Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Parses 'P2P' As 'Peer 2 Porn'
watchful.babbler writes "Having largely failed to galvanize public and political action against P2P systems, the RIAA has mounted a campaign to link P2P systems with child pornography (NYT, reg. required). The result is H. R. 2885 (available via Thomas), which has the remarkably clear and honest intent 'To prohibit the distribution of peer-to-peer file trading software in interstate commerce.' Amongst other things, the proposed law will require the creation of 'do-not-install beacon products' (do-not-ask, you really don't want to know), force P2P apps to include warning labels that users may be exposed to pornography, and require P2P developers and distributors to obtain and store users' personal information -- ostensibly for age verification, but one can think of other reasons that the RIAA might be interested in that info. Worse yet, even given the 'operation exemption' (Sec. (4)(b)(1)(C) in the bill), applications such as AIM and iChat appear to fall under these provisions."
You can get porn from p2p networks??
And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
Please, everyone knows that pedophiles exclusively use Freenet, due to its anoninimity.
C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
Here is the google news link, no NYT registration required. Aiming at Pornography to Hit Music Piracy
/usr/games/fortune
... does that mean that they're continually exposing themselves to child pornography at will? Wouldn't that make them party to the crime of spreading child porn?
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Please remember the DMCA
So many people ignored it, simply because it was unconstitutional didn't stop it from becoming a law.
"...force P2P apps to include warning labels that users may be exposed to pornography"
They should put those labels on all web browsers too then.
This is a logical step for them. After all, they want to villify the program - since capturing the hearts and minds is the only strategy that'll effectively work for them, because less people = less sharing = less effective. Same strategy as the lawsuits they're mounting against Kazaa users. They know they can't sue everyone, so they're trying to make the service unusable. Your local P2P network's only as good as the users who use it. Write your local congressperson and denounce this strongly.
Go on, prove me wrong. Destroy the fabric of the universe. See if I care. ~Terry Pratchett
If a person who don't trust sudenly starts doing something for the "common good", wouldn't you be a little suspicious and say "what're you up to?" This could easily be a way to find not just pr0n sharers, but illegal music sharers.
When you don't have a leg to stand on, don't even get up.
They also use email, ftp, http, nntp... shall we outlaw those applications? (I know some of them are protocols, smeg off.) Doesn't make any sense. I must once again call for viruses which install freenet and make people freenet nodes, sharing all media files on someone's computer.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This is it. This is the straw that broke the camels back in my mind. We need to find a way to get everyone to fight the RIAA with us. I'm registeringwith the EFF... I need to know what to do next. What are the most effective methods of protest (short of a suicide bombing).
Good evening, fellow patriots:
What is the status of P2P encryption of IP addresses and transmissions?
Thanks in advance,
W00t
Fire the
Moron-In-Command
I think that this is hillarious. Porn seems to be the one thing in our society that everyone hates (in public anyway). They say it's bad, immoral, etc. So the RIAA is trying to associate file sharing with child porn. Now, if you use filesharing clients, you're a pornographer. Great.
Unfortunately for them, a search for a common song rarely turns up porn. Not a lot of porn around with MP3 headers. So rather than implementing a list of all subscribers, file sharing services could filter out all non-music files. Just like the RIAA made Napster do with certain songs.
So with only music on the P2P network, the RIAA could only object to "their" "copyright" being infringed upon. And nobody would care.
fp?
My other car is first.
And you can all protest this by downloading lots of pr0n this weekend.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I suppose we should put them on the insides of people's eyelids, as well. You can be 'exposed to pornography' walking down the street.
GL
"As a guy in the record industry and as a parent, I am shocked that these services are being used to lure children to stuff that is really ugly," said Andrew Lack, the chief executive of Sony Music Entertainment.
Has this guy even seen Kazaa? Doesn't he know you have to type in what you are looking for?
Could this be the most effective attempt on their part, so far? It's hard to argue against them, without being labelled as a supporter of kiddie-porn. It doesn't matter how legitimate your claims against this bill, you'll still have to put up with the obnoxious cries of, "think of the children!"
This is really slick, on their part, because they can try to humiliate their opponents, reglardless of the validity of their arguments. How can people easily claim that this is just profiteering and securing a closed market in which to play?
Obviously, I don't want to see this go through, and it likely won't (not on the first try, anyway). But, it is an interesting tactic.
