RIAA, MPAA Instigate U.S. Naval Academy Raid

LaikaVirgin writes "After receiving a letter from 'four entertainment-based lobbying associations', the U.S. Naval Academy has seized nearly 100 midshipmen's computers that allegedly had pirated media. It's good to see that the armed forces know who's really in charge."

Comments

Music?

[T-Kir]

Maybe they we're bugged 'cos of all the illegal copies of "In The Navy" by YMCA ;)

Re:Music?

[T-Kir]

Doh! Think before you post! "In The Navy" by The Village People, not YMCA... must be my day for stoopidity.

Re:Music?

[Jucius Maximus]

""`Theft' is a harsh word, but that it is, pure and simple," the letter stated. "... It is no different from walking into the campus bookstore and in a clandestine manner walking out with a textbook without paying for it.""

Aside from the clear lack of logic in this statement, it is interesting to note that the RIAA has enough sense to not call it 'piracy' when they are talking to the Navy.

In reality, it's 'infringement of copyright' , not theft or piracy.

Re:Music?

[ahfoo]

In reality P2P is neither piracy or theft or copyright infringement.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

It is no different from walking into the campus bookstore and in a clandestine manner walking out with a textbook without paying for it.

Actually, it is. It's like going into the campus library whenever you need to read a book, rather than going to the bookstore. Or borrowing the book from your friend. Or, at worst, borrowing the book from a willing friend and then photocopying the chapters you were interested in.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

It's not piracy because they're not raping and murdering on the high seas.

It's not theft because there's no missing property.

It is copyright infringement. But some would argue it falls under fair use.

Re:Music?

[gl4ss]

dunno, but lots of people do walk into public libraries, and pay some mandatory fee, and do photocopies of few pages.

Re:Music?

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

It's like going into the campus library whenever you need to read a book, rather than going to the bookstore. Or borrowing the book from your friend.

No, it's like sneaking into the campus movie theatre or the amusement park without paying. Or jumping the turnstiles on the subway, so you can get a free ride without paying. It's about avoiding paying for something that cost someone else money to provide. How is that not theft of service, again?

Re:Music?

[An Onerous Coward]

P2P itself isn't any of these things. It's just a way of moving data about. As to the files being moved about via P2P, the question is a bit hairier.

C'mon, moderators! +3 insightful? For a comment where people have to guess as to what the poster is actually trying to say?

Re:Music?

[sprintkayak]

I think you mean by the 'Village People'. Both 'In the Navy' and 'YMCA' are songs by the 'Village People'.

No, I'm not big into gay disco; I do work as a DJ and so I know a lot of music. People inevitably request such songs when they're drunk.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

It's like sneaking into the campus movie theatre

No, because you're taking up someone else's seat.

or the amusement park without paying.

No, because you're making the lines longer.

Or jumping the turnstiles on the subway

No, because you're making the subways more crowded and slightly heavier.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

It's about avoiding paying for something that cost someone else money to provide. How is that not theft of service, again?

The following are all examples of "avoiding paying for something that cost someone else money to provide". Are these theft of service as well?

Borrowing a book from the library

Going to a friend's house to watch a movie on pay per view instead of each of you ordering it yourself

Reading about a sporting event in the paper instead of going to the game yourself

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

As soon as someone downloads music that they would have otherwise purchased, there is a theft of the money that would have been paid.

I was going to go see a movie. A friend told me it sucked. I didn't go see it. Was that theft? Meets your definition.

How about if i was going to buy a book, and a friend stopped me on the way to the bookstore to tell me that they already owned the book and could borrow it from them? Again meets your definition.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

Being at the game yourself and reading about it in the paper are such entirely different experiences

That's irrelevent. Let's refer to the topic i am arguing against: That enjoying something for free that cost someone money to produce is theft of service. Is it freeloading to read about a sporting event in a paper? You're getting enjoyment without supporting the massive operation needed to stage the event.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

If you believe that borrowing books from the library is okay but listening to music on the Internet is wrong, where do you draw the line?

Re:Music?

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

The following are all examples of "avoiding paying for something that cost someone else money to provide". Are these theft of service as well?

Borrowing a book from the library

I'd say no, because they paid for that copy, and it can only be used by one borrower at a time. If they started handing out photocopies to everyone (like P2P), that'd be stealing from the author.

Going to a friend's house to watch a movie on pay per view instead of each of you ordering it yourself.

Again, no, because it's limited to his private circle of friends (as many as can fit in his living room). If he retransmitted it to everyone else's house in his city, IMHO it'd be stealing.

Reading about a sporting event in the paper instead of going to the game yourself

No, that's not stealing, because you didn't actually get to see the game. Reading about a Daft Punk album isn't stealing it either, but downloading it for free is.

Re:Music?

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

It's like sneaking into the campus movie theatre without paying

No, because you're taking up someone else's seat.

Suppose the theater was half-empty. Would that make it right to sneak in without paying? (IMHO, this is the essence of the "pirates wouldn't have bought it anyway" argument.)

Re:Music?

[MarcQuadra]

It's not theft because the costs to make it are fixed. The first CD cost 2 million dollars, every other CD after that cost about $1, and every time somebody who WOULDN'T have BOUGHT it listened to it it cost NOTHING. You can't apply the same rules to information as you do to physical goods, they are too different in nature.

Re:Music?

[(void*)]

Again, no, because it's limited to his private circle of friends (as many as can fit in his living room). If he retransmitted it to everyone else's house in his city, IMHO it'd be stealing.

How private is private? The guy down the road owns a personal entertainment center. The whole town (200 people - it's a small town) likes to go there for a weekly party to watch his Pay-Per-View. They pay him a little every week for the favor by letting him eat at the local restaurant for free. Illegal?

Re:Music?

[(void*)]

Suppose the movie theatre lets people who choose not to pay into a place to watch the movie. They have to stand for the whole length of the movie. Illegal?

I'm willing to bet with you that lots of people in 3rd world countries do that. Should it be illegal?

Re:Music?

[GMontag]

That is easily an illegal violation of the PPV agreement, a commercial showing (barter counts too). Try a better analogy.

Re:Music?

[Guppy06]

"It's about avoiding paying for something that cost someone else money to provide."

Ah, but what if the price being asked for is provided by price-fixing? I'd be more than willing to pay for an album's production costs, but the music companies are asking for a lot more than that.

Jumping subway turnstiles is illegal, but things get pretty fuzzy if you're doing it to avoid paying $100 for a lousy subway token.

Re:Music?

[Minna Kirai]

It has been used in the sense of copyright violations for hundreds of years.

Wasn't it around 125 years ago that William Gilbert started using "pirate" to refer to Americans who could reproduce his works because copyright didn't apply internationally?

Earilier usages of "piracy" for intellectual-property violations may have been based on the fact that the most valuable copyrighted works were nautical charts, and thus often stolen during violent crimes onboard ship. Does anyone have a good reference for the history of the word "pirate"?

As soon as someone downloads music that they would have otherwise purchased, there is a theft of the money that would have been paid.

The situation is very similar to sneaking into a movie theater. The owners are out $9 they might otherwise have been paid, but no one would call it "theft". Especially in a legal setting.

(Would you call bringing grocery-store snacks into a theater theft also?)

By the definitions of the English language, it is possible to "steal" a song or work of art- this means convincing the public that you, and not the author, are entitled to the copyright for it. The canonical usage for "She stole my song" is in response to a radio DJ misattributing your music. That offense would still be prosecuted as a fraud, though.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

The problem with this analogy is that in the real world, it's impossible to, say, watch a movie without having an effect on the people around you. You may sit in a seat someone else wanted. You may block part of someone's view. You might spill your soda on the floor.

How about this: You have x-ray vision. Is it immoral to sit in your apartment across the street from the movie theater and watch the movie for free? I don't think it is.

Re:Music?

[Mike Schiraldi]

I'd say no, because they paid for that copy, and it can only be used by one borrower at a time. If they started handing out photocopies to everyone (like P2P), that'd be stealing from the author.

Oh, you might like my journal entry.

Re:Music?

[einTier]

A better analogy (because it actually exists) would be the classic "my office looks over the ballpark" situation.

So, is it immoral to sit in your office and watch the game (which is blacked out on local television and radio because it's not sold out) instead of going down to the park and paying $30 for a nosebleed seat?

Now, that doesn't mean that the ballpark can't build a huge, ugly fence so that I can't watch the game, or even build a dome over the whole stadium -- but it may negatively impact sales.

Re:Music?

[maxpublic]

Yes, there is. As soon as someone downloads music that they would have otherwise purchased, there is a theft of the money that would have been paid. No, not all downloads are theft, but that doesn't mean that all downloads are legitimate.

Get a clue, kid. That's called 'copyright infringement', a legal definition quite distinct from theft. You don't get to redefine terms as you please - not unless you want to look like a complete idiot.

