos (just wait until the porn industry wakes up and realises how much money it's potentially losing on p2p). And Kazaa is certainly the worst client for fake files but others like edonkey seem to fare a lot better content wise.
Over and over, I see posts that seem content to write off RIAA and MPAA representatives as idiots who simply don't understand the technology. This is a grevious mistake. I have friends in the entertainment industry. I'm practically family with a major-label executive. These people are very, very smart. And they know how to work the system. They are playing the game their way, and if we're not careful, they will win. The mainstream has never looked favorably on anti-establishment subcultures, and we have been slow in making inroads in government and in public perception. We need a PR department, and we need a lobby, and we need them yesterday.
Sorry, I'm ranting, I know. But I really think that we need to stand up and take a good look around. We can't fight the RIAA and MPAA with mathmatics proofs and P2P clients. By continuing to simply set up new P2P networks in spite of the Law, and by ignoring our governments, we resign our cause to the fringes. We will be troublemakers, miscreants with no morals. We will have a very, very hard time making ourselves heard in government or anywhere else. We have to fight this war on their territory.
> > What are the implications for the Internet's functionality when the inevitable arms race develops?
> I love this comparison. This indeed seems like an arms race.
> On one side you have the big corps armed with heavy lawyers and lots of money.
> On the other side, groups of hackers, filesharers, IT-rights activists. We're armed with technology, innovation, and a whole lotta people
It's been done before. Look at the history of alt.religion.scientology -- the Scienos on one side with money, & lawyers, a bunch of activists on the other with hackers & a clue about the Internet. So far it's been a quagmire for the Scienos, whose ideology won't allow them to compromise, let alone cut their loses & run.
Unfortunately, it's not been all that fun for the other side: this little battle has taken its toll in money, careers, & burnout. However, practically every current Scientologist will become an ex-scientologist & thus be interested in picking up the fight where another has left off.
One thing about this one fight is that it has provided a battle plan for Hollywood to follow in its own approach to the Internet & protecting content. A number of actors & musicians are Scienos, & there are only a finite number of lawyers who specialize in media law: anecdotes & experiences from the Scienos battle with the Internet have undoubtedly seeped into the studios & recording music offices. Thus Rosen's interest in attacking the personal computers of anyone connected to the Internet -- something David Miscavige, the head of the CoS, would give his right theta for.
As a result, Hollywood believes they have to fight a war where there really isn't one: as it has been said before, all but a negligible amount of this ``piracy" would vanish if simply music & films were easier to buy or rent online. The industry would make more money, consumers would have more choice -- a win-win situation.
Fortunately, these industries are far more interested in making money than in pushing an ideological point-of-view. Hopefully if we keep defeating these misguided acts, the PHB running these companies will get the message, & at last see how to make money by offering an effective online point of sale.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
here's a nice what if:
i record something and copyright it.
i then ul that file somewhere.
i now have a nice entry tool.
alternate:
record & c/r.
upload the file to someone with a public share
attack that person's comp
look at it this way, now you have a way to take down ppl you hate.
-.no
I've been working on a story for New Architect about RIAA's lawsuit against Verizon and in that case (as well as this one), the RIAA appears to have little regard for standard legal procedure--according to those I interviewed, it's trying to subpoena information about a P2P file trader without presenting evidence of wrongdoing and without actually filing a legal action against that person. In effect, the RIAA wants the law and your ISP to view you as guilty until proven innocent where copyright claims are concerned. It's a sound legal strategy, actually--certainly, it's more cost effective than trying to sue several million music fans.
Who gives a damn about the Libertarian model? It doesn't work. It's as doomed as Marxism. Oppressive government is evil, but no government is infinitly worse. Do a little research on the days of privately owned Fire Departments.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Well, since these DOS attacks would consume all of the cable provider's bandwidth, as well, I think that they'd have something to say about it. I mean, if half of their customers who AREN'T filesharing have no bandwidth because the RIAA has decided to DOS their neighbor, they would have a LOT of irate customers in a hurry, and I imagine that they would be inclined to sue the RIAA for stealing bandwidth.
(or, they'd just preemptively cut the connections of all the file traders. but somehow I doubt that it could be anything but economic bad news for cable companies if a large entity has authority to launch non-discriminatory DOS attacks on mere suspicion against a large portion of their users.)
The Berman-Coble bill creates a safe harbor for technological self help to impair infringing file-sharing on peer-to-peer networks. The relevant passage reads "a copyright owner shall not be liable...for disabling, interfering with, blocking, diverting, or otherwise impairing the unauthorized distribution...of his or her copyrighted work on a publicly accessible peer-to-peer file trading network." This would appear to create safe harbor for the system described above, despite the costs it might create for ISPs, universities and users. However, section (B)(1)(b) creates an exception to the safe harbor if the copyright holder "causes economic loss to any person other than affected file traders" It would seem that any large scale scanning or impairment system would cause economic loss by virtue of increased bandwidth costs to affected ISPs or other network owners.
Whether or not infringement and impairment systems can meet the economic loss exception of the Berman-Coble bill, the costs for development and implementation of any scanning and impairment system will likely be passed on to consumers. Because copyright attempts to strike a balance between access to copyrighted works and incentives to creators, the Berman-Coble bill could increase incentives and thus increase the creation of new works because it creates a new means of self-help for rights holders. However, this might not fully be the case. Because costs for this system will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices, demand for works might be decreased. Further, it has been argued that users of peer-to-peer systems are low-reserve price consumers of music who are willing to spend time, but not money on acquiring music. Raising prices to cover the additional enforcement costs will add to the pool of consumers for whom the market price is above their reserve price--users of peer-to-peer networks. However, since the aim of the Berman-Coble bill is to impair the ability of peer-to-peer networks to traffic in copyrighted works, it will eliminate whatever social value these networks created through the increased access to copyrighted works. If low reserve consumers weren't going to buy music anyway (thereby creating no new incentives for creators), the reduction in their access to it is essentially deadweight loss. Since the Berman-Coble bill will likely result in increased prices for music, possible economic loss for ISPs, and reduced access to works, it would seem to reduce overall social welfare, while at the same time overtly shifting the balance of copyright from access towards protection of incentives.