Down with Saudi Arabia!!!
That's great that they include AIM and iChat. We need companies like AOL, Microsoft, Apple, etc with heavy interests in P2P to help put a stop to this bill. They "rent" legislators, too!
The story doesn't explain what the bill sets out a 'beacon' to be, but basically the intent is to (within a year of the bill's passage) develop a US standard for a magical 'beacon' one can set on a computer that will prevent people from installing P2P software on it. While it's a great idea IF YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT COMPUTERS (hey, parents can keep kids from using evil Kazaa! and workplaces can prevent employees, too!) it's a stupid act. Stupid act. Anyone who votes for this act should it ever come up in Congress should be publically ridiculed in every venue available.
I see it's time to start the letter-to-Congress process...
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
This is so cool! The signs saying "This software may expose you to child pornography" on your favourite P2P proggie.
It's like putting up a "AOL users do not go beyond this point" sign without offending a single AOL user. Admirably genious. In fact, it's probbably the most effective AOL-user barrier anyone has thought of to date. They should patent it, at least they'll be making money of something.
Go RIAA!
-
Boy, it must really burn "their" pants that they can't lock down p2p. The same mentality as the drug war. I guess the new republican in the RIAA's seat wants to be the new Anslinger, will we have a Anti-P2P tzar appointed by the record companies?
Somewhere the ideals this country was founded on, that the free flow of ideas is a GOOD thing is becoming perverted, when will they realize that we can't isolate ourselves from the rest of the world? Aren't invasions enough for them to realize this?
Laughing at the absurdity of it all is the only thing that keeps me from being totally disgusted.
Because, sometimes they just have to touch the stove.
-YY1
The RIAA can suck my 14 year old dick.
The DMCA was the greatest act of terrorism ever enacted on US citizens. The RIAA is just the axe of the Great Evil, basically.
---Vote None of the Above---
Soo... Does this mean that someone could get immunity from the RIAA by simply deleting all their stuff once they get a court order? Or would they have to do that before the court order?
Are they trying to be hated? Like... did they hire consultants to teach them how to alienate... 70 million people? What... the... fuck.
I'm never buying a CD from these FUCKS again.
Oh great! Now I'm going to catch hell from all my customers who run in-house P2P LAN's to share the internet or just to share a printer/fax/copier.
Thanks RIAA, I'm sending you my Excedrin bill for next month
-- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
I find this sort of bill among the more reprehensible things our legislature does. This bill has no chance of passage, and the authors undoubtedly know this. Further, if it were to pass it would be the target of a million legal challenges.
The purpose of this bill is almost certainly to force a "compromise" bill that achieves the achievable portion of these effects. By staking out an extreme position, the sponsors paint opponents as staking out the opposite extreme, and suggest that the difference be split.
Honest congressfolk: don't give in. There is no honorable compromise here. P2P is just folks communicating via computer---to restrict the medium of the net is the beginning of the end of free speech in America and around the world. I would rather see our civil liberties go down fighting than turn to the dark side voluntarily.
No one cares that porn on the web is virtually unavoidable thanks to advertisements and pop-ups. But on a P2P network where you actually have to seek out pornongraphic materials...? Puh-leeze.
-Nick
I got my M$ Monopoly, SCO, and RIAA news today.
:-)
Now just give me some newly released Apple G5 benchmarks and the day will be perfect
Error 407 - No creative sig found
They are trying to make paying for music more attractive through legal downloading services, and in the case of Universal Music Group, the world's largest record company, slashing the price of most its CD's by 30 percent
Wow. 30 whole percent. What's that leave the profit margin at? $12 on a $15 dollar CD? I'll bet most of that %30 is coming out of the artists paycheck. Whoops! They never made %30 to begin with.
So, when the RIAA sees someone sharing songs, and it turns out to be a child, they can hold the parents legally responsible for the actions of their kids? I'd like to believe otherwise, but given RIAA's track record of wanting more legal power to prosecute sharers, they give me no reason to.
Claiming P2P is a haven for pedophiles, or claiming piracy funds terrorism?
A friend of mine works for the RIAA marketing department. He told me by spring 2004 they will unveil their new campaign: "If you listen to mp3s, you love Hitler!"
