"Super-DMCA" Outlaws Ph.D. Thesis
zenquest writes "SecurityFocus reports in this article that a recently-enacted Michigan law makes the graduate work of Niels Provos illegal. (His honeyd project was discussed here a few months back.) According to the article, "Among other things, residents of the Great Lakes State can no longer knowingly "assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise" any device or software that conceals "the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service." It's also a crime to provide written instructions on creating such a device or program. Violators face up to four years in prison." Provos has had to move his website and research papers to a server in the Netherlands. Similar bills are under consideration in seven states, and have become law in six others. The EFF has more information about the individual states. So, does this mean that Caller-ID block now illegal, as well?"
This is outrageous, how far will the DMCA go before those in charge realize what it's doing to us. How much will it take before soemone decides to put an end to it.
Is it now also illegal to drop an anonymous note into a suggestion box in Michigan?
SCO to Hell
Add to this caller ID blocking, and most importantly, Anonymous Cowards.
You are not the customer.
Slashdot won't be getting any more AC posts from Michigan.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Someone should inform the telcos that they cannot offer this service anymore. Then the army of telco lawyers will kill the bill.
... is that the US will use it's diplomatic muscle to force laws like this on those of us who live in the free world.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
thx,
The Comittee to Buy Back the Constitution
The law is of course idiotic - I won't bother to comment on it.
But why does he think he can just move the stuff to the Netherlands? He is still a US citizen and a Michigan citizen, and he is still producing the documents that are illegal. It doesn't matter where he publishes _to_, it's where he publishes _from_.
If a Dutch citizen published it then fine - it's legal there, but he's not accomplishing anything by putting the documents in another country, and I don't know why he thinks he is. If they wanted to prosecute they could.
1. Fear of technology that most of the congress doesn't understand
2. Greater fear of those who know about that technology and therefore must be dangerous.
3. Blind desire to control the actions of everybody else.
The law makes it illegal to hide the information from a service provider without the service provider's permission. In the case of caller ID, the service provider is the telephone company. You are not hiding the onformation from them, and even if you were, by using the service they provide, they are giving permission.
So I can legally post software that tells people how to create a bomb. Posting how to create a bomb on a web site has been to federal court and protected. But I can't write software to conceal a communications device? Which is more dangerous? And where does it end? Will anyone in the federal government be able to say code is a form of speech any time soon?
Developers: We can use your help.
Thats how I read it.
Yet another example of how politicians pass bills that they never expect to be enforced, just so that they can line their pockets with money. I really do hope that they realize that if this stupidity continues, not only will they be unable to move forward with technology, but they will squash educated thought and push us backwards!
Just the stuff off the top of my head that would now be illegal...
Cable/DSL routers for home use
Private networks for business
NAT and firewalling
Proxy servers
SSH and SSL tunnels
Email Listservs set to strip off headers
-------- -Shdowwar And you thought that life was easy.
electronic voting machines. Guess we'll be stuck with good old paper punch voting machines in Michigan, since it would be a felony to allow democratic voting practices via any electronic medium under the new law.
Can the phone companies in Michigan offer caller-ID block? Should be illegal to do that too.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Originally I was upset that Canada, where I live, did not follow the US, its close ally, into Iraq.
This single post change all that.
I believe that anonymity is the basis of a healthy democracy. It takes a lot of guts to stand up and say something controversial without being anonymous. I believe that the benefits of anonymous statements far out way the costs.
The "...this is illegal because terrorists can use it..." argument is getting stale...
There is a fine line between safety and police state and the US is passing it in a hurry.
So hats of to living in Canada the home of the free.... until the US invades because we are thinking of legalizing possession of marihuana. As you know marihuana is a drug and drugs support terrorism.
You will have to pry my proprietary software $$$ from my cold dead hands!
The problem is everyone votes for democrats and republicans.
There is no significant difference between the two. Neither one has any intention of doing anything other than enlarging government and reducing freedoms.
Anyone who doesn't yet realize this has a screw lose, or their head buried in the sand.
Most will grab a single issue and say "I can't vote Libertarian because they like pot!" So they'll agree on 98% of the issues, but instead, vote for a republican that they disagree with on 7 5% of the issues because of pot, or abortion, or one other authoritarian leaning in them.
I work for large academic Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) lab that for the most part works on DoD contracts. We are allowed to connect to work from home via secure ID cards and are encouraged to get a free single port router from work to use at home, these routers employ NAT for extra security.
Does that mean that people who work for organizations that do DoD work can no longer protect their home systems, and thus protect the governmental work systems?
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Two things to note, first, if you haven't, please write your state senators and reps right now, either to stop the chance of this happening or hoping that in states that its too late, that they might review and amend.