Hollywood is the largest hub of the Music Industry in the USA. More record labels are based there than anywhere else. Motown and Nashville are tiny in comparison.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
for(;;) { code_red->send(www.riaa.org); }
In other words, there is a distinct legal process and considerations for hunting/killing copyrighted material: the copyright holder must notify the Department of Justice about what technology it will use in blocking the work, and there appears to be an opportunity for the file trader to be notified what files are allegedly copyrighted before the copyright hackers move in.
My point centers in the language of the bill:
"1) If, pursuant to the authority provided by subsection (a), a copyright owner knowingly and intentionally impairs the distribution, display, performance, or reproduction of a particular computer file or data, and has no reasonable basis to believe that such distribution, display, performance, or reproduction constitutes an infringement of copyright, and an affected file trader suffers economic loss in excess of $250 as a result of the act by the copyright owner, the affected file trader may seek compensation for such economic loss in accordance with the following..." (emphasis added)
Yeah, IANAL, but still, spoofing could bog down the network, which could interfere with the trading of legitimate files (class action lawsuit opprtunity). Or, if interdiction were applied (sucking up all your outbound file connections) it could be argued that that would also prevent legitimate files from being shared.
So once you violate this, you move to the penalty track, where a copyright holder must submit a claim with Justice and try to get compensation.
Something to think about.
There is a simple way to keep **AA from easily determining what files are being passed around on p2p. It also would make it very hard for them to prevail against an individual file sharer that was making copyrighted files available from his PC.
:-)
:-)
:-)
-Rename music files to make them look like they are the songs of various indie groups
-Encrypt the files with WEAK random keys that a PC can brute-force in a minute or so.
-Pad the files out randomly so that the length gives no clue whether it is a popular tune masquerading as an indie tune.
-Make an mp3,ogg player that works with the mis-named files by storing the keys related to each so that none of them ever need to be stored in an unencrypted state.
-A central list that translated the indie names to the actual names could be kept so that everyone would know what to look for.
If a user is charged with infringement s/he says that their intent was to collect the indie tunes... and that they have not yet found time to actually listen to the tunes they have downloaded to verify their authenticity. They have remained in the shared folder with the same names they had when downloaded...it is not users fault that some miscreant made bogus files available
The user is no more liable for copyright infringement under these circumstances than you would be liable for possession of drugs if a pharmacy wrongly dispensed a scheduled drug in place of the one you asked for
The weak encryption serves to increase the time needed for the **AA to check large numbers of files to see if they are contraband.
If done properly indie artists could get some needed exposure from such a scheme... after all some of the files downloaded would wind up actually being the named song.
The RIAA would need to get a law passed that made it illegal to trade the songs of the Indie artists online.... The courts would have a field day with that one... many lawsuits would follow as Indie artists sought damages
If this law passes, it would be open season for hacking. Just put up a an original two-line poem on your web server. Claim copyright on it. According to the DMCA, when anyone's web browser downloads it, they have made an actionable copy and therefore infringed your copyright. So now you have the right to go and hack them to kingdom come, with no penalty whatsoever!
It would be even better if someone created a central repository of logged copyright infringements, indexed by the source. Want to hack Microsoft or IBM? Just look for a company IP address in the repository.
Any idea when we'll see Congressional action to look into how RIAA members can collude to keep CD prices artifically high?
[sounds of crickets chirping]
?If this passess, then well they well be given the right to do what others would be jailed for. If I decide that I am against somthing, such as Paypal (just a example) and I decide to DOS them, and case damage by doing do. Then hell paypal is not ging to be happy and can get cops on me if thye wish.
... what ever, I can't get anyhting from RIAA.
Now we are saying that if this bill passess, then the RIAA well be alowed to DOS psp networks. Now considering how DOS works not only is the guy next to my house get DOS, but I get it to. It would affect the general area to be honest. Now lets say my system takes damage, software messed up
There are countless examples I can go into but hey my time is worth cash. But also noote one thing, this is a US bill. I am in canada, so what happens when they do a DOS attack that goes over the border. If my companey is hit because soem one ran kazaa on our network even tho its not alowed. Then well they can mess up corporate data and such. Now this just became a VERY tuchey subject.
my 2 cents plus 2 more
Ok, I am against this sort of actions they thinking of. I am also for that we should be able to listen the music we buy on several different devices as we have paid for the music.
But what we are doing at the moment is defending our right to break the law. By sharing copyrighted material to others we are violating laws and we argue about this as it is our given right to do this.
Do like we should do with copyrighted software, if we dont like the license dont buy and don't use it. Our lifes doesn't end because we cant listen to music. And if you really like the music then buy it. Of course you support the record label by doing so but at least the artist gets something, pirate the music and the artist will get nothing at all.
We can have many arguments on the record industri and that sort of stuff, but we do break the law by sharing copyrighted material to people on p2p.
who shot the cat in the hat to experiment is insane
Hilary Rosen: Computer, you have a problem, and it's affecting the entire music industry! Computer: Click, click, click, click (HD red light flashes) HR: Your RIAA family thinks you need help. We're worried. You're in denial. You need to go to Hard Drives Anonymous. C: Click click click HR: Don't talk back to Me! We have it all set up for you. Just let us type format C: and press enter on your keyboard. C: Click,click click click HR: Okay then, we have your permission? C: click click click......silence.
If politicians get the idea that millions of people who use such software will know if their representatives are screwing them, it could be deterrent.
Maybe some sort of e-mail feature can be built in that allows you with the press of a button to send a message to your representative that you intend to vote against them in the next election if they vote to approve some legislation.
People will most likely not act on their threat, but politicians won't necessarily know that.
Here's a great link: EFF legal actions You'll see how your contributions can actually help.
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
They support music lovers, really!
ac
(Howard Coble)
and
(Howard Berman)
They both need to be marched into the woods for legal re-education. Copyright has nothing to do with property rights. All it represents is that someone has a temporary government-granted monopoly on copying a work. Someone does not "own" the work itself just because they have been granted the copying monopoly.