But apparently that doesn't bother you.

Max

Re:Music?

[karlm]

The marginal cost to the record label of your downloading an mp3 is identically zero.

It's more like bribing a McDonnalds worker to give you the next burger that's been in the queue too long instead of throwing it out.

When you download an mp3, there is no extra dirt you track into the theater, extra wear and tear on a seat, etc. There is no extra strain on amusement park security staff, restrooms, wear and tear on the tracks, electricity used to hoist you up that first hill, etc. You also don't take up an extra seat anywhere.

My friend worked at a second-run music theater in HS. The managers let employees get in free and take one friend to one free movie per day. He'd convince other employees (that were working concessions or ticket sales at the moment) to let him use thier "free friend"s so he could get a few friend in for free. This was certainly not what the manager had in mind, but it wasn't theft as long as the theater wasn't packed.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA

[trotski]

The Navy would be raiding RIAA computer ;).

Go ahead, I'll take the karma hit!

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA

[Stephen VanDahm]

"IN SOVIET RUSSIA ... The Navy would be raiding RIAA computer ;)."

I'd pay good money to see that.

"Knife to Variable: SEAL team 6 is in position...."

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA

[sam_handelman]

This whole affair just goes to prove one of the great truisms of post-soviet russia:
"Everything they said about communism was a lie, but everything they said about capitalism is true."

Re:This is Farging War!

[gt25500]

My buddy who just went to college was so psyched and then they locked the whole network down. No p2p or hosting of anysort... He can't even connect to my web server because it runs on port 81.

so much for looking forward to college. All because of these bastard RIAA heads.

How?

[marshac]

I really wonder how the academy was able to simple seize the computers. It said that the midshipmen were "given" a computer when the entered the academy, but paid back the value over time..... this would indicate that these computers were the property of the midshipmen. So unless they had a search warrant, how were they able to seize and search the computers?

Re:How?

[clark625]

It might surprise you, but folks who have entered the armed services don't have rights. Seriously. I'm sure you've heard that so-and-so signed his life away to the Army? Well, what actually happened was that upon entering the service, the individual gave away his/her own rights to protect the rights of others.

Sure, some people don't like this fact. But it's important that our military have clear understandings that they are not out on a joy-ride and they can't leave whenever they like. They are the property of the govenment and officers do have the authority to use deadly force on a soldier who won't obey orders (at least in time of war). If you're ever drafted, or you sign up for the service, you don't have the right anymore to complain about first ammendment violations and the like (except in protecting others' rights) because frankly, the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to you.

Re:How?

[garcia]

the midshipmen themselves are the property of the government. The school can do as they wish.

Downloading of copyrighted material is usually against a school's TOS anyway. So if they were breaking that, and the school even owned PART of the computers, they had the right to confiscate them.

Re:How?

[TechDock]

Actually, military folks do have rights, just not the same ones as civilians. The military population is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

Given that, I suspect that the argument could be made that the computers don't actually belong to the midshipmen until after they graduate and the systems are fully paid off, and is government property until then. Any veterans out there that could offer more insight?

Re:How?

[ealar dlanvuli]

Because they are the cartel of the 21st century.

It kind of scares me to think what it will be like in the 22nd century if we stay on this path.

Re:How?

[CounterZer0]

Naval academy (and the armed forces in general) do not have the same constutional rights while on gov't property / in their facilities as other citizens. They cannot make disparaging remarks about politicians, and other such things we take for granted.

Re:How?

[Technician]

Be careful passing judgement. The size of the infraction is not mentioned. This could be any infraction. That alone would nail pretty much 100% of anyone that ever browsed the web. Many images are copyrighted (including banner ads) and may contain trademarked images and logo's. Your browser may save images, html, and sound files to a local cache. Simply having a MIDI file that was a background music loop for a webpage or the MSN logo in your cache is enough to be an infraction. Do you have the copyright owners permission for that photo or MIDI file? How about some real facts about the infraction. Going 25.5 MPH in a 25 zone is an infraction also. In most places you don't expect to get busted for it. I would seriously reconsider joining the service if the infractions were small (a couple MP3's for your jukebox software from your own CD's) and the enforcement was draconian. I don't need it. However if they were running open FTP sites with XP Pro and 10 Gig of MP3's, and the latest Harry Potter movie, I could see where this may be considered a blatent violation.

Re:How?

[Guppy06]

"I really wonder how the academy was able to simple seize the computers."

Um... dude, it's a federal military academy. When you're there, they practically own you (especially plebes). They tell you where to be, what to wear, what to do (and not do), and even what you can't have in your room (especially plebes). We're not exactly talking about UCLA here. They seize the computers the same way they seize radios in plebe rooms.

"this would indicate that these computers were the property of the midshipmen."

1.) The fact that they're "midshipmen" and not just "students" should clue you in that they don't have the same "rights and privileges" us normal civillians have.

2.) They may "own" the computer, but the Naval Academy owns the room (if not the midshipmen).

Re:How?

[srmalloy]

Naval academy (and the armed forces in general) do not have the same constutional rights while on gov't property / in their facilities as other citizens. They cannot make disparaging remarks about politicians, and other such things we take for granted.

Small point: Military personnel may not make disparaging remarks about politicians, the government, or superior officers in any situation where those remarks may become public knowledge. Bitching about the crap that's been dumped on you, the idiot ninety-day wonder in command of your unit (who couldn't pour piss out of his boot if the instructions were written on the heel), the circus at Fort Fumble (aka the Pentagon), and the rest of Dreamland-on-the-Potomac is a long-standing tradition in the military. But that's all private, inside the family, and stays outside the performance of your duty; they'll come down on you for letting it out in public, and God help you if you actually address your remarks to a member of the media...

Re:How?

[Coplan]

As in the case of USNA, you officially own nothing until you graduate and do your 5 years of time served. At that point, your "time compensation" pays for all your expenses over the past few years, and in theory, you owe nothing. As is the case of my brother, however, if you're separated before that, you owe quite a bit...and he had to pay for his computer if he wanted to keep it. So realistically, while you're at the academy, they (the Navy) owns the computers. This type of operation, regardless of how symantically wrong it might seem is actually quite legal and quite legit.

Wide Spread Panic?

[Flamesplash]

Unfortunatly, I doubt this is atypical of those serving under the government. While those actually running the systems are probably smart enough to not do such a thing, those using the systems may not be.

Arrr!

[duckpoopy]

I always knew the Navy was full of pirates.

Question...

[Anonvmous Coward]

... aren't Navy personell in need of entertainment?

I know that I, for one, wouldn't want to play games like that with people who are willing to die so I can maintain my quality of life.

Having gone to a military academy...

[aluminumcube]

I can't imagine being dumb enough to use a school issued computer, on a school run network to do anything even remotly wrong. That would be in defiance of the #1 rule any military academy cadet should know, the very rule to end all rules: Don't Get Caught.

Think about it; military schools are places where they punish you harshly for dumb shit, like not having the back of your belt buckle shined or having your underwear folded 4" across instead of 6". It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that breaking a real law in such an environment is going to be met with harsh consequences... no matter how dumb that law is.

The Future of Warfare

[Nastard]

How long before we start to see corporate sponsership of our armed forces? Ideas like "Apple Navy", "AOL/Time-Warner Air Force" and "Dell Army" are becoming less outlandish.

On the plus side, the marketing would be interesting.

"...and the F-16 was all like beepbeepbeep..."

Re:The Future of Warfare

[fungus]

Halliburton Air Farce? "This news report on Iraq is brought to you by... Shell! Shell, for a clean and affordable energy source."

Re:The Future of Warfare

[mikeboone]

Maybe it'll start in the police and fire departments first. Our local newspaper currently has this poll on their website:

Do you favor law enforcement departments selling advertising space on their work vehicles as a means of offsetting costs?

I can see it now: the owner of the local Pizza Hut talking his way out of a ticket because his logo is on the squad car.

Re:The Future of Warfare

[WetCat]

Microsoft cruise missiles?! May be Disney Cruise missiles?

Re:The Future of Warfare

[_ph1ux_]

Bush to Saddam: "Dude, you're getting a DELL!!"

So which department is stronger?

[PissingInTheWind]

'After receiving a letter from four entertainment-based lobbying associations'...

So does that means that the U.S. Propaganda Department have more power than the U.S. Naval Academy ?

Some might be offensed by such thoughts, but it is in some way a reality: America get as much (or more!) power abroad from Hollywood than from their military.

Re:So which department is stronger?

[sql*kitten]

So does that means that the U.S. Propaganda Department have more power than the U.S. Naval Academy ?