I for one would never put personal information into a p2p app. The hassels of the p2p networks like kazaa are already pretty bad (popups, spyware, horrible coding that slows computers to a crawl). Who's to say that a Kazaa lite to get around this law won't be made? Klite is here because users are fed up with the current problems, I can't see it would stop there.
Either way, water seeks its own level and things will eventually solve themselves. Hopefully it doesn't pass, but if it does it won't mean the end of the world like the DMCA has.
"warning this contains explicite..."
interesting. since the RIAA's members are promoting so much smut this days which is passed as "art" by them - eminem anyone?
This strategy seems bizzar to me. the RIAA should know what those "warning - explicite lyrics" stickers did for rap and hip hop..
Whatever.
This cannot be enforced. If they could restrict the distribution of data, they'd already have restricted mp3s. Since they can't, they will also fail at restricting P2P applications.
It means that the RIAA has finally realised that it can't stop people sharing music over P2P. Thus, knowing that no one in power would dare stop anything that pretends to combat something as vile as childpornografy, they change their aim - at least to outwards apperance.
Lets tell it to the politicans; the RIAA has no legitimate reason to stop people sharing childporn. The only semiofficiall organisation in the US that may have a legitimate reason to do that is the MIAA, and then only for childporn made by their members (which could lead to a lot of akward quiestions later...).
The focus of the RIAA is to prevent people from swapping music, thus making people buy overpriced CDs instead. Everything else is just blue smoke and mirrors.
As for the pedophiles... well, I guess a bullet in the head will 'cure' their sick lusts...
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
What if I live in a country that has no such law? And if I develop a P2P system there... And leave it to the users discretion to use it anyway they like. I have an explicit note in the EULA that the user is responsible for not using it in countries in which they require the things mentioned in the article? I bet 90% of the people that are not allowed to use it, would still use it (hey 99 % now is willingly stealing already). Kinda pointless isn't it... That's the internet... Very hard to make rules that hold up internationally.
"P2p stands for piracy to pornography," quipped Mr. Lack.
How about Power to the People.
or
Profits to the Profitable
You are just the middlemen RIAA. The more middlemen we get rid of the better.
RIAA: P2P is evil. Music is freely available through it and artists aren't getting compensated for their work! Apply to porn: RIAA: P2P is evil. Porn is freely available through it and... Ergo, RIAA: Defending the Intellectual property rights of child pornographers! Age verification my shiny metal butt! Put warning labels on browsers and email clients, why don't you.
RIAA Parses 'P2P' As 'Peer 2 Porn'
Actually, the relevant quote from the article is:
"P2p stands for piracy to pornography," quipped Mr. Lack.
Good to know that like many other people here, the editors don't bother to RTFA either!
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Next thing you know... Microsoft will be trying a similar trick to get Linux servers shut down cos they can be used to serve pron...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
He is saying that pr0n is bad, but then to do what they do. What does RIAA does? f**k artists and poor college students? I like that. Less pr0n, but more sex! yay!
Gotta love to quote things out of context...
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
I think they have the wrong target. They should go for banning (photo)camera's. And let's not forget pens, brushes, paper and paint. They can be used to CREATE child porn. You always have to fight the root of the problem. O by the way, children can make very sounds that make people that are susceptible to such a thing very horny. Ever listened to a children's record? Here in Holland we have Kinderen voor Kinderen (children for children). Every year or so a new record with children's songs sung by childern appears in the shops. Who knows what can happen when people listen to that stuff... I say we ban the whole recording industry altogether. It's gone far enough.
-- Cheers!
This may work in the US, but the US is merely but ONE country with Internet access. The RIAA has no teeth outside the US, so in effect all they're doing is trying to create an island on the Internet. Good luck.
That this could merely be an easier way for the RIAA to get a complete list of every P2P user to sue? If the P2P services have to keep a database on the children (and others, as it is the logical extension of the law, and not much more difficult to do), the RIAA can merely say "Hey, give us the database so we can attack the right people."
Of course, by "right people", they would mean every P2P user. Just for good measure. This could easily be the first step on the gradual destruction of Peer-to-Peer networking as a whole, not only for transferring of illegal files.
From the article:
Now just what penalties are going to be instituted if children do NOT get their parents consent before using sharing software?
Is the House of Representatives going to send the children to bed without any supper? Ground the children for a week? Take away the children's allowance?