I understand the copying industry's desire to cast it in this light. After all, property law is much stronger than the actual copyright law they really fall under. In fact, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't try and twist the truth like this. But that doesn't mean we have to swallow it.
Last night's Capitol Report on CNBC had a 5 minute piece with Hilary Rosen and a representative from the EFF.
Amongst others, Rosen made the following amazing assertions (I am summarizing, not quoting verbatim):
1) That the record industry's business is down 10% this year over last, yet normally in tough economic times people spend more, not less, on things like music so downloading must be the culprit
2) That the bill will give people more, not less, protection against intrusion into their computers (and that people currently have no protection) - that P2P is wide open and a means by which currently anyone can do damage to your computer with impunity by "planting a virus" (amongst other things)
When confronted by one of the hosts with a question as to why he should feel comfortable with the RIAA invading his computer to look for their IP, Rosen said that the RIAA would not in fact be doing this. She then likened the P2P community to a harbor with many, many small bays and said that the RIAA would be "policing the harbor", looking for their IP to cross it and then follow its route to the offender. Rosen also stooped to name calling - referring to the EFF as the "Everything for Free Foundation".
Fair Use was not discussed.
Rosen was smart and focussed and showed a politician's gift for evading issues and distorting facts. Twisted as they may be, she got her points across. The person from the EFF (her first name escapes me but her last name was Steele) was, in my opinion, not up to the challenge. Admittedly, a 5 minute rapid fire forum is not a good place to discuss a complex issue, but she seemed not to have a clear message that would speak to the average person. The only point that she got across well was that people want to download music from home for a reasonable price and see the artists fairly compensated. She never touched on the very important issue of invasion of privacy and potential damage that can be caused by IP bounty hunters.
They also aired one of the new "downloading is theft" commercials which equated downloading music to stealing a CD from the store. Like a music video, it was fast cut and fast paced and seemed to be aimed at under 25's.
Most of the time I'm searching for live performances, outtakes, or out of print material etc. If I have no other avenue by which to acquire it, am I really violating copyright? Who does that material belong to, the artist or the record company? I've been researching this issue for quite some time and my initial conclusions still seem to be intact.
- Piracy is only piracy when the pirate is compensated; this does not happen in P2P networking since material is freely distributed.
- The idea that material freely distributed is equal to lost sales is simply wrong; what if I never intended to buy that record in the first place - it's not a lost sale if there was never going to be a sale.
- People like me have actually purchased more CDs since getting involved in file sharing due to increased exposure to more bands that I find I like. I would never have heard of more than half the CDs I bought in the last year were it not for P2P sharing. God knows the radio ain't playing any of it.
- Finding obscure and out of print material does not cost the record company a dime since they're not offering it for sale in the first place. Who the hell are they kidding?
- Most people don't download Britney Spears records from P2P networks - they tape it off each other or the radio. Honestly, why would someone take the time to download a song that gets played on the radio constantly? Besides, those artists that are already successful seem to be the most freaked out by this; does the equation 'Increased exposure equals increased sales' mean anything to anybody? I know I'd like as many people as possible to hear my band for free - that's marketing and exposure - but if someone charges for it and I don't see a dime then that's piracy (*which when it comes down to it, is exactly what record companies do the artists).
Finally, I'd really like to see Eminem kick the ass of 'those guys on the internet that are downloading my songs' as he so intelligently put it. Cripes, I think I'll go download as much Eminem as I possibly can, burn it to CD and then set it on fire. That'll show 'em.
-B
"Look, Smithers! I'm Davy Crockett!"
In other words, the check hasn't cleared yet. ;p~
Yeah, mod me down. You know I'm right.
Hmmmm....If this law were to be passed, would it give me the the right to legally hack the systems of any company or organization that supports web browsing? After all, web browsers are making a copy of my homepage.
:-)
Sure, posting a web page might be considered to be giving implicit permission. But I could always put a notice at the top of my webpage (in lawyer-sized type of course) denying that permission to anyone but myself. Then I just need to look at my web server's logs to see what networks I'm leagally allowed to hack.
Shouldn't it be Cracking Bill?
Aren't we trying to get rid of the image of hackers being bad? We should use the correct terminology ourselves then.
I just found a new sig.
Just out of interest, has anyone here realized the potential weaponry we already have to stop potential attacks from the RIAA, MPAA, et al? Folks, we control the routers. Last time I looked, the internet was an organic beast controlled more or less by us. (checking my router monitoring CGI scripts) If you don't like the policies, or 'legitimately' fear an attack from a network, then isn't our responsibility to either route around them, or crank up some access-lists to block them? Attacks from a network certainly generate access-lists on my WAN routers.. I'll just leave you folks with that, and let you marinate on it...
I was a realtor last year, and I can tell you for certain that the NAR has heavily pushed the use of customer access to the MLS, against the wishes of member realtors. Why should they care you might ask? For starters, if it wasn't for our dues there wouldn't be an MLS because it's a private system funded by our dues. Second, by giving customers access to the system we paid for, new realtors are no longer the sole access point to this information. In effect, the public gets the value we provide with our member dues for free, and then throws it in our face that we have nothing in the way of service to offer them that they can't do for themselves.
Established realtors who are already taking in customers by referal and through other means aren't hurt by this practice, so it's worth their while to give up control of a little proprietary information to limit their competition from newer realtors. Most of the newer realtors don't have the funds or to pay to play for more than one cycle. So even losing one sale because our customers shop for other forms of value in service when they don't have to rely on us to provide the information we paid to accumulate is enough to sink a fledgling career. (So is having every one of eight customers calling off their search for a new home after certain events on 09/11/2001, but that's just an act of God so to speak.)
As a realtor I was all for banks, individuals, and other businesses forming alternate and competing forms of listing services. Competition isn't what bothered me. What bothered me was using MY money to fund an organization which gave one of the more compelling reasons to use the services of an unseasoned realtor away for free, and have the gall to charge $600.00 a year for the priviledge. Not that we had much of a choice because it's next to impossible to find a real estate agent who isn't a realtor, let alone one I'd want to work under. Not to mention the public perception that a Realtor and an agent are mutual inclusive terms.
Oh, and as an aside, most agent's main fiduciary focus is upon themselves, whatever else they may say it is. If you don't know what the word fiduciary means then you're all the better a client in their eyes.