On US soil, probably yes. It's remarkably difficult legally to get the armed forces to do anything within the borders of the US, which is why the National Guard, not the regular Army or Marines are called out to deal with situations like homeland security or disaster relief. It's different in different Western countries (for example in the UK we have the regular Army manning the fire service while the Labour Party have one of their traditional tussles with the unions). If the lobbyists tried to board a US Navy ship in international waters, it would be an entirely different matter :-)

The RIAA and MPAA

[I_redwolf]

Just put an end to their whole propoganda "we are going to get everyone and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law" shit. If there is one thing on earth you don't fuck with its people with the power to make it very difficult for you to operate. The US Naval Academy (as well as other military institutions) has stronger ties to business, schools and government than the RIAA/MPAA/etc/etc could ever dream of. These are the people that have strong influential power when it comes to basically anything regarding basically anything. Not only that but these institutions harbor great ill-will to anyone threatening the "future of our country" over something they'll see as extremely "trivial".

Also, once you piss one military institution off unless it's a battle between divisions (army vs navy etc) then none of them like you. I can already see alot of top brass talking about these Lobbying institutions especially since Thanksgiving is coming up. The word will spread and friends of friends, families who have made service life a career will hear about this. It will spread to public servants etc and this one action seriously just damaged any pull the RIAA/MPAA/NMPA and the Songwriters Guild had with government. Especially considering the state of affairs on the table now. Not only that but the owners of the equipment that was seized will truly remember this especially if they get article 15's as well as not knowing if you're fucking with the next (insert influential power here) or if one of those young men/women has a father/mother/aunt/uncle who happens to be a congressman or senator or what have you.

Re:The RIAA and MPAA

[I_redwolf]

Doesn't matter, midshipmen aren't midshipmen forever. Also these midshipmen are at risk of being booted out of even having a Naval career. Do you honestly think that top brass will allow that? Where do the majority of these midshipmen go after the USNA? Do you think a commander likes having to raid his own students? If they have to boot 100 students in one fell swoop what do you think the outcry would be? What do you think retention would say? Sure these organizations might have enough power to do something like that to you as a citizen. That's not so with the gov't and even though they'll follow the law; the law will be changed or forged primarily in their own interest.

Answer those questions and then you'll see how bad of a position those organizations just put themselves in. Especially considering these midshipmen might get the boot; World War Vets will probably jump outta their fucking graves.

Re:The RIAA and MPAA

[dissy]

> sounds like your talking about the mob.

But isnt that exactly what any government is?

You pay us (taxes) and we protect you from everyone else (Other mobs/governments)

Food for thought

Re:The RIAA and MPAA

[elmegil]

Yes, I honestly think the brass will let these midshipmen get kicked out, because they were violating the law. Doesn't mean I agree with the law, but I am under no illusions that the brass will want to protect people who have made them look bad.

Re:The RIAA and MPAA

[jedidiah]

Who do you really think the Navy will associate with this "black eye"? In all likelihood, it will be the RIAA that will bear any animosity if the Academy ends up with any remotely bad press on this. They may jettison the cadets overboard with no hesitation. However, the lingering resentment will be directed at the RIAA.

Re:The RIAA and MPAA

[jedidiah]

Why would that be, exactly?

Industry finally sees the light...

[djmurdoch]

Some of the recording industry's biggest stars, such as Madonna, Mick Jagger and Eminem, have joined coalitions to combat the wholesale theft of music. The industry claims this threatens the livelihood of everyone from artists, songwriters and manufacturers to sound engineers and record-store owners and clerks.

Finally the industry realizes that these thuggish tactics are going to hurt their sales :-).

Re:Industry finally sees the light...

[sql*kitten]

Some of the recording industry's biggest stars, such as Madonna, Mick Jagger and Eminem, have joined coalitions to combat the wholesale theft of music.

Eminem who says download the audio on MP3 you mean?

Code of Honor

[the eric conspiracy]

The military academies have a very strict code of honor. For a midshipman to be caught with something like pirated music would probably result in summary dismissal from the academy.

Evidence presented by the RIAA that midshipmen were engaging in illegal activites like this would really cause the administration of Annapolis to investigate quite carefully, and be VERY upset if this sort of thing was going on.

I feel sorry for these people - if they are caught with pirated music, their careers at the Naval academy are done.

Re:Code of Honor

[kscguru]

Reminds me of an article I ran across a little while ago...

The Air Force Academy (I don't know about the others) apparently keeps records of where all the students using their internet connections surf. As in, since they decided that porn was unbecoming of a student, they keep a list of the students "suspected of visiting known porn sites". This made the news because someone accidentally forwarded the list to the entire student body. Oops! If my memory serves (someone can search the Denver Post archives if they're interested), ~150 names were on that list... out of a student body of 4000.

The implications: the fact that they are keeping a list and NOT summarily kicking students out means that the AFA considers porn a problem - but a correctable problem. They would probably treat copyright issues similarly. Having computers seized would be pretty serious... or an over-reaction.

Re:Code of Honor

[oyenstikker]

But remember, the government is master of sweeping things under the carpet and making things go away.

Re:Code of Honor

[Chanc_Gorkon]

Better get yer tin foil hat out dude. Seriously, what makes you think this? Sure, the government can manage to keep some secrets. Something like this isn't going to be a danger to National security if it gets out. They aren't going to necessarily sweep this under the carpet. Now a suspected UFO sighting which was really a Top Secret jet should be swept under the covers!

Re:Code of Honor

[Dolly_Llama]

It's nice to think that the mystique of the service academies still lives.

In my plebe year at USNA 98-99, Napster was HUGE. Not only that, but exchange through the magic of the 'Network Neighborhood' made the accumulation of huge mp3 libraries trivial. Two problems: 1) Plebes arent allowed to listen to music, so we had to do it on the DL. 2) Our computers came with a 6GB HD and on the $50/month I was making, no upgrades. Since CDR was rarer back then, there were guys actually making money by burning CDs for $5 with either CD tracks or chock full of mp3.

Moral of the story: Don't think that the administration is only now learning of p2p and its questionable legality. It's been at USNA as it as been at every other college campus.

Re:Code of Honor

[coyote-san]

There's now a range of penalties (at least at the USMA), with separation reserved for the most serious offenses.

Meanwhile I think there's at least a chance that the RIAA will be the one to get a black eye out of this. How many of these "pirated" tracks are sitting in the student's room at home, left behind to save space and prevent damage? This isn't your average college dorm room, and I would be inclined to reward a creative cadet who found a way to enjoy his music collection despite restrictions on what he can keep in his room than punish him.

Never forget that an RIAA spokeswoman testified before a Congressional commitee that they believe consumers do not have the right to make copies of CDs they own for use in their car or at the office. I'm sure that they consider copies made while a student is in college equally "illegal." That doesn't mean that such copies are actually illegal - everyone outside of the RIAA seems to consider such copies very reasonable and legal.

Well La Dee Da

[blandthrax]

Some of the recording industry's biggest stars, such as Madonna, Mick Jagger and Eminem, have joined coalitions to combat the wholesale theft of music. The industry claims this threatens the livelihood of everyone from artists, songwriters and manufacturers to sound engineers and record-store owners and clerks.

I feel for these people, I really do. I say we set up a Paypal account to help keep Mick, Madonna and Marshall (emineminem?) fed and clothed. Oh sure, take me to task on this but honestly, shouldn't the RIAA present better examples than pampared, multimillionaire recording artists to make their case. I mean c'mon, Mick Jagger could never sell another record in his life and still live like a king, same with Madonna. This RIAA FUD is preposterous. These people can afford to buy their records, I can't and neither can a lot of people I know, that's just the sad reality of things right now. So I'm a thief, well I guess that's just a matter of perspective isn't it?

Re:Well La Dee Da

[jedidiah]

If they can "steal" from me without preventing me from fully utilizing my property, they are free do do so. If they can "steal" from me without lowering the ACTUAL value of my property, they are free to do that as well.

We realize that this so called "theft" you speak of deprives it's "victim" of nothing and devalues nothing that the "victim" owns.

This is especially true if the "thief" is someone who would never be a paying customer to begin with.

I have no need to deprive others just to inflate my own sense of superiority.

Ohhhhh Whoah, You're An AOL'er...Now...

[Myriad]

Ideas like "Apple Navy", "AOL/Time-Warner Air Force" and "Dell Army" are becoming less outlandish.

DUUUUDE, somebody set us up the bomb!

You know, you maybe onto something... I've often thought AOL confused the concept of subscription with conscription when giving out those damned CDs. Perhaps there is more to it...

joke?

[oyenstikker]

I read an article about this yesterday, and was sure it was satire. A joke. Please tell me this was a joke. Please.

The DoD recent;y barred Powerpoint

[gelfling]

In the Pentagon, it became so common for the chart jockies to put together such enormous PPTs that brought down the internal networks at the Pentagon just shipping the PPTs around to the audience that the Brass had to ban/restrict its use. It was common for even the most ordinary presentation to contain movies, sounds sub programs, shooting stars.... Presentations typically ran to the multi-hundred megabytes.