Hopefully some of the less ignorant representatives will recognize that the sponsors of this bill are even more ignorant than they are and kill it. But that is just wishful thinking.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
So an industry group that itself has promoted ghild porn throigh the likes of briney spears and madonna, and a plethora of other soft poarn idols appealing to pre/teenage girls is trying to take the moral high ground aganst porn?
am i nutz or do i smell a hypocrite?
Sleep... good...
they're pretty close to the line sometimes with their suggestive moves etc...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Excelent idea: communications with other people may expose you to porno ! You are warned - remind this before you speak with others (your teacher, policeman or car dealer). Your congressmen should wear this label too, he certainly deserves it !
Portraying the intent of P2P app developers in this manner is beneath contempt. Hiding behind his "shock" and "parenthood" while making them is cowardice. Coming from the upper eschelons of Sony, a company which has released more than its share of violent, sexual content in the form of movies and games, is pure hypocrisy. 'Lack' is truly an apt name for such an individual.
Does anyone get the idea that essentially the RIAA would be happiest if the Internet did not exist, period? After all, their business model is based on passive entertainment mediums such as television and radio, and physical media distribution. The Internet gives people too much choice as to what they want to see.
For that matter, the Internet can be less offensive than TV or radio! I know a lot of parents who are horrified at the things children can see on today's media, and at least with the Internet the parents can have some small measure of control over what comes into their child's view.
Child pornography, phhft. It's pretty hypocritical, when the media exploitation of the newest underage pop star is verging on just that.
...
A study in March by the General Accounting Office found that KaZaA would be effective for someone looking for child pornography. The agency searched for 12 terms associated with child pornography, such as "incest" and "underage." It did not actually download the files it found, but it determined that 42 percent of them had titles or descriptions associated with pornographic images of children.
Didn't actually download them huh. Well, they must be porn. I'm now off to download everything on project Gutenberg and rename all the files 'porn underage kiddies sluts with barnyard animals.txt'. Won't the RIAA be disapointed when they find copies of Emma and The War of the Worlds.
RIAA pushing ChildPorn to the net like they did with the broken files so that they can say: "Here! Look! P2P is used for pr0n!"
They'll put a piccy and rename it to some new pop hit so ppl d/l it and then say: "Look! They even hide it by changing the name!"
^_^
That brings up a good point. The RIAA is trying to restrict P2P because their "could" be pr0n on it. Wake up, RIAA. The whole friggin' INTERNET "could" have pr0n on it, so why don't we shut it down, for the good of mankind?
Everything has drawbacks, but sometimes they aren't really that big. You can't just go around being more strict when a little problem arises.
When you don't have a leg to stand on, don't even get up.
It's hard to imagine a more effective way for P2P to catch on among the masses than for the government to attempt to outlaw it because it represents a pornography distribution channel.
So any and all networking software is illegal. Hell... tcp, ftp, et. al., are all illegal.
Well shit.. the whole damn internet is illegal, along with every bit of software that accesses it and/or makes it possible.
No more networks, anywhere! Because networks spread child porn!
Congratulations, we just went back to 1950!!!
No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
KaZaA is just like Joe Camel," she said referring to the cartoon logo that had been used by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings to promote its Camel cigarette brand. "KaZaA has done an incredible job of attracting young people to their site, and as a result they have been really able to attack children."
I don't think I've ever heard Kazaa or such being associated with a product image specifically created to get kids to damage their health. She (Laura A. Ahearn, the director of Parents for Megan's Law) makes it sound like Kazaa is luring "kids" and then just giving them child porn.
I wonder how much she is getting paid to say stupid crap like that.
Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
I don't want to "Peer 2 Porn". I want to "Peer @ Porn". Quick, someone make a p@p network/client!
when are they finally understand that the RIAA is their own worst enemy, not the P2P networks, not to mention that there's no possible way to really control P2P, not to mention that people are responsible for their own actions. If you get child porn from kazaa or whatever, it's your bad, not the author of kazaa.
Don't become a regular here, you will become retarded. -- Yoda the Retard
Windows has web browser.
Web browser leads to the porn.
On p2p the porn isn't waved in your face, but some spams are very explicit and you can't really avoid it unless you're clued up on spam filtering.