MediaDefender president Randy Saaf said the company can also block downloads through a technique called "interdiction," which closes off a user's hard drive to others on the network.
Whoa. For a second there I thought he was going to request the Pope interdict any offending user. I guess even the RIAA realizes that an eternity of fiery damnation is a bit much for a few mp3s.
Wo whose files are exempt from copyright? I guess everyone not in the RIAA?
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001
Aren't we all libertarian here?
What in the world makes you think that?
Woah, ok, its the slashdot flag of 1777 before new hampshire joined the union. SHHHH!! Dont tell the TIPS people.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
What really bothers me is that Boucher is the only politician to have said anything about this proposition is a guy that we already know is already on the side of the people. I appreaciate Mr. Boucher asking these questions, but I really want to hear other politicians asking them too.
You're right on though with the analysis that you can't just go making new laws because the old laws don't work efficiently enough. Why doesn't the government just slap a *REQUEST DENIED* sticker on this whole thing and tell those a$$es to use the current laws like everyone else has to.
I belive that the answer to your question was contained within the question itself:
$$
The congress-critters like money, and the RIAA/MPAA gives it to them.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
You're right; it's "boxen". There's absolutely no excuse for doubling the 'x'. That makes it look like one of those brand names, like Exxon or Nixxon or ...
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Berman makes no sense. Your point does. Out of the "240M" they are losing, how much of that represents people that would have actually gone and bought the music? I would be that about 5% of that 240% is the real impact. I would actually like to see the RIAA find success in their witch hunt, shut every door for making a copy of a song, and thus cause consumers to finally give into their hate of big corporations. This way their sales will fall flat, and perhaps they will go out of business. No one likes a smartass, and no one likes a bully.
Ok slashdot, tell me this - The RIAA wants permission to, amoung other things, launch DOS attacks against people they see who are serving their files. Fair enough - now what is to prevent kazaa from reserving a small amount of bandwidth on everyone else's computers which could then be used in a ddos counter attack? (Besides the obvious legal implications)
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Out of curiosity has the RIAA ever thought of this:
With all of their sue, this stop that, flood this network stuff. Why don't they just bring the price of CD's down?
Heck that would probably be cheaper.
Just my 2 cents.
I'll look through past polls, but I'd imagine given dem/repub/libertarian/green, well over half would be libertarian.
IRAQ / ALASKA ANYONE?
At any rate Bush wants to...
Most lawmakers are dubious: questionable or suspect as to true nature or quality
Perhaps the author meant that some of the lawmakers are doubtful: lacking a definite opinion, conviction, or determination that "... the RIAA wouldn't abuse this capability".
Age 12 - My mother, never one to be really interested in music at all, acquires an 8-track tape player. She soon discovers that there is a store - yes a legitimate business here folks - where you can walk in, select the 8-track of your choice and bring it to the counter and for a meager $4 they will make you a copy in less than 2 minutes. Did I say copy, damn right! They had several high speed 8-track duplicators sitting right behind the counter. These guys were printing money and you had to shove your way to the counter on several occaisions we visited. There was nothing like getting that crappy Neil Diamond record for only $4.00 and my mom was hooked.
This lasted for several months before they were shut down - hmm...wonder how that happened. But not before the whole town was rocking and rolling with these illegal copies. So let's go skip to the next track here.
Age 16 - Mom finally breaks down and let's me get a stereo - receiver, big ass speakers and record player. A few months later I discover cassette tapes, man I gotta get one of those!! So I acquire a cassette tape recorder and some blanks. Hey guys, can I borrow your LP of Styx or that new Van Halen. I hear they're smoking! We traded LP's and cassettes back and forth for years - I think if I opened all the boxes of tapes I have laying around there must be at least 500 blanks I recorded at one time or another.
Fast forward to 1984, CD's are looking like the next big thing, great sound, compact, portable, wow. So I get a CD player! Guess what, I still have that tape deck too. Ooh that Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon CD sounds so much better on CD (wonder if they'd really have ever sold anymore of that one if it hadn't been remastered on CD) gotta borrow it and tape it off.
We really hadn't thought of duplicating a CD onto another CD at that time, PC's just couldn't deal with the amount of data and commercial duplicator's were way too expensive. But boy those record companies were really raking it in! $17 bucks for Dark Side of the Moon and guess what - they don't have to spend any more on art work, the artist, recording or any of that crap, but they can sell it to you all over again! Now who was printing the money. They were laughing all the way to the bank!
About this time, I walk into my neighborhood video store and guess what - yeah that's right I can rent the latest audio CD's from them for $1.00 a day. I did a double take and thought to myself - I want that one and that one and hey that looks good too. I taped like there was no tomorrow. Why spend $17 on a new CD when I could get 13 on tape after buying the blanks. I had more music than I could possibly listen to - still do for that matter. And now the record companies were starting to feel the pinch from home taping so they got Congress to enact the taping tax on blanks. The bastards!
About this time I started working at a radio station - reviewing records. "Hey, Sire how about sending out copies of that new Talking Heads album for us to give away and anything new you might have going so we can play it out here." I was in taping heaven - a direct fix from the record companies on an almost daily basis. I didn't have to rent it anymore because they would just send it to me and pay the postage too. I was taping things almost 12 hours a day, there was always something laying around that looked interesting. God I loved that job!
It really wasn't until about '98 that CD-burners and the internet caught up with the record companies technology. While they were too busy counting their profits to invent new technology to prevent this, THE PEOPLE got tired of paying the same $17 for a cd they now know costs about a quarter to make. Now we could make a perfect digital copy - in the privacy of our own homes. Hey dude, can I borrow that Floyd disc again - I just got a burner. It was no different with software and porn - burning night and day, while asleep, while at work. And by the way, where are these porn and game devoper people in this debate, how come they aren't right up there on the front row screaming with the rest of them, "They're stealing my god damn avi's of Brittany naked!!"
Now with the advent of compression schemes like MP3, we can steal that song in seconds. Ooh there's that Dark Side of the Moon track on MP3. Yeah I know I own 3 copies (lp, cassette, CD and soon to be DVD video) of the damn record already and I'm too lazy to rip it, just download it and be done with it.