Second, for all you fellow Coloradans, this is currently in the works (SuperDMCA), I think it's going to pass the senate without issue, so please those of you write your reps and senators and stop this one while we still can.
Thanks.
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
So does this also mean that slashdot has to
After all, the whole thing with AC is disguising the source of the post.
Worrisome, this is.
[note to moderators: Don't mod as "funny". This is truly serious tinfoil hat stuff. Think about it.]
The legal notion of 'anonymity' is actually comprised of two components: can you publish or do something without directly indicating your identity, and can you avoid being held accountable for your actions or statements. The blanket term of 'anonymity' just blurs the issues.
The courts have consistently decided that you can operate "unsigned," in that it would abridge or chill your freedoms of speech and silence to make your identifying signatures compulsory.
The courts have NOT supported the notion that you could operate in a way that you are "unaccounted;" if an illegal and unsigned statement or speech or action can eventually be tracked to you, then you must face the consequences.
What matters here is whether NAT or DNS or Caller-ID blocks or DoD/RSA mechanisms are going to be seen as attempts to be unsigned, or unaccountable. The legislatures have rarely put much careful attention to this distinction; this may have to be handled by the more contemplative (and usually better-informed) judiciary.
[
Republican politicians - rich people
Democratic politicians - guilty rich people
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Republicans do a lot of talk about the need to dismantle the "bloated" Federal government but really they only want to dismantle some of it. They want to dismantle all of the social programs and consumer rights laws while at the same time building a permanent massive police state that invades every aspect of our lives.
Even worse then the spying are the secret search warrants which bypass the judicial system.
People are being held for anything, for any length of time, and without access to the outside all under the guise of "protecting the citizens(aka the state).
Librarians are being hushed with threat of jail time and we have a Pres. who has made it clear how he feels about those who don't support his right to conquer anyone for any reason.
This is all like some bad dream and the 1984 jokes aren't even funny anymore. I no longer laugh at those Rednecks hiding in the woods waiting for the government to come and seize their guns.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
All I can say to Michigan State police is have fun collecting every cable/dsl router (that usess NAT) in the state, including those at retail stores and warehouses. Oh, and hope you have enough room in jail for every person who owns one, the manager of the store where the bought it, the delivery boy who delivered it to the store, the truck driver who drove it into the state, and whoever decided to advertise the router in the state. And I am sure there are no routers that use NAT anywhere in any Michigan government office either... right...
A computer is a valuable tool, so use it and stop whining.
For those in the State of Georgia interested in putting forth an opposition to this legislature, my office number is 770.719.3852. My email for this will be hsb867@lobosoft.com.
I just called our four representatives for District 48. One of them has called me back so far, and said that honestly, single phone calls are in no way as efffective as collective opposition.
So, if you are a small business owner, a computer consultant, or even just an individual who is looking at a felony record if this passes, email me.
To find out who your representative is Georgia, you can visit Polling Place and Elected Officials finder at the secretary of states website.
----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
>IANAL, but shouldn't anybody ticketed by a hidden
>radar speed trap be able to use this law to their
>advantage? After all, if the police are disguising
>"the existence or place of origin or destination of
>any telecommunications service," they're in
>violation of the law. Right?
I hate to say this, but... "in violation of the law" ? They *are* the law!
(yes, yes, oversight and fair trials, Constitutional rights, and why not, the Magna Carta...)
I was just discussing this with someone else a few days ago, how sodomy laws still exist in a number of US states (most places say anything other than missionary style is technically illegal) and not only do the laws require an unreasonable invasion of privacy to enforce, but they are being enforced unevenly, being used to harass certain target people. These laws are just one more tool for the law enforcement establishment (the local police up to the FBI, and the judiciaries that paralell them) to make life difficult for 'undesirable' elements in society.
Instead of mentioning how KMFDM's "What do you know, Deutschland?" is playing behind me, and the sample 'dogmatic police state' is in it, I'll just make reference to a quote that I can't remember, about how a state passes laws to make everyone a criminal, um, and how that is bad.
fair.org counterpunch.com truthout.com indymedia.org salon.com
eff.org guerrilla.net debian.org gentoo.org
And I mean Suck. They suck the life out of America. They suck the life out of every individual that is forced to work an average of 10 years during their lifetime (based on around a 15% income tax and a 60 year lifespan) in the service not of themselves, but of the federal governement. That is at least 2 months every year working for what? What free people would choose to do that to themselves? And still the federal government can't pay the bills that they are writing...
... and we wonder why? Because we have elected a generation of spinless whanabees. They are so used to believing their own lies, that when a big corporation goes to a congressman and says 'we need your laws to keep us in business', the congressman doesn't think 'is what they are asking consistent with an American value of freedom?'... no, they ask themselves whether the business is big enough to keep the coffers flowing.