"A second aspect of its study measured the likelihood a child would inadvertently be exposed to pornography using KaZaA. It examined 157 files downloaded in response to three search terms of interest to children -- Britney, Pokemon and Olsen twins. It classified 49 percent of those files as pornographic."
An RIAA sponsored bill is not what is needed, but a measure of protection against inadvertently encountering porn should be included in P2P software. Just like ESRB ratings, it is always better for for this kind of thing to be industry initiated, not government enforced.
"As a guy in the record industry and as a parent, I am shocked that these services are being used to lure children to stuff that is really ugly," said Andrew Lack, the chief executive of Sony Music Entertainment.
Some of the most vile, disgusting, and just plain horrible stuff is distributed on P2P networks. And after your kids download all the Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys and N*Sync albums, their's pornography too!
From the bill:
"(4) Approximately 40 percent of users of peer-to-peer systems are juveniles." - And whose ass exactly did they pull that stat from?
"Peer-to-peer systems also pose serious security and privacy threats to users." - As if this bill doesn't pose 100x more of a threat.
"Among other things, peer-to-peer software often gives others access to all the files that are stored on a user's hard drive, and many users, including juvenile users and their parents, do not even know of these threats." - Only if it has bug (which any program could, most noticebly WINDOWS), or you ignore everything it tells you and you set it up completely wrong, which is your own fault.
"The crows seemed to be calling his name, thought Caw."
also require the same of all telephone calls. Or perhaps for every purchase we make at the grocery store, fast-food restaurant, fleemarket we should provide all of our contact information, just to ensure our "safety." Perhaps we should even submit dna samples at birth and then use that to track everything we say/do/go/etc.
Sounds like a fun place to live to me...
I can still get my bestiality pr0n...
</Freudian_slip>
When I read something like this, I think there is no way the RIAA is actually attempting something this absurd. So can we moderate the RIAA -1 Flamebait ?
I was just getting ready to check in some code to a remote CVS repository when I realized this proposed law would also apply to CVS.
What is CVS's primary use? To share files with other people and keep track of changes and the history. It even allows anonymous access! My god! We must stop this evil porn distribution system! Think of the children!
-- Will program for bandwidth
Please stop buying music as of today. And if possible convince as many of your friends to stop buying music, and get them on Kazaa.
I'm thinking of taking all of my cds and releasing them into the wild with a small ad between the disk and the cover explaining the dangerous behaviour of the RIAA in cooperation with our governments. The ad will then ask the finder that if they enjoy the found cd that they participate in a do-not-buy campaign and call their governmental representatives and express their opinion.
I wish there were a bookcrossing.com type organisation for cds to connect with.
...the first thing the software makers will do is distribute their P2P software from outside the US.
As it is, Kazaa is based in Australia. How do the RIAA propose to do anything about them? (Aside from the obvious answer, which is lean on the Australian government, whereupon Kazaa will just move somewhere else).
-- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
P.S. (sorry for posting twice, but this is genuinely disgusting)
Section 2: Findings spells out their beef with p2p software and it seems to be the same beef people have with that pesky first amendment.
Peer-to-peer file trading software has been very widely distributed. The most popular of these programs has been downloaded over 200 million times, and at any one time, there are over 3 million people using it.
Strange that they want to outlaw something that a substantial percentage of the public find useful enough to download. The people behind the bill obviously carry some heavy political currency.
(2) Peer-to-peer systems are emerging as a conduit for the distribution of pornographic images and videos, including child pornography. Child pornography is easily found and downloaded using peer-to-peer systems.
Emerging as a CONDUIT?!? Sense when do we go after the conduit. Speech is a conduit for unsavory ideas as are the radio, magazines, books, our minds. Shall we outlaw those too?
If the RIAA is behind this it is really the hight of hypocrisy. This is an organization that is happy to dress up a teenage Brittany Spears in next to nothing and pay here to wiggle around in front of a bunch of horny boys, but threaten their profits and suddenly they are the keepers of the moral flame. What a crazy world.
No group has done more to sexualize children for profit than the music industry. Go to amazon and pull up a photo of britney spears' first album -- she's wearing a school girl uniform. They have a lot of nerve talking about this now.
MTV actually did a promotional show for the snoop dogg girls gone wild video, the way they'd promote a hollywood movie. Not only is MTV's audience primiarly made up of kids, but the producers of those videos are probably going to go to jail for using minors in their tapes. Not one or two who slipped through -- several dozen young girls.