You know where I'm getting most of my CD's to burn these days? The freakin' public library!! Oh yeah and there's that cool DVD I've been wanting but didn't want to shell out $25 for, I think I'll check it out and rip that over to VCD too. I can keep it for a week, no problem, thanks. And now with shn, you can compress the tracks and not worry about quality loss like with MP3. Watch out BMG, I'm coming for your whole damn catalogue next!
I guess the point of this whole rant is that we've been stealing your music for years and you're still making plenty of money. Get over it! We will find a way to do it. It's human nature to rise to that challenge. It's the little kid in all of us that likes to do exactly what he's told not to do just to be rebelious. And besides, 90% of the stuff I taped was CRAP. I listened to it maybe once. I look through it now and it's like, "man why did you tape that shit."
The record moguls need to worry less about us copying there music and more about coming up with a replacement for the CD. They got themselves into this mess with their new technology and that's the only way they are going to get out. They need to come up with something that is so far beyond our computer's power to duplicate, so far beyond consumer electronics and so superior to compact discs that we can't say no. That's the only way out for them.
Laws are made to be broken. And besides, I bet they find that they are going to get hacked a whole bunch more than they will ever be able to hack us consumers. What a pea-brained idea anyway! This was probably the second great idea of the guy who thought up the copy protection scheme you can defeat with a sharpie!
Sorry, the mail man just delivered those VCD's of the Rush - Vapor Trails tour show on 8/24/02 in Colorado I traded for, gotta go check it out. Oh yeah, and what are they going to start doing now, checking my mail? Give me a break and get a life you RIAA idiots!
You know, systems like Echelon and Carnivore are bound to hold quite a few copies of various emails I wrote (particularly as I like to throw in random "bomb", "terrorist", "attack" and "allah" keywords in there). I wonder if I could claim they are _sharing_ those emails (my copyrighted material) through that system...
Scientology has succomed to its own bullshit, and it hasnt killed itself yet. So i wouldnt be to sure in saying the RIAA is going to hang itself.
This
So I guess the fun will start when someone launches a virus that instead of "damaging" Windows it just starts up filesharing and shares a ton of "copyrighted music" -- either spoofing or downloads of the real files. Enough to attract the RIAA Gestapo. Then sit back and watch the fireworks as the RIAA does all the dirty work of trashing the machine. Admittedly you could say this virus already exists as any PC User, but it isn't as efficient.
It would be fun to see how long the RIAA tactics lasted. Especially as the virus made it's way through the government agencies...
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
What if you suspect them of distributing your copyrighted works? I suspect that they've been distributing the novel that I've been working on. Disclaimer: only pay attention to what I'm saying if you have a lawyer and a buncha money.
WWJD? JWRTFA!
I cannot believe that this issue is even up for discussion. This is a clear cut case of someone trespassing on my property without permission. I'm not talking about anything as fancy as cyberspace, either. I'm talking about the fact that the computer, which they are using, which is using my electricity is in my house. It is trespassing without a doubt.
The police don't have this kind of power and I certainly don't want any old corporation to have this kind of power. The precedent this law would set for someone like Microsoft is ridiculous.
My computer belongs to me. If you suspect that there is something on my computer that shouldn't be there, take it up with the authorities and bring evidence so you can get a warrant. Anything short of warrant is going to guaruntee nothing short of a retaliation. I don't let theives into my house and the RIAA isn't invited either. This is a clear violation of my 4th amendment rights against search and seizure.
For those of you who might want a refresher: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
As the rednecks in my part of the country like to say, "Get the hell offa my property!"
_________________
Even if that's true, which I sincerely doubt, "well over half" is not anywhere near "all".
Wouldn't this be considered a DOS attack against the ISP? I don't own the connection, I just lease it. This would be especially true of cable internet where there are many users per area...their tactics would cause congestion across the entire segment...Also, would there be grounds for a lawsuit if their activities caused you to go over your bit cap?
Great! Maybe that'll help out all of us jobless geeks!!
Any sufficiently simple magic can be passed off as mere advanced technology.
The US government collects levies on blank media too. It's not just Canada. And the levies aren't cheap. And the companies that get the money aren't always the ones that should. Yea freedom!
I wonder if we'd get away with it...
No no dude, don't nuke that place, that's my home computer downloading the LOTR soundtr... I mean... let's nuke this person distributing Britney Spears' latest album
(mental count, 99 Spears' lovers taken out, yesss)
A slashdotter put it best in another RIAA discussion I read a while back: Game On
No sig for you.
Assuming this becomes World War "T", where are the targets?
Hacking the RIAA website is amusing, but it's been done. And done. And done. They still run IIS so the next exploit is just a malformed URL away, but what's the point? A PR website that produces no revenue is hardly a strategic target. Ditto for Sony, Disney, MPAA, and the others. If this turns into a war I would hate to see the black hats waste their time on a bunch of meaningless, defenseless websites.
"Yeah, we may accidentally kill a few hundred people", Rosen was quoted as saying "But what's a little collateral damage when money is at stake? This is the Enron/Bush century, after all."
Why is nobody alert to the fact that all songs, movies, pictures, books, or other digital works are just numbers. Therefore, it would be illegal to copy a file with certain numbers between about 10E10E6 and 10E10E7 because those numbers may be in the set of numbers that potentially 'could' represent a "copyrighted" song.
.. er.. numbers themselves - that copyright only has to do with applying said numbers in a manner that produces something known as a copyrighted work?