Trillions of dollars in debts have been accumulating, yet we still play these stupid games. Oh it's the Dems fault... it's the Republicans. No, it's America's fault. America's fault for not seeing through the daily lies that our elected representatives now even seem to believe themselves. America's fault for believing the carpet baggers when they tell you they have all the answers to your daily struggles. America's fault for signing up for all those credit cards which you can never pay off. American's fault for their forgiveness, when the itinerant congressman or president tell you and themselves that the lies they told were better than the alternative. America's fault for not seeing through the scam of social security from the very beginning... It only works when the population is growing and most people don't live very long, still sound good to you?
Both parties have ceased representing the interests of citizens in the government, but instead try to banally represent the excesses of goverment back to us in patriotic terms.
Now we see all these restrictive laws being passed
With every iteration, laws become more restrictive more intrusive and more unintelligable. Until one day, noone can live a day of their lives without fear that somehow they are breaking some law and right and wrong are so far removed from the law that only your political connections or your subserviance will keep you out of harms way.
Big government is bad government.
And yes, I just did my taxes!
Googling for my own state's (Texas) Super DMCA, I found this by Dan Wallach, an asst. professor at Rice University. He has some interesting things to say aout the bills before our House and Senate. So in the interest of fact checking, I looked at the Senate version.
Sure enough, by the letter of the law, NATs would be illegal. It prohibits owning or creating any technology that is used to knowingly modify a communications sevice in ways unauthorized by the service provider. The bill imposes a Class A misdemeanor for the first offence, except where five or more 'communications devices' are employed in the 'criminal episode'. In that case, the crime is a felony.
In my home, I have a wireless NAT setup. There are four desktop systems and a laptop that regularly access the internet via that network. Additionally, there is one more desktop that occasionally joins the network. That makes seven discreet communications devices, including the router, that are employed in gaining access. The definition of a communication device is very broad and includes single connectors,switches and connections (presumably between devices). Theoretically, the state could use each cat5 cable and external wireless nic as communications devices, upping my number of devices to 10 or 12. Since my ISP only grants authorized access to one communication device in my service contract, I would fall squarely under the stated definition of a felony under this bill. For running a freakin' home network!
I freely admit that I use my internet service connection in ways unauthorized by my provider. Sure. And they can cut my service at any time of their choosing if they find out. I accept that. I'm violating the agreement, therefore they have the right to terminate it. Simple, to the point, and effective.
But now I could become a felon as well. That's where I draw the line. In my opinion, the state has no business enforcing civil contracts with the criminal justice system. That's what the civil courts are for. If my provider cares to, they can try to get compensation for any perceived loss in a civil court. There is no need to make my activities a felony.
Somethings got to be done. I'm going to do my part and write a letter. Please do yours.
(Score: -1, Stupid)
Pro war:
- There is no alternative to war (people are suffering and dying - possible direct threats by Iraq government).
Weakness:- Assumes war will work - possible post-war chaos may be worse.
- Lack of diplomacy simply pisses off rest of world.
Anti-war:- War will injure and kill innocents.
- No legal authority.
Weakness:- Peace has also allowed innocents to be injured and killed.
- Lack of action allows governments to commit far more illegal/immoral acts.
Also forgotten is, exactly what is the alternative to war? Anti-war seems to be all opposition and no proposition. Pro-war seems to be "one tool fits all". For example, rewind back to January:- First, drop main sanctions as long as Iraq coopertes with weapons inspectors. They weren't doing any good anyway. Threaten to re-impose them if inspections are prevented.
- Once disarmament is completed, drop remaining sanctions but require monitoring of questionable imports (e.g. chlorine imported for water purification must be accounted for, and can be spot-checked).
- Promote free-trade zone for Arabian League. Countries must be allowed to trade manufacturing, technology, and leverage intellectual resources. Oil is a lazy money source that doesn't promote economic development.
- Increased economic interaction will require increased (and more open) communication.
- Foreign aid targeted directly to hospitals, schools, etc., not to governments - but under control of locally elected administrative boards, not the donating countries/groups. Aid is conditional on fair elections which must meet democratic standards - the governments won't be too concerned because it will be too low a level to make policy decisions, but the general population will gain direct experience with practical democracy (not just a theory).
- Even if the elected representatives want to teach that Israel doesn't exist, let them - democracy should come first. But:
- Provide independent arabic news and entertainment, to give people a choice. Even if it's initailly banned, see the point above - economic leaders will need more open communication, and will also want the privileges of more open entertainment. As the middle class expands, so will the demands for openness.
That's just an outline of one possibility. There are others, and many, many more details would need to be addressed. But it is an alternative to war. Unfortunately, it would take a few decades - but then again, this is roughly the U.S strategy for dealing with China ("Constructive Engagement"), so it can be done.