Don't get me wrong -- I believe in free speech, and I will defend their rights to promote music that sexualizes children, glorifies cop killing, rape, and drug use, and all of the rest of the stuff they promote. I don't like it, but I'll defend their right to do it.
But the sheer disingenuous of these sorts of statements is hard to take. I don't know where they find guys with the chutzpah to make them.
That brings up a good point. The RIAA is trying to restrict P2P because their "could" be pr0n on it. Wake up, RIAA. The whole friggin' INTERNET "could" have pr0n on it, so why don't we shut it down, for the good of mankind?
Don't give them ideas..
P2P is nothing more than another method, albeit distributed, of disseminating information. Why aren't search-engines required to filter out porn sites then?
The RIAA aparently also forgot that one of those 'A's in it's name satand for America. I do not belive they are going to police the globe.
One more thing, anyone know how big (in $$$$) the recording industry is? 10, 20 billion annually. All this stink for such a small industry.
-teknopurge
I can get porn from Kazaa??? Why the hell am I the last to find out all this good info?
Good work RIAA, you just gave a good reason for boys between 14 and 80 to start using Kazaa. Way to do Sharman's marketing for them.
As far as any proposed laws are concerned... how is more bureaucracy going to stop something when the mass of bureaucracy we have now can't stop it? So instead of breaking 2 or 3 laws every time I download a song, I now break 5 or 6. Someone please explain that logic. What's next; mandatory minimums for file sharers? Look at how well that solved the drug problem.
Sometimes I feel like I live in a nation run by chimps in suits.
The attack on P2P stuff needs to define what the hell they think p2p is... because peer2peer has been in use for about as long as any network aside from one consisting of a computer and many terminals...
"...Amongst other things, the proposed law will require the creation of 'do-not-install beacon products' (do-not-ask, you really don't want to know), force P2P apps to include warning labels that users may be exposed to pornography..."
In that case, surely the entire Internet should be forced to carry a warning that users may be exposed to pornography.
Actually, the RIAA had better put a specific warning on their website because, as soon as I manage to hack it again, they'll be going Goat Sex themselves.
Scott Lockwood prefers the company of men. Homosexual men, that is!
Is somewhat acceptable, except that it shouldn't be a law. The movie industry got together and made a rating system to advise the viewers of innapropriate content. But they aren't by law required (they can be fined if they don't, but it's not censorship, it's different).
Anyway, personal information for what? My ISP already knows who I am. If they don't want to give the RIAA my info, there's a reason. I have my privacy garanteed.
To use a software, a type of software (define P2P), you would have to tell (tell who?) your information. Now why this needs to be a law? I don't like laws that demand that *I* tell you who I am. If you want to know, go and find out.
In our society, children are considered glorified pets, and the sole way to ensure your policy gets implemented is to say (not prove or show, mind you) that without your policy, the children are in danger. Kiddie porn "hurts" children (via the "market" theory) and now that kiddie porn and p2p have been used in the same sentence, unless someone comes up with a theory about how getting rid of p2p would hurt children (and hurt them more than a proficient means of transferring kiddie porn), this is the beginning of the end.
Note: how would James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, et al. feel about america having software programs that are illegal to run (and probably even to possess)? Shit, even Hamilton is rolling around in his grave right now. Horrible. Also, expect both Democrats and Republicans to support this bill evenly, because the RIAA buys them evenly. $20 says it passes.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Perhaps the police should look on some of the RIAA's computers...so they can try to use the infamous Pete Townsend defense "we were just doing research".
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
While the US Government is known to pass moronic laws, the net community has already established ways to deal with 'local' stupidity.
All we have to do is use a lesson from the early days of PGP. Should this bill be passed I expect that most of the respected P2P open source project will move off-shore where they will no longer be required to build in components that are harmful to their users.
Just one of many ways to defeat local stupidity in a global economy.
-Chris
-- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
Wow, I'm smelin' an arms race. The RIAA associates P2P with pornography, specifically, child pornography.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the universe, the folks who are being asked to pay $3,500 to DirecTV because they purchased a piece of hardware file community decency suits against DirecTV. Well, they're not, but they should, if they think like the RIAA, or even if they don't.