2 25 31711071021502632232513242626321771771773231521713 57357357757474350262271320320320337337337334215227 37236436523412227727727723523623635530231016011655 24270116151172256256256207207211254233223370347351 12041373252732623261732073132211261371401413131261 46271307343163721563143263531741031132125773731031 72344313300340344354122120120267246241214134105276 26025320116115522121721736626115336733331636031732 33111121333422362473643333363563613703452441431601 37133354213231224177172144175257161161162152150147 30576120404040406323137737737741371440404040405440 40404020027640406377300237160110543221731024416231 11547223732025016411225513225733025416631335517227 73402601701145623331735026417231515627333736027017 41162573333573702741763173573733772002012021472611 75207555203213214215216217220221203102062072267536 22223223323423523623724010222522722621224124725025 12522532541316244244525526326426526626722052602441 32702762773003013021442732442030331031131231331430 52273073143213223233242372723165136555355261032534 13423433441633631622611573537055334034536136236336 41271432731655353373573027536540312143013375614374 36626514060260241303207322301701101203003404134374 60403544742022011020103212341113131421716537354703 00340401032041732071641101222402002443152333211306 01404033217377133053702553702611403061714555631534 43013011316247120305131601303003022171632736025611 33213132372111217564513401613002512263112323413031 32662012243121261370230113267256335273170363352335 31326725733727720031336114270260341303210233531560 40712111020035621240366122117675422443002201207451 31201140160250171204332354637636013031527236535230 24331530622524227026635533327016335333631527336734 04071100306137133133130617611122354263436221720367 41423006534240617322126124371504024317336726525624 36731060732123573633503232531373172761753363401043 20305262201203205152241132715526026130247121103603 30341300132111516741646131066105625335220414152503 26332160603412002336125370224173341663503773412074 01623040110331014731116137124527021611720100340300 51263311413217324630140176213434140143445561103332 62616613622224311232147533224342222114663513442231 73140204211752602403422255754642041141021343002035 62254226432343062002063621103033523010521425136164 12212434523416432615124715712212215130276332602601 22635335410010421410264473071425317534041646425241 20322173050101164633064032042155217124715530211130 02462773454010040240226132301304245323103102301501 65451213712241323202063061011402461043002034717156 26211206133324611323402025220511126134246457122225 12111653723032473143662540144772101001522643303562 54012627324160317121123526414717633354360172154316 13771032031041443001501422242615613114270403472160 30111321737130227240203206520012326616711111130426 51667113255235110200100403021643154104164127214127 25212612122620163236420026177256140213265166125320 14304372306255330315140135245362262333062746526221 30125574302453462451512222651531102632310535520133 27245360246113741341271610424351643051230304345117 12635633031572143201611463403401012004617316022113 23415316221315024721536677142642203002567232511046 37672601433153633621003041431214234114631510514370 13261562723263003171521502031022376120030032423374 75200214734016526417322203320272347141003272641021 30373364350713014011015037036733733422732615671602 60301655104140377200540423202342024537740101722252 46031233353516220523334146124330030614236710333610 34035234020152755736020317353403742130623617022024 27210641243140176305224717314020073701703626421110 61702366032134146276712364403440407110074272305316 11230221321402372724410512632731042562403004601046 61640124107172140212373430240501133003331741477453 31421064366132115115214252574124116102023432011313 46365203200713051451443411011122132074303303601471 71123407274367204107365151321703043273023261011164 55406470213561622713663302175710432023417640277411 10361177130374334330230160216415030462263212006110 20021222001442131022202403576670245361406021533374 13513025420441511537715265106271125315306575141221 67216523341374252604311010055157221734033665671453 15100615413111331461501021721116302117164260432013 72614111027410231335147612113754021110224012335126 77740214152613160454034414722713301624037227324537 42507042133032217716521134232221226031313337217702 62244345242157110513121635626116445567724711314510 21232273173141421351123002044013224221420732020015 31101002121355510014526250325521130045711323411061 72232022613423144145335312101171343301365124163751 41271461713301731244230316320044301263463752220243 24243620022536010665201147170214342621524121122224 23501011300664631432121040342151143516414721402007 74030161253501222472120122637722333302134220140315 14013232156246134242171363727122612341212104200217 11051126227124061225257364301320176402614020241162 33231411351722222114435040262074011750260202213603 13143320340521611220433630530721510716024733330367 31121144240534175361532061405463335161172507432217 15614535105413527210320013161366323542265466101342 30013221422450423345217117027443153142260261631030 05036342215166567124332734200334526316171145310326 23525126553533423361266131703402342336140103406021 24234253155721402001664501013351526016546213401525 52602706717220447614010322017342137116510172324632 12264072150242362103253353512014011220423136241246 16422156135142327235712201226507537715717020710032 61234231422410520351711231322722622652521672511005 24114762160226342251323452011217616021212034075130 30123242102752325035625415754202345112221125125304 33206140143140347521171662612141020526334115333430 42533255031011572202012144303240171142256172304336 41353110275633511064233642021336105361063653101301 75632153001230757424452551132401043552642413211362 40117210302323534324225432121415226442226340322753 43104010334143521202563043326134223240230325142366 36510140412261364335024211113403521663073331353553 06117573421352571143553742031352220140404030125371 21441507512710415031434525027710332327277170141343 40207320242342513607102034715216374325716105310200 10017337720716020144254323101622541521221003312346 40340202527414414373114226273261011021462723252451 26203143105711262041062002012571772152533236340111 17424413114777300263131412011520142662300267353622 54531012051234020122236421236743301034740324536652 41352404034257761127216512152532634030104047103136 36130612716051335103134265254164141250262003061026 10324352175300643723214520042230454025631312437230 62341261144270374170123157236362164277304363115355 12243633661715622313256115205320271511361272121255 43322673561502241233432216634146366542007315070140 17036026011535032013251037073770106251217201011234 31313021054345343172212661472163031623452272772241 25702062661062423502013030337730335524413064063662 01563252001714111155726017213117622050212323535034 12512016423455244275342252333337462021077721215113 52303023131034017410623336312662463320310121412134 11133443551117632433520121716030711126160104317305 32112023521326311620026037112215415023424763164753 16335757317434317331126317345523222032741040110252 30727126105512162322301631415156125173632711243001 54505426512334403454031240653246300152106100117013 35210125753022512213163671612642713103553352551723 64127302266531101126227223030436474161102076523616 43313413065636641144406631234133333532522664011123 72311251151415644602621671473057714035601045741443 33351461261451652210514010250365320234720021522712 13652462003772013476117224731223061703203401165016 31012634112152123147331221004740150404016171471605 