I guess what I'm getting at is the DoD has a culture of extreme presentation and content bloat for no good reason. Seems to me that the upper management tacitly approves of massive media collection and sharing.

Sensationalism

[cascino]

For all (/. included) that are trying to make this a RIAA/MPAA vs. The U.S. Armed Forces battle, it simply is not. This is no different than the seizure of computers, harddrives, etc., by colleges and universities around the country over the last few years. The writeup conjures images of soldiers in enemy waters having their navigational computers seized, when in fact it's merely a case of a bunch of students downloading music/movies on their government issued (owned?) computers.
Sensationalism gets everyone all riled up about what doesn't amount to much.
Of course I'm not happy about what happened; I wish someone would stand up to these multi-billion dollar industries. I do, however, feel that this really isn't that big a deal. Yes, it's technically a part of the government, but then again, don't try to tell me "midshipmen" wasn't purposely used instead of "students" for effect.

This is more serious than you think...

[DavidBrown]

Forget all of the debate here on /. about whether or not copying copyrighted material is theft. For these 100 midshipmen, the real question is whether or not the Naval Academy will consider their acts as "theft" and charge them with violating the Honor Concept.

Naval Academy Midshipmen serve under an Honor Concept, which states:

"A midshipman does not lie, cheat, or steal."

Penalties for violating the Honor Concept include: reprimand, being sent to the fleet for a year (and maybe being allowed to come back), and getting thrown out of the Naval Academy.

Hopefully, the Honor Board won't get involved and these midshipmen will be subjected to only administrative discipline (loss of weekend liberty for a period of time, etc.).

You can count on one thing though - Everyone at the Naval Academy will get lectured on how they can't illegally duplicate copywritten material, and the next midshipmen who get caught won't get off so easily.

IAAUSNAG - I am a United States Naval Academy Graduate

IN SOVIET RUSSIA

[SHEENmaster]

The RIAA couldn't afford a computer!

(these are the best to arguments for communism that I've ever heard!)

RIAA: Big brother of the Artist

[Gyorg_Lavode]

Remember, only the RIAA is allowed to steal from needy artists. May God help anyone else who tries.

What were they THINKING!

[Chanc_Gorkon]

I mean honestly, they were using what is essentially a government network even if it was their own machine. The midshipmen were stupid. I am surprised that their superiors did not catch it before the RIAA did.

My **AA fights...

[rosewood]

Sigh, let me take a page from my journal from this week. The **AA's influence on Universities is fucking sick. Pardon the language, I was absolutely angered.

God fucking damn it. So I was given a fairly simple assignment in my 160G Music Appriciation class. I have to listen to Verdi's Rigoletto and write some shit about it. Well, I fucking love Rigoletto but the only copy I have is at my mom's house on an LP.

So, I figure the internet will help me. So, I fireup ol kazaa lite. I do a search for Rigoletto and find exactly what I want. So, I start to download. I am getting literally HUNDREDS of BYTES per second. Mother FUCKER. So, I let kazaa do its magic and its downloading from 4 people and all at ass speeds. I message one of the people I am downloading from and he says he is on a company T1 line and has great speeds. So, I am being raped by my university.

Well, I call up the communications people. I tell them whats up and they say its illegal for me to download music from kazaa and that if I don't stop they will take away my connection. I told him the hell it is, Verdi's Rigoletto has been in the public domain for hundred + years and that is bullshit. He hung up on me after I said bullshit. I called back and got the same guy. I asked for his supervisor and the supervisor told me using kazaa was against campus policy. I asked him to point it out to me and he told me that I can not download copyrighted materials. I said fine, this is not a copyrighted material, so give me my bandwidth. He told me I was just SOL. They kept asking for my room # but I refused. The last thing I need is them trying to cut my fucking connection off.

God damn bastards.

Re:My **AA fights...

[jdkincad]

You're mistaken, the piece is copyrighted. The score itself isn't, but the recording of whatever ensemble was playing it is copyrighted.

Re:My **AA fights...

[hoytt]

Verdi's Rigoletto may be in the public domain, but you're not downloading that. You're downloading a recording made by an orchestra and choir. And the rights for that recording are still in place.

Bach's Goldberg Variations are also in the public domain, but Murray Perahia's recent recording on a Sony Classics' CD isn't. That one's still 22.50.

You're paying for the orchestra and conductor, not the notes.

Re:My **AA fights...

[ender81b]

I understand your problem with it but you have to look at it from the IS point of view. Here we limit dorm bandwith to something like 60mbit/second which is, in theory, a lot of bandwith. Except when you get 5,000 students all having kazaa on at once. Before they limited it this was sucking up, literally, close to 150-180mbit/second of bandwith. I mean they where taking nearly all of our bandwith just downloading music/pr0n/games/etc.

A rock and a hard place. What can you do.. on one hand you royally piss off the students since they all still have kazaa on but now they just get crap for ping times/bandwith. I'm talking the dorms are barely better than dial-up for web surfing because of the amount of bandwith these guys suck up. And they have a point, paying 175$/credit hour should get you decent internet but.. on the other hand you royally piss off the faculty who want to use the internet to do 'cool' things or actual academic stuff.

I don't know what to tell you. It's a tough decision.

Re:My **AA fights...

[murgee]

No, it's not, at least IMHO. It's always been my opinion (and I'm a student, here) that you're there for academic purposes, not because you can get a fat pipe. Kazaa very rarely counts as "academic purposes", and that's why it gets packet-shaped. We've had problems (I work at the Univ I go to) with Kazaa et. al. that things have been sucking up enough bandwidth that stuff like our public web servers weren't responding to connections. That, IMHO, says to the public "we're a publicly funded university, but we'd rather let all our students download music and movies and stuff". Plus, the people who are actually trying to do academic work get screwed. Primary functions tend to need to go, well, first, and if your institution's primary function is academic, then it only makes sense that you block or shape P2P users.

Granted, I'm sure you can find a few legit uses for Kazaa/Morpheus/et.al. in an academic point of view, which is why I'm more for packetshaping than outright blocking it. (At least on student's personal computers - I wish we could block it completely in the labs.) I don't have much sympathy for the people who bitch that they can't use Kazaa on their university's network - no matter how you try to justify it, it's pretty damn evident that the primary purpose of the program isn't academic.

The gist of my rant is as follows: you may be paying $200/credithour for stuff plus added fees for on-campus residence - but you're there persuing a degree. And you're STILL buying a part of someone else's connection.

Re:My **AA fights...

[Idarubicin]

I imagine that they're just cutting you off because they're jealous of your excellent people skills.

Seriously, Verdi has been dead for quite a while, and the score of Rigoletto is indeed in the public domain. However, the recording that you want to download was recorded much more recently, by an orchestra and vocalists. They (or their label) very likely retains copyright of the work you attempted to download. Consequently, you were indeed participating in an act of copyright violation.

Buy your own copy of Rigoletto, or visit your campus library. Many universities have a music library of some sort, and any self-respecting music library will have the important works of Verdi. (Yes, I know--both options make you get off your ass and go outside. The music library at my school doesn't lend materials; you have to listen there. Life goes on.)

Incidentally, some of us need to use the campus pipe for more than just downloading music. My school hasn't done a very good job of crimping P2P, and in the evenings I can't even run a telnet connection at reasonable speed. (I start and monitor computational chemistry problems on the chem department's big computers as part of a senior thesis. I like to start jobs running in the evening so that I'm not competing for cycles with other researchers.) Be glad they're just shaping traffic at your school; some places have taken more radical steps.

Re:My **AA fights...

[ortholattice]

Recordings (not the underlying musical work) made before 1972 are not copyrighted.

Unfortunately you are wrong. From Music Recordings and Public Domain Music:

Records, cassettes, CD's, and other music recordings come under a general category called Sound Recordings or Phonorecords. Before 1978, sound recordings were not protected by copyright law, but by a hodge-podge tangle of state laws. This problem was fixed with the 1978 copyright act and extended by the 1998 twenty year copyright extension. Different copyright experts have offered very different complicated explanations, but all agree that all sound recordings essentially are under copyright protection until the year 2067. So here is the one sentence you need to remember:

Sound Recording Rule of Thumb: There are NO sound recordings in the Public Domain.

Re:My **AA fights...

[rosewood]

There is a really simple way to handle this imho. There are users that have can legitametly use bandwidth. For example, if I am in a business class and part of it is starting a small business, why can I not use campus bandwidth to host a class related website? What about transfering mp3 audio notes of class, etc?

The simple sollution is to allow more bandwidth for certain ip blocks that have been aproved for high bandwidth usage. On top of that, it drives me crazy that any of my data can be seen by the dorks in resnet much easier then when im on a normal ISP.