13505117412612233367162363256125024716177205123177 34617225330716052370162117324420616616227232717317 03614025226331502410134710643073273213063232026040 27260533745141151125104266410712623043102631653362 07757022343342207432112244374075110340621455042723 46433402674334436713143263262401106420314225311326 21034152021765514411120522231136015610526017020350 23171501023250141204502126510321012727020112633010 57714072111100602162464722451462431272710336351673 10211577014725147172117224172637013737307147264644 27223077701701726531014720046113264110113360265211 10223013717300136317107162377173262326532701406212 11104166020521447171224146205351641030020742176520 72542011277716063323370316744671663276325524140146 17020632624175172225422653236136216620022512172220 72653061531661674430614213120320443154472073173412 16462031011316014420311020120730201202302101122101 26204074340340210207402111742671675211200771006026 72104256250211251144213743455464140221632764621102 12632302732216516125036716232726277243072033332710 42136115233122421327333021252632051137012044120430 52704510624721421616712631251751021401333013223215 22621032014244322361330616275333701173722416536122 44516421610536043141053215767130256201413563301756 43022242542217421414517625324122410320025103507037 71124710134736016740371217271414514425354464103120 13413020124211272462755107145202461701243202210064 40150202371172421052301051605510363122215161135255 14723021714621211360221252150135257641372347212260 37015041167552253271603537121127121027372225106252 32373542021413325223103402057113120537225156102160 12523141532314143661043623510512014616110763645171 21117344153253321413165130221204225233264141364302 25255416016714426156426037116420711634111716514741 02401333114041233012014110425117377150210110346210 33311323670233243702107321156241124211330621372036 62123451052211122606011324510424113115024113123717 03017131210416115510614017222621223351105132022711 32252115323011255231213377277474131206210310741362 45232541204143203427120542316642221172223012033321 11024246227104247234364350205303166111744117117300 24234114151121223555152751551273242215317123433026 22341024017627636211132724033073004020536015624312 15710216016206342244345326312314310134621561261011 17536017334151723342513347224220151164103436520031 52055554345641631611242443425437315117123712324077 34024011222542171123140172271113437774205212421051 13503121312316417352125603471232172101504536314023 21062234135073551622411723471262771255330236513320 16025111401341174610452252205367644433126132236164 40152421303107111111036017613230025210440131153241 40245152621561433164066141201062522140377333501265 03602222423213427324510130641563272204034712274522 01341223461322301212534513311237015711020055216661 60206721721222331501642152352160373112340540144345 25566502506410173112243247242704050265256257130212 25310725611736525576401602172232222725041270401153 70461220641452431260244143172022171634054346223455 36225113234021013630012611220025017122116117416111 33223021141142022612653013032322427441052611724116 31062602572232701251422643244401062504314263372721 72257203135277363250223472627035336160106162717320 44267017160273701002242401370202647513151254121216 43624032205335360401162132641111332653722262126353 17325312342122013722612117616011140233265130124237 72541214732716033254026614433326635326126363322662 53404277373223167341264226340173227100272512011223 73401433532662462222331064725212651211533317120212 02333270347221146156153122621012651641611110137340 35163102312011160121203563402652402534027024024217 47420224627327225453305532727045606613341201732717 01731076360406560123235323540402413327424113332453 33272163102270743002643062732743141332736153261751 13271164211473404011626131651211233002732074040112 40230333272352401354027430253403223332743720227435 23332763561332653517327125165126521325640405240130 03327665360273540272346532743613732763552411744174 30010141631761132327122032652334032437315327640342 72326030113427232343003512212573233430136174472003 13272341327624233316536027134153276261743012120273 37374302603430316213340561142717200224040526013260 15220301342173301102134274621343041061743042105226 52653132715354276747413013333042713431120030412617 43051303747717617327075403041021343403543055411430 31311343061461743062451221142543043421132761543542 75312143061627430716427436113003061021343052540743 33333307502030216534310202743102752613061543341161 11431021227431021415430206743051043343102227431122 43542716721430712134311225134306101404073
Would we not be served by moving to the notion that you can't copyright the digits
Just for kicks, here is the value of the disney corporate logo in octal:
10711110670711412002764032540401622163072710524
I suppose by stating that number, I am violating a copyright?
I dunno, just a thought.
There has been talk of creating a Political Action Committee for technology issues, but so far, nothing has come of it.
Laws vs. Laws. If they want to bring in the big guns, don't expect us to continue using spitballs.
It's been a long time.
There should be a "Draft Boucher" movement started. Certainly he's the best choice amongst the Dems. He's prolly the last Dem that isn't 0wn3d by Hollywood, at least.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
That makes all government agencies excempt from the rules.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
According to testimony MediaDefender actually connects to your shared folder as if it was another "pirate" and downloads the files at a really slow rate tieing up all of the upload availablity.
From the outset it seemed the congresscritters had made up its mind before the hearing ever started. One thing that Ms Rosen kept saying was that they aren't hacking, but only accessing the hard drive that is freely available.
Gigi Sohn handled herself pretty well considering ever congresscritter kept trying to trip her up and admit that she supported "illegal music theft". She stuck her ground, and came off pretty well.
Maybe after the capmiagn reform laws become law after this years elections, we won't have certain of the cogresscritters out "whoring for $$$$", to the highest bidder. Check out yours at Opensecrets.org
Mods, *please* ignore this! I just want a /. post for my newborn Emily who arrived today! Maybe in 15 years she will understand what a geek her daddy is when I show her this post!
Anybody got a link for the nastygram mentioned in the article? This is an awesome illustration of the abuse of copyright. Your kid's book report earns you a cease and desist from Time Warner. Brilliant. A book report.
They pass bills, they embed DRM chips in the CPUs, they run DRM software, they kill Linux, yada, yada, yada...
The result? The consumer stops buying and spends their $120/month entertainment money (IIRC, that is the national average) on something else, like going out to dinner more often with friends or paperback porn or whatever...
And the music and movie industry collapses into a depression...
You CANNOT legislate human economic behavior.
So let them do what they want - it'll kill those industries quicker than the speed of light...
And something better will take over - making those who invest in that something better the billions currently going to these assholes...
I can't wait to get rich off other people's stupidity.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
The other day on Kudlow & Cramer (CNBC), I happened to see Ms. Rosen along with someone from the EFF...