For the AC that said get off the dorm connection, I can not. We arent allowed to dial out on our lines for modem access, and I sure cant get DSL or even cable. All I have is university. Why do I live in dorms? Because Im putting myself through college and I have no $$.

They would be raiding the RIAA because...

[myowntrueself]

the RIAA was evading taxes?
Or because they need those downloaded mp3s to stop the reactor going critical?

Damned if you do

[overshoot]

This was so amazingly un-smart for everyone involved that I'm utterly stunned.

• As others have noted, the middies had to have been smoking something to put anything on P2P from the Academy.
• The Academy just qualified for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Security Award by actually having an wide-open network.
• The Content Cartel just caused an entire year's worth of middies to get flushed down the tubes. People Who Count won't forget what this particular witch-hunt cost.

In the long run, this cost the Cartel so much good-will that it will take freaking million$ in bribes^Wcampaign contributions to repair the damage.

Re:Damned if you do

[Dolly_Llama]

As others have noted, the middies had to have been smoking something to put anything on P2P from the Academy.

Not as stupid as some mids busted a few years back for selling their issued copies of expensive software on Ebay...

That they were doing it isn't news. The fact that a corporate cartel could exert this kind of pressure on an august government institution IS.

Fear-mongering

[RoC MasterMind]

"illegally possessing copyrighted material"

This is an extremely broad term. Also, I have copyrighted material everywher ein my house. My CD's, my books, hell, even my copy of XP-err Linux ;-)

Aha, That's it!

[Phoenix666]

*AA's regularly violate the constitutional rights of us peons with impunity, but let's see how far they get going after the sons and daughters of congressmen and people of power. We should alert the *AA's to the rampant file sharing that goes on at schools like the Latin School in Chicago and Exeter back east. Let the children of the powerful feel the hand of the Man, then go whine to their parents (aka the Man's bosses). Perhaps then Hilary Rosen and Jack Valenti would finally receive the long-overdue crushing they deserve.

Burdon of proof?

[3-State Bit]

I have legally bought every one of the full-length CD's, ripped at 196 kbps, sitting on my hard-drive. I'm at college and did not bring with me the physical compact disks on which I originally bought the content.

Am I a pirate? Is it up to me to prove that I'm not? ("Show me the original CDs" -- maybe when you replace scratched ones at production-cost...until then, why should I hang on to broken stuff?)

I dunno', maybe this digital-rights-management stuff isn't so bad -- it lets me prove that what's mine is mine.

Also, with DRM I can by doctrine of first-sale (which says that you can't impose limitations on what I do with a CD once I've bought it, including restrictions on who I resell the whole package to) says that I can buy someone's scratched CD "virtually" at half.com, and then, owning that CD, I have fair-use rights to the content on it.

Conversely, I can virtually sell the CD when I'm done listening to it. The Internet allows for instant transfer of virtual-property, so really there only need to be as many licenses floating around as concurrent listeners. It's like a superfast transfer of the physical compact disk -- if we had teleportation, and CD's that didn't scratch, we could have a communal pile of CD's, which you'd tele-take whenever you want to listen to them and tele-return whenever you're done. Only with "digital" rights and "virtual" property we do have teleportation of property. Interesting, interesting.

Therefore, in conclusion, DRM advocates -- BRING IT ON!!!

The sooner we have ubiquitous digital rights management, the sooner my audio software can play anything that exists in the world, by buying it at $4.04 when I begin to listen to it and selling it at $4.04 +/- 0.04 when I'm done.

I'm sure it would only take a few pennies per hour of listening to finance the logistics of such an operation.

So any reasons why this couldn't work?

Re:Burdon of proof?

[zurab]

I dunno', maybe this digital-rights-management stuff isn't so bad -- it lets me prove that what's mine is mine.

Also, with DRM I can by doctrine of first-sale (which says that you can't impose limitations on what I do with a CD once I've bought it, including restrictions on who I resell the whole package to) says that I can buy someone's scratched CD "virtually" at half.com, and then, owning that CD, I have fair-use rights to the content on it.

I think you are a little bit confused on what the DRM's intents are. They do not intend to sell you the DRMed content. They do intend to sell you any medium on which the content is stored (if any), and give you the license to listen or otherwise enjoy the DRMed content:

- during specific time period, or time(s),
- on designated hardware and software only (w/additional software licensing fees)
- leaving the seller or the licensor the full discretion to either charge you for, or simply and most likely not allow you to do anything else with the content, including but not limited to, litening or enjoying content when you want to, where you want to, sharing the content with friends, changing medium on which content is stored, etc.

The sooner we have ubiquitous digital rights management, the sooner my audio software can play anything that exists in the world, by buying it at $4.04 when I begin to listen to it and selling it at $4.04 +/- 0.04 when I'm done.

I can tell you right now that if such a DRM system would exist, YOU would NOT be the seller, YOU would be the consumer or a licensee. Let's be clear on this one.

A wee bit exaggerated

[overshoot]

According to the news item I saw, it wasn't internal PowerPoint that got banned, it was shipping the stuff worldwide via the DOD secure tactical network. That scrambled-and-encrypted-beyond-belief network hasn't got all that much bandwidth, and it was getting jammed by so much multimedia that real-time command messages were getting delayed or dumped. Thus, the order went out to keep the freaking desk-jockey multimedia slideware off of what is supposed to be a life-and-death real-time network.

Why is Bush wasting all that money?

[NewtonsLaw]

Why is President Bush wasting all that money trying to track down and eliminate Bin Laden when he could simply report him to the RIAA for breaching their copyright.

Clearly the RIAA has far more power at its disposal than the US military and although Bin Laden has managed to evade the united power of the armed services, he wouldn't stand a chance against the recording industry.

Better still -- tell Hillary that Saddam has a huge collection of MP3s and boy-band CDs copied onto CDR. No need for a UN mandate, she'd be in and clean him out in no time!

But what I *really* want to see is the RIAA conduct a raid on the IRS computers to look for copyright breaches.

Now that would be great -- a real clash of the titans eh?

The sad thing is that it's the every-day Joe who's paying for all these power-plays -- either through our CD purchases or our taxes.

Couldn't they find something better to do with all this money?

Re:Why is Bush wasting all that money?

[PhxBlue]

Better still, tell Tipper that Saddam is going to bomb Israel with "2 Live Crew" CDs if the United States invades Iraq. . .

No Veterans in the /. community?

[Old.UNIX.Nut]

For those of you who have NEVER served in the Military I will clue you in.

1) Soldiers fall under the UCMJ not the Constitution when it comes to legal rights.

2) These Naval Academy students face being bounced out of there for violating the "code of conduct".

3) Ragging on /. will NOT change the fact that the RIAA has the "current" law on their side.

If you don't like the law, then become politically active and lobby for change instead of wining that you think it is wrong.

"All battles are fought by scared men who'd rather be somewhere else." John Wayne

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Midhsipmen fall under the UCMJ too, of course; I suspect the parent poster was using "soldiers" in the generic sense to mean "people in the military." This may not be strictly correct, but the problem is there's no good one-word description to cover soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines.

In any case, the parent poster is wrong in one important respect -- the UCMJ doesn't replace the Constitution, because no US law replaces the Constitution; it is the supreme law of the land. Soldiers (etc.) do have Constitutional rights like everyone else. The right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure exists in the military.

So what's the difference? "Unreasonable." That word is interpreted much, much more narrowly in military law than in civilian law. It's very unlikely that the Navy would go into a regular officer's quarters, or even into enlisted barracks (or whatever the Navy calls them) and search people's computers for MP3's. But midshipmen fall under a different set of rules. The service academies are kind of like four-year basic training. While people are at the academy, the military considers it entirely "reasonable" to search their computers, and I doubt any military or civilian judge would disagree.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[Froomkin]

sayth the poster:
Soldiers fall under the UCMJ not the Constitution when it comes to legal rights.

Not so. The UCMJ is subject to the Constituition, including the bill of rights. Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981); Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. 25 (1976). "[M]en and women in the Armed Forces do not leave constitutional safeguards and judicial protection behind when they enter military service." Weiss v. U.S. 510 U.S. 163, 194 (1994) (Justice Ginsburg, concurring). Indeed, many appeals from military courts on constitutional questions have been heard by the Supreme Court.