;-)
Among the usual FUD she spreads around, Ms. Rosen would poke at the person from the EFF. Quite frankly, it was the first time I saw her on TV... It was funny, the person from the EFF didn't poke fun at her, and Ms. Rosen ended up looking stupid
Shows what happens when you channelsurf and just stop it on CNBC for a few seconds. The first words I heard her say were "everything for free foundation" and I almost fell off the couch laughing!
Why should a musician or a artist have the right to make a living on something that is basically a hobby for a million others? How come a bimbo like Britney Spears makes millions of dollars a year and scientist doing cancer or aids research has to beg for money. We live in a society we're the intellectual inferior prosper while the truly important segment of humanity (scientist) are budgetly limited.
A baseball player makes 1 million dollars for hitting a ball with a stick, a slut with no talent makes 10 million dollars for lip syncing in a mike. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
This BILL is declaration of war on are rights of ownership, territory and privacy. If the RIAA attempts to attack MY COMPUTER or MY PAID CONNECTION to the internet, I will hunt them down and bring them "JUSTICE" in the physical and virtual world.
Anyone how calls themselve a Hacker or a Free American should get out their guns, load up Winamp, download latest Denial Of Service toolz and read out loud the Second Amendment.
( A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a FREE State...)
All technology emerges from the "supreme will" of man to become GOD!
They have a notice that if your check fails to clear for NSF, they reserve the right to (for 30 days) remove the money directly from your account, ALONG WITH the NSF fee of $25.
Now, it's been a few years since I had a check bounce, but does this seem patently WRONG to anyone?
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
1) What's with the qjkx? It reminds me of the subjects in spam...
... They may well be CRIMINALS in your country (since you must, as the law was written last I knew, NOT be based in the US). I'm not sure what the US Gov't can do to protect multi-national corporations from lawsuits in other countries. Hopefully, the gov't just won't buy this--last I knew, they weren't buying this crap, but who knows? P.S. elections are coming up--this would be a GOOD time to yell at your congressperson.
:] It's their own fault if they get DoS'd offline, then, not yours.
2) The law, last time I read it, only allowed them to go after OVERSEAS (e.g. non-US) based file-sharing. It also required them to notify the government of their intent to DoS whoever.
3) Since it's a US law, it's not binding on whoever it's used against (theoretically... note that there are exceptions like DeCSS author & Dmitry). If they do any real damage, you might well try suing them in your country, if they do business there. Remember: they [hopefully] haven't got any extra leeway with your government [yet?]
4) No part of it says that the service has to take this lying down. They can blacklist them (or whatever). I doubt that the RIAA is clever enough to stop people who are determined enough to continue. Just so long as those who are attacked don't do anything illegal (in their jurisdiction) they can do whatever they want. How about finding ways to "reflect" the attacks back at the attacker? That's always fun
5) It might not be a terrible thing if they actually went through with this stupid plan. Just be sure to publicize the result (and embarass the congresspeople involved in passing this thing).
"There must be a hundred silver dollars in here," moaned Boggis, waving a purse.
"I mean, that's not my league. That's not my class. I can't handle that sort of money. You've got to be in the Guild of Lawyers or something to steal that much."
-- (Terry Pratchett, Wyrd Sisters)
I think the crucial question is not why God doesn't reveal himself us, he may simply be too busy, creating new universes or something. Rather, why didn't he make his existence obvious from his creations? For example, he could easily have signed his creatures so that we would find somewhere on the animal something like: "Copyright (c) The Sixth Day, God. This animal is commanded to be fruitful and multiply. It may do so freely, provided that this copyright notice is included."
-- Ted Ts'o, VA Linux Principal Engineer
And what about free speech in all that sucking stuff? You got money? No! So shut up... thanks.
-- You
freddo
-- search the web
That is the most insightful post I have read on /. for a long long time. Thankyou for that.
it seems to me that lego would be the best medium.
...to paraphase a rock song...why have we not started to contact our representatives and tell them how horrible this legislation is? If nothing else, the 2000 election should have showed us that a few votes can count and that we should voice our opinions. If the millions of P2P users actually emailed or called there congressman, this bill would die very quickly. I already wrote my representatives. When will you? ooguru
I believe the best way to fight the RIAA in this battle is to give them nothing to fight about. Establish peer-to-peer networks that actually do NOT condone illegal transfers. Promote bands who allow the trading of their music. Use the peer-to-peer internet radio protocols to build communities of musicians and listeners enjoying new, original music all the time and build a collection of music we dont have to worry about getting cracked down for. Don't let them change our ways, lets change theirs. What will they do when they don't own any of the music being traded and becoming so popular?
Question
http://www.ironfroggy.com/
If they try any of this stuff against me I shall prosecute them in turn. I am not in the US and couldn't care less about its laws. However we do have anti-hacking laws here which they would be in breach of. Since its a criminal offence the police will investigate and pick up the bill. They would look funny when they have to face an extradition order for their activities.
Shut the hell up. I think he knows that "boxxen" isn't a word. You are an elitist snob.
To an earlier post about the end of the world, the REM song is available for download from 15 users. currently.
Has anyone working on the master servers considered changing some DNS records for the RIAA? or doesn't that class as fair use?
Also $2.88Billion, wow, I'm a bigger criminal than Ronnie and Reggie Cray!
If your in the UK, and this action is allowed in the USA, can we sue under the computer misuse act?
THEY WOULD!
I run a school (UK,England) network 200 terminals, 20PC's our music department has kazza installed, we're a licensed school, and so allowed to use play and broadcast music that is owned or BROUGHT INTO the school.
They download mp3 in the music classes for sampling etc. and then do as they like, we're allowed, we have a piece of paper that says we can, (not exactly, but technically). but does the RIAA know that? if they come into my network, the school will sue, (i need some better air-con in here anyway) we get 1 or 2 attacks a day from inside, instant dentention. Outside of school attacks I let a sixth-former with a script go after them. Whilst not the official policy of the school, it is that of the IT department, the RIAA is not exempt from this!
You are misinformed. People ARE downloading music and people ARE buying CDs.