Rather, the UCMJ arises from the Constitution giving Congress the power to define a military code of justice, U.S. Const. Art. I 8, cl. 14, which it has done. Congress chose to exempt the military from civilian rules of procedure and evidence but NOT basic Constitutional requirements of due process, right against forced self-incrimination etc. Indeed, as those rights are based in the Constitution, Congress lacks the power to write a UCMJ violating those rights.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

nope. sorry.
cite all the cases you want, it doesn't change the fact that the UCMJ is not really subject to the constitution. Certain articles of the bill of rights are in the UCMJ, such as the right against self-incrimination at a court-martial.
The problem is that you fail to understand the distinction between a court-martial and an article 15 hearing, which is what these young dumb-asses are going face. Article 15 hearings are not federal court cases, and as such are not subject to the constitution. The only thing that is limited is the punishment that can be handed down -- i.e. your CO can't sentence you to keel-hauling or flogging with a cat-o-nine-tails anymore. He can, however, summarily dismiss you from the military -- which is just as bad as far as these people are concerned. There are no rules -- if you try to request legal representation you will be pushed to rescind that request, as it will only make your punishment worse.

I know -- I've been to an article 15 hearing (coloquially known as Captain's Mast in the Navy). You are guilty from the moment charges are filed -- nothing you say or do will change the outcome. Everything from that point on is based on trying to minimize the punishment you get for whatever you were accused of, guilty or not.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[nemaispuke]

You are partially right, the difference is they are on Shore Duty which means they can hire an attorney to represent them at Mast. When you are on the ship you are screwed, because that option of legal representation is not given to you when you are underway! And I know because I am a 20 year Navy veteran who has been to Mast (as the "main attraction") and has sent his share of people to Mast. It depends on what they are charged with under the UCMJ, because a slick lawyer versed in Military Law could probably get them off very easily. Considering who goes to Annapolis, money will not be an issue. What will be an issue is publicity, which the Navy and eventually the RIAA will want to avoid because the taxpayer "foots the bill" for the military, and with the emphasis on fighting terrorism, Iraq, etc., the last thing the RIAA wants is to be on the front page spouting their half-baked "we have been violated" crap, protecting the rich (namely themselves) and trying to prosecute future military officers who don't make squat until they are actually commissioned. Downloading music is real low on the "radar scope" as compared to selling secrets, in other words real crime!

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

Ah... but you still miss the point.
You may always request legal counsel. However, when you do, you are looked at as "trying to get off" in a situation where you are already guilty. Remember what I said about guilt being a forgone conclusion at mast? Requesting a lawyer just makes the punishment worse -- in most cases, a lawyer at mast is simply ignored, never even given a chance to speak. I've been there too -- as the "main attraction" as you so eloquently put it, and as a witness. It is in the best interests of these middies to simply take the article 15 and go on with their lives -- requesting a court-martial (this is where the diff between shore and sea duty comes in -- you may NOT request a court-martial on sea duty), simply puts them at risk of being convicted of a federal crime. At least with an article 1e5 they can get out of th military and try to start a real life somewhere else. At worst they suck up 45/45 and maybe a BCD (probably not -- it would probably be an admin discharge in this case)... As opposed to possible jail time, a dishonorable discharge, and a permanent federal conviction on their record.
Ultimately, I suspect these will simply be handled with a few token dismissals and most of the "minor" offenders will be put on probation for the duration of their remaining time at the academy.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[Froomkin]

I'm afraid that you are wrong as a matter of law: If you are denied due process rights at an Army art. 15 hearing -- e.g. ordered to incriminate yourself -- you have a federal case, and you'll win. What you don't understand is that the "process that is due" is much reduced in the military; which is probably as it should be. Nevertheless, it remains that case that the constitution applies at all times; it just happens that in the circumstances you mention the Constitution doesn't do much for you in a routine case; indeed you may not even have a right to go to court at all to correct routine error. In part this is because the courts have held that art. 15 punishements are "administrative" and not "criminal" in nature. Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. at 31; Dumas v. U. S. 620 F.2d 247 (Ct.Cl. 1980).

What the Constitution does is protect you against non-routine mistreatment: For example, suppose your CO orders you to convert to {fill in religion}, or penalizes you extra for a failure to pray. That's a First Amendment violation, and would be illegal even if military regulations permitted it (I'm sure they don't). Have a look at Weiss v. U.S.. The theory (right or wrong) is that if you wanted the additional constituitional protections that attach even to criminal prosecutions in military trials, you should have exercised your right to reject the art. 15 and demand a full court martial [a right that AFAIK exists for all military personnel except those serving on board ships at sea]. Yes, I understand that in practice the punishments get worse if you are seen to be wasting more people's time.

As for the defendant's perception that all he has left to bargain for is the level of punishment, this isn't actually so different from the civilian system: prosecutors have so many more things they might do than they have time for, they tend to charge the ones they think are most guilty or serious. Unless you have something exculpatory the police missed, you're reduced to plea bargaining: which is just another form of "trying to minimize the punishment you get for whatever you were accused of, guilty or not."

Note, however, that if you are caught red-handed it's ok to punish you more for failing to confess. That's done in the civilian courts (both by higher charges, since you didn't plea bargain, and by higher sentencing for 'failure to take responsibility'). I don't necessarily agree with that, but that's the law, and I can't see why it couldn't be done in the military.

Now you are going to tell me that any idiot who thinks he can win such a federal case and have a military career afterwards has no sense. That's probably true, but that goes to the tendency of all organizations to retaliate against whistle-blowers, not what the rules say.

Here's a (farily) simple rule: The US Constitution applies to everything the US government does, not just court cases. It applies to all three branches of government including the executive (which includes the military). But "due process" is not a one size fits all standard. Rather, it's the start of an inquiry, 'What process is due under these circumstances?'

PS. I'm not a veteran. I'm a law professor.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

Since Article 15's are not criminal punishments, I'd like to know which other organization has the right to deny me the freedom to come and and go for 45 days, and assign me to humiliating jobs outside my job description for an extra two hours every day, regulate my bed time and the time I get up, muster me for inspection nine times per day (I had to shave before EVERY single inspection). Any ideas? I couldn't think of any. You're a prisoner -- plain and simple. It's just not called jail -- it's called "restriction."

I'm sure your points of law are correct, the problem is that an article 15 is not really subject to those laws. It's much more more far-reaching than most civilians understand.

My point about bargaining for level of punishment was more directed to the simple fact that in the military when you're brought up on charges (to an article 15 hearing) you could have any number of witnesses who say you didn't do it, as long as an officer says you did, you're guilty. Regardless of the evidence (there are no rules of evidence in an article 15 -- anything the JAG wishes to present is accepted), regardless of anything. You're guilty -- it's a very bad feeling to know that nothing you say or do can affect the outcome of the hearing, regardless of your guilt or innocence.

And by the way -- I would have requested a court-martial in a heartbeat. I was a sailor on a ship -- so I'm well aware of that restriction. Soldiers and sailors deployed away from the US for all intents and purposes have no rights that are not specifically granted to them in the UCMJ (the right against self-incrimination is in the UCMJ) -- regardless of what federal law or the Constitution says. There are arguments for and against this -- in the military, the CO has to be assured of complete obedience in all areas to ensure that he can accomplish his mission. At the same time, article 15 hearings can be frequently misused in situations where this concern has no bearing.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

Typically I don't respond to AC's... but this is a fair question, so I'll take a stab. The point is that military personnel do not enjoy the protection that is provided to civilians by law. However, they are still subject to federal laws (such as copyright law).

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

You may be technically correct, but I've never heard of a CO's recommendation being ignored. Have you? In my experience, when the CO says "get this person out of the military", It's done immediately. Also, I've never heard of a CO recommending separation without an Article 15 -- it may have happened, but the two are so closely intertwined that for all intents and purposes that's the way it works.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[joshki]

restriction on shore duty and restriction on a ship are two completely different worlds.

Re:No Veterans in the /. community?

[paiute]

Exactly which battle was John Wayne in, again?

Not that it's any surprise...

[wandernotlost]

"`Theft' is a harsh word, but that it is, pure and simple," the letter stated. "... It is no different from walking into the campus bookstore and in a clandestine manner walking out with a textbook without paying for it."

Not that it's any surprise around here, but this statement is a flat out lie. It would be one thing if the recording industry was engaging in a constructive debate somewhere, or at least sticking to facts, but instead they've chosen to deceive and lie to protect their way of doing business. Why can't our government recognize this and stop catering to this corruption? (I have a few ideas, but that's another story.)

This is very different from "walking into the campus bookstore and in a clandestine manner walking out with a textbook without paying for it." For one thing, it's not very clandestine - or at least there's no specific effort to make it such. Secondly there is no tangible good being "walked out" with. A closer analogy would be walking into a campus bookstore (better yet, a friend's house), and reading a textbook without paying for it. But, of course, that wouldn't serve their interests. Obviously this isn't a clear-cut issue, but lying to the public to get their way is just disgusting, and displays a remarkable lack of integrity, IMO.

Re:Not that it's any surprise...

[wandernotlost]

No, more like walking into your friend's house and photocopying the textbook.

Yes, that's probably a better example, although it depends on how you're using that music - and is still a far cry from the RIAA example. Further, some photocopying of that nature is allowed by copyright law. Is copying a track from a CD really much different from photocopying an excerpt from a book? There are certainly legitimate, compelling uses which P2P (uniquely, at the moment) enables. This is to completely ignore the travesty of the intent of the original copyright clause, "to promote the progress of Science and the useful Arts," to essentially a promotion of large businesses' earnings potential.

In any case, unless you go buy your own copy, you have somthing you did not pay for.

This is also the case when I record from the radio, pick up a discarded newspaper in the subway, or am given a CD a friend no longer wants. The most obvious difference is the method of transfer, and the possibility for more than one copy to be made from the first. Again, the issue is not clear-cut. To claim it is (which is what we're talking about here) would be simply fraudulent.

riaa spying on the navy ?

[jacquesm]

So, I think we can now safely conclude that the RIAA has an operation mounted inside the NAVY, how else do they know which computers to point out (I assume the NAVY has a little firewall, or are academy systems directly connected ?)

Question:

[inode_buddha]

Why is the Navy kowtowing to (possibly) civillian law, when as a federal jurdistiction it is explicitly not subject to those laws?

Re:Question:

[Dun Malg]

Why is the Navy kowtowing to (possibly) civillian law, when as a federal jurdistiction it is explicitly not subject to those laws?

Copyright law is federal law. They are subject to it.

Content Community my ass

[nurb432]

THese people need to be stopped.

I wont argue about the legal issues, but they are NOT a legal enforcement entity.. They are a coporation... One with a bad track-record to boot.

Re:This is Farging War!

[Moonshadow]

ASU has a much better idea. They have all the filesharing ports (1214, anyone?) throttled between 7AM and 12AM on school days so you can only get about 0.2kb/s per connection. That way, the students can get their work done with adequate bandwidth during the week, and then the holds are off for full-speed downloading after midnight.

I kinda have to wonder if some brilliant tech came up with this to appease the administration by showing him that he made it too slow for anyone to practically download, while leaving himself a loophole to download to his heart's content when he got back to his dorm :)

Re:Erk

[dacarr]

It's my opinion that if Bill Gates used this as an excuse, he wouldn't be so against Linux.

You will not OWN it.

[Kjella]

I'm almost about to consider it a troll, but I'd rather believe you've listened to a little bit too much newspeak.

DRM may prove who owns what, but it will not matter. You will no longer "buy" or own any CD or DVD you have, despite owning the media it's on. It will simply be licenced, under the licence "negotiated" between the CD/DVD and your trusted computer. Most likely you'll get a EULA-clickthrough the first time you put it in your computer, if at all. It's not like you accept or decline the region restrictions on your DVDs either.

And you can no longer ignore it, legal or illegal EULA, as your DRM hardware will enforce it on you with no way of circumventing it without committing a federal crime under the DMCA.

Kjella

As a graduate of Sing-Sing on the Severn...

[smittyoneeach]

The Honor Concept states that Midshipmen are persons of integrity: they do not lie, cheat, or steal.
Legal eagles take note that it's not the letter of the law, it is the discernable motives that count in that fishbowl of a school. And I like that.
For the minute you try to legislate integrity, the situation expands or contracts to mock the legislation.
Legislation works well when there is no immediate threat. But in a lot of military situations, what's in your guts counts far more than your ability to spew sophistries.
So, these mids stand to be crushed. Military officers (and little ones in training) are held to higher standards than the general population, or even elected officials (who didn't inhale or engage in financial gymnastics).
I recommend everyone volunteer a little time on active duty, or some other service-oriented activity. Those who have might agree that you appreciate what you have a little more from
a) having stepped out of the civilian mode and
b) seen some other locations which aren't far off the Monty Pynthon Four Yorkshiremen skit.

In the Navy.....what else is there to do?

[Anonymous Coward]

Geez....when I was in the Army (saw Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Egypt, etc) when I got to Kosovo in 2000 I found one of the computers in my area had over 10 gigs of MP3s on it!
I defy ANYONE to go to ANY military base and NOT find at least 10 or machines with tons of MP3s on them.
Oh, yeah, and when they do, I want them to PROVE that they were "illegally downloaded".
You see, Uncle Sam is blocking p2p software AT THE BLOODY ROUTERS! YOU CAN'T USE FILE SHARING PROGRAMS AT ALL ON THE MILNET ANYMORE! And MP3s are put on the websense "kill list" so you can't even download them from the web either! They even blocked a anti-terrorism brief from us because the company that made it put it in MP3 format which we couldn't get through websense. Had to go through an unauthorized PROXY server to get it.
Go figure. After the Kosovo 2000 debacle with the MP3s, Uncle Sam is starting to block that crap. At least at the Army level. Air Force and Navy are a whole different kettle of fish.
I even RUN some of the networks the Army in Germany uses, and I can't get past it. The contractors that put the blocks in were pretty damn good at what they do.

Re:This is Farging War!

[borgasm]

No, they are not locking down networks because of the **AA, they are locking them down for the cost of bandwidth.

Most colleges do an excess of 1500GB+ of data each day through their Internet link. Now, imagine you are the guy in charge of handing out this bandwidth....I am friends with mine.

Reducing P2P bandwidth cuts your job time probably by 3/4.

What path would you take?

Dosn't everyone's computer have pirated content?

[autopr0n]

I mean, the vast majority of people, anyway. I doubt I could find one person's computer on a collage campus that didn't have pirated content.

The trick would be finding people who are distributing huge amounts of the stuff. In fact, I'm not even sure it's technically illegal to have pirated content.

Wonderful News

[Henry V .009]

It's good to hear that the RIAA is harassing our armed forces right before the commencement of hostilities in Iraq. The RIAA should throw the book at these young men and women who will soon be putting their lives at risk for the sake of their country.

Just because you are putting your life on the line for the sake of our freedoms, doesn't mean you have the right to listen to illict tunes!

Keep this up RIAA! I hope you make sure to get lots of media coverage with this campaign.

Remember, it's a Microsoft organisation

[xixax]

New product for fall 2003:

Windows GP - Skirmish, Invasion and Global Theater editions. Featuring:

- IntelliSpend (avoid those pesky budget hassles and let us spend your budget for you)
- ActiveService (see the world! Meet new people!)
- WYSIWILAYBIU (What You See is What Is Left After You Blew It Up)
- Microsoft Paladin, Jihad edition - extract foreign binaries from your /home.
- New incursion wizard
- MS massacre, P2P app lets you keep enemy lists and exchange munitions with them automtically (as used in Yemen).

Call now for special military contractor pricing...

Xix.

Really? That's what it's like?

[Anonymous Coward]

"`Theft' is a harsh word, but that it is, pure and simple," the letter stated. "... It is no different from walking into the campus bookstore and in a clandestine manner walking out with a textbook without paying for it."

Because I was thinking it was more like walking into the campus bookstore, reading a book, and leaving, maybe ocassionally coming back to re-read parts of it. I didn't realize that everytime I listen to a song on the Internet, that song disappears from existence.. no wonder music today sucks so bad.. I've been removing all the good stuff... damnit, how could I have been so stupid!

Re:Music?-Accountability?

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what they say about people who represents themselves in a court of law? Glad I'm not you guys.

Legal definition of property

Copyright myths dispelled

The actual law

Fair use & copyright resourse at stanford

More resourses pro & con

Intellectual property

I know people don't want to read and understand the above, but they certainly want to voice their opinion of the way it should be when the law comes after them. A little late IMHO.

Re:UCMJ

[suwain_2]

And before you flame, those joining the military agree under oath to accept these different laws upon joining. I know very little about the Armed Forces, but this leads me to a question: If I'm drafted (forced) into service, does this still apply? Because then they're essentially taking away my rights, and I'm not consenting to it? (Again, not criticizing you, just trying to understand this.)

Brace Up!

[Keebler71]

Bah! "When I was a plebe..." upperclass would come to our rooms to play their games on our spiffy new 386s. And don't even get me started about the internet... about 50 of use knew how to use Procomm to connect to a mainframe that had external IRC and FTP access and that was about it. Of course,... "When I was a firstie..." we would go into the plebes' rooms to check out their spiffy new 486s with CD-ROMS...wow. Oh yeah... back then the academy still had a bowling alley under 3rd wing and pool tables in memorial hall but I digress.

Re:Brace Up!

[Bluesman]

This does the heart good to read all this stuff again. Hello to you fellow grads!

When I was a midshipman, I ran an online web site that wasn't particularly favorable to USNA. It took the Commandant a year to figure out it was me, but when he did, I was threatened with a Court Martial if I didn't hand the site over to him so that it could become a legimate "Log" again.

The reason it was against the rules for me to create such a site was that I was using the USNA network inappropriately. This of course, is a very broad rule and open to interpretation by the Commandant, and he interpreted in a way not favorable to my cause.

Also having been one of the two midshipmen responsible for the computer systems and their various uses, did not help my argument.

In any event, part of my job was to monitor the networks for mp3's and such, and we had to "crack down" a few times. It was always a slap on the wrist, especially when it was a group of midshipmen.

If I had to guess, the Academy leadership wants to stop this activity once and for all, and this is a good way to make the mids scared of being kicked out.

I was scared enough to give them back The Log, two days before graduation, when they gave me the choice.

-Salty Sam '01

IIRC the below site should still have the rules for the USNA network.

MISLO Web Site

Re:UCMJ

[Registered Coward v2]

And before you flame, those joining the military agree under oath to accept these different laws upon joining. I know very little about the Armed Forces, but this leads me to a question: If I'm drafted (forced) into service, does this still apply? Because then they're essentially taking away my rights, and I'm not consenting to it? (Again, not criticizing you, just trying to understand this.)

Yes, the UCMJ applies equally to all service members, regardless of how they entered into the service. The rules for searchs on military property are different than for civilian - for example, a command can do a health inspection of all living quarters, complete with drug dogs, and prosecute anyone found with illegal drugs. (As a side note, they can even do one on civilian apartmenst *if* the government is the actual lease holder). In addiotn, entrance on a base is considered consent to search - most bases have large signs stating that a condition for entry is consent to search. Also, bases can do random searchs, such as vehicles leaving - but they must truely be random. You can't target a particular vehicle, and then search it.

All jokes aside...

[Sarcasmooo!]

clickety click

Oh good grief - and cybersecurity at academies

[dawgnut]

Look, I know most /.ers are RIAA-paranoid but this talk about RIAA bribing officials etc. is stupid.

-- The networks at all of the military academies are owned and operated by the Dept of Defense, which (especially these days) has good reason and authorization to monitor any and all traffic over them. Use of the networks for unauthorized purposes = misuse of government assets. Doesn't matter whether that use is "okay" "illegal" or "fair use" content-wise -- every time a cadet / midshipman logs onto the academy network they click on an acknowledgement that it is a DOD site, may be monitored and will be used only for authorized purposes.

-- Cadets/midshipmen can only connect to the Net via their academy's network unless they use a cellular modem and a private account, not my choice for high bandwidth downloading. So any music downloads were pretty likely to have occurred over those DOD networks, against the regulations the cadets/midshipment agreed to follow.

-- Cadets/midshipmen know their use can be monitored. They all take IT / intro comp sci courses -- required. They also all have at least some cybersecurity clubs -- West Point has a student SIGSAC chapter and the academies have an annual cyber security competition, judged by some fairly heavy hitters at NSA.

And yes, I teach at one of the Academies.

"America - love it or give it back!" - Cathy Moomaw, Native American weaver

Other considerations

[PhxBlue]

There's more at stake here than just, "Do these midshipmen posess copyrighted material?" Unless these kids are sharing the music via CD, they're misusing government resources--namely, bandwidth--to support an illegal activity. This may well be against the Honor Code at the Naval Academy; but in addition, one could make a case for it violating the UCMJ's Article 108, "Loss, Damage, Destruction, or Wrongful Disposition of Government Property."

In the Military, Ownership != Do As You Wish

[cjsnell]

In the military, just because you own something does not mean that you can do with it as you wish. Here's an analogy. As officers, we have to purchase our own uniforms. However, we are not free to use these uniforms in ways that are not permitted. If I were to take my uniform and wear it in violation of AR 670-1 ("Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia"), I could be subject to punishment under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).

When you enlist (or commission, or contract [ROTC]) in the military, you sign a peice of paper acknowledging your submission to the UCMJ. Once you sign this paper, you must be prepared to follow all military rules and regs or face the consequences. Interestingly, you do not become immune from non-military prosecution, either. These midshipmen could very well be prosecuted by the USNA as well as the federal (or local, depending...) court system.

The important thing to remember here, as others have pointed out, is that cadets/midshipment are future officers and are expected to conform to a much higher standard than regular college students or even enlisted military. We are supposed to set a pristine example to our peers.

I feel sorry for these guys/gals but they're probably going to get screwed on this one. In a military academy, you can get tossed out for the craziest shit. A high school buddy of mine was tossed from the USAFA because his roommate cheated and he did not turn him in. And here is the really crappy thing--if you're a sophomore or above and you are kicked out of the academy (or quit...), you will likely have to re-emburse the federal government for the expense of your education. This expense can easily total $250,000 or more.

How long

[porkface]

How long is Slashdot going to continue discussing the same mundane, less fine points of the issues everytime copyright infringement comes up?

The userbase always degrades into a "It's not theft, it's ______" spat with no new ground broken in these discussions. Why not acknowledge it is what it is and that it's illegal and move on to talking about what happens to sailors who are caught? Compare that with the consequences of your average college kid. Anything besides the usual. There have been enough of these articles and "discussions" here that you'd think things would E-volve.

And how long are the editors of Slashdot going to continue posting these copyright infringement stories with a tone of "these people are victims," or "the RIAA is evil BECAUSE they're telling so and so to crack down on this"? I know the RIAA is evil, but not because they go after people who steal from them. Napster et al are NOT civil disobedience for 99 out of 100 people. I agree the Napster revolution was necessary, but the follow through, and the manner in which it was conducted have been so misguided that they are not having a positive effect. And the Slashdot editors aren't helping to fix the message. If the Napster generation had a clear and earnest message, they would get more done.

Actually...

[cjsnell]

Actually, we are bound to the UCMJ *and* the rest of the laws that you non-military folk are bound to. If I get busted for public intoxication here in downtown San Antonio, I can be prosecuted by the City of San Antonio as well as the United States Army.

Navy cruiser stops dead in the water...

[Alien Being]

when paladium based ship control systems detect "on-board pirates".

Re:Music?-Accountability?

[shepd]

>Legal definition of property [lectlaw.com]

Again, the non-physical definition refers to the actual right to call the item yours. ie: The right to put your name on a project. It is theft if I download an MP3 by the Beatles and rename it to say "By: shepd". However, I didn't see anything in there that says it's theft if I'm simply in posession of the unmodified MP3.

>Copyright myths dispelled [templetons.com]

Contains no references to "theft".

>The actual law [cornell.edu]

For the US. Outside, this is much more likely to be it. The original Berne convention mentions no references to theft. I don't know about this revision.

Anyways, the last few aren't exactly legal help sites, so I'll say this:

I think it still stands that downloading music from KaZaa is infact copyright violation, and not theft. But IANAL, so YMMV.

>You know what they say about people who represents themselves in a court of law?

An intelligent person? Too bad that technically most all courts in the US are now military courts (look for the gold-fringed flags), and in a military court you really do need help.

IRS could be our good guys now

[Adam9]

Just what the RIAA needs.. a complete audit by the IRS of everything includings its "campaign contributions."

long term effect

[HealYourChurchWebSit]

I have to wonder if the RIAA isn't shooting themselves in the foot in this case. A number of Naval Acadamy cadets have parents in powerful political places, especially some just an hour or so away down RT.50/95/395.

Moreover, it is not uncommon for a Naval Acadamy graduate to find themselves in polotics after a distinguished military career. One wonders some yeard downline if such acts won't cause some grudges to be paid out to the RIAA in spades.

We can only hope so.

Re:Midshipman Honor Code

[jedidiah]

The substance abuse of his children.

The young won't heed a word you say. However, they will follow the example you set.

Re:Why feel sorry for theifs...

[jedidiah]

No, we think that steel and stone and dirt are more appropriately called property than words or interesting sounds.

Culture should not be owned, PERIOD. It is simply bad public policy. Any copyrighted work older than 30 years should be in the public domain already.

Any cultural artifact is simply too deriviate to be attributed to any particular entity. The fact that such items are "owned" is the real theft here.

"Intellectual Property" is the real theft. If you want to go on some moral crusade, then at least be equitable about it.

Re:You break the law..

[jedidiah]

The law only claims that it is a crime when the act exceeds a certain threshhold of damage.

That's not a very compelling law from a moral standpoint.

Re:Music?-Accountability?

[Dannon]

Why put an eagle at the top of a flagpole? Why decorate the walls of a local courthouse with portraits of significant figures in local history?

Pure decoration. Nothing more. For each courthouse, there's generally an official, most likely a judge, with some level of authority over how to decorate the place, within a certain budget. That official gets to decide what portraits to put on the walls, and so on.

So, one judges thinks it's worth the budget money to spring for extra-nice flags (which can be purchased pretty much anywhere you can purchase the ordinary-looking flags). Another judge in another district may think it's more important to repaint the walls this fiscal year.

And if the city taxpayers think that the municipal judge is wasting their money... well, more often than not, local law has a way of dealing with it.

I don't honestly think most judges, in deciding how to make a courtroom look proper and formal, would waste a second thought on the reaction of anyone prone to jumping at conspiracy shadows.