You see folks. DirecTV has a bunch of porn channels that low and behold; what's shown on those channels violate many community decency laws. And oh-my-god, every person in those communities is being bombarded with these channels, twenty-four-seven. Sitting in church on Sunday morning? Well, you are being bombarded with porn. Porn I say!
What an outrage. DirecTV must be held accountable!
No user intervention. It could even be done via a virus. All the sudden you open an email in outlook, and your illegal mp3 collection doubles in size, then the virus emails itself to all your friends! What an ingenious idea!
P2P, being a medium or a form of communication, can have various kinds of communication on it, some might be offensive, but, IMHO, IANAL, it is protected speech, just like a newspaper or a website - you can go after the content and restrict it, possibly, but how can you restrict the medium without interfering in my right to free speech?
Local news has picked up this story and the tagline is that "people that use P2P networks to trade music also use it trade child pornography." Direct f'ing quote.
He also explained that their clients will now look for other explanations for their lost profits and ways to stop them, starting with beating up school children that play loud music in parks and other public places, and breaking into houses of people believed to sing under the shower.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
The internet *is* peer-to-peer file sharing.
The RIAA has been raping children for years (charging them $18 for a CD with 12 songs). Even with the price drop, it's still rape.
Children are NOT the people who seek out CHILD pornography. I know this as a fact because I have 2 boys in my home. They want to see MATURE (looking) women with great big 'bazookas', not flat chest-ed 9 year old little girls. For a 15 yr old boy, this is normal, natural and even healthy (not to mention reassuring that I may one day be a grandfather).
The people that seek out child porn are adults, sick adults, but adults none the less. The RIAA seems to think that it's children seeking this stuff out. They are truely lost souls...
This is the equivalent to outlawing cars because pedophiles use them to abduct kids.
Back to the rape, maybe the RIAA is getting jealous after watching the kiddy porn on the P2P networks.
RIAA's intent with this bill: "Nobody can rape those kids but the RIAA"
The bill defines P2P as ...software that enables the transmission of computer files or data over the Internet or any other public network of computers and that has as its primary function the capability to do all of the following--
(A) enable a computer on which such software is used to transmit files or data to another such computer;
(B) enable the user of one such computer to request the transmission of files or data from another such computer; and
(C) enable the user of one such computer to designate files or data available for transmission to another such computer, but which definition excludes, to the extent otherwise included, software products legitimately marketed and distributed primarily for the operation of business and home networks, the networks of Internet access providers, or the Internet itself
So...
1. It is illegal to transfer files between two FTP-servers or HTTP-servers.
2. But if you use it for business, you are allowed to operate software like gnutella or kazaa.
Troll off, bozo, I use DCC almost exclusively to send software I have written and I will not use any other P2P.
And let me put this as bluntly as I've ever put anything on Slashdot.
Fuck the RIAA. When was the last time any of you Slashbots gave a damn about what the RIAA was doing, rather than just looking and saying "Well, fuck them, I'm not dealing with them" and ignoring their bullshitting? They're just like SCOrdure.
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
H.R. 2885
It's about the only country in the world where showing a little sex is worse than showing a lot of violence. Why would you rather have your children see a murdered woman than a naked woman ?
Such biased puritanism is contemptuous and says a lot about mentality of a nation.
Intelligence shared is intelligence squared.
I always thought that the US music industry has a weird thing with sex and young girls. There was an interview with a 15-year old Britney Spears in the Washington Post magazine a while back. She was all cute and wholesome and nice. Then, after the music industry got done prostituting her, we have her sucking face with Madonna on MTV...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
We'll all just resort to going back to IRC channels or setting up telnet-enabled BBS' and go 'old sk00l' on you. Or, barring that - just resort to installing some 56K modems and running WWIV or some other BBS without hooks into the 'net.
More likely than not, people will simply resort to participating in file- and song-trading parties like we used to in the 80s. Unless you're prepared to raid all the Incredible Flying Pizza Society locations (any Austinintes here?) or other places we're known to gather, how about you just sit back and have a nice cup of Shut the Fuck Up?
The sad thing is, Joe Q. Public will actually buy into the idea that P2P programs are stomping grounds for pedophiles. While there may be an isolated number of child porn traded over P2P (I've never run across any, but I'm not looking for it) I imagine this isn't the norm.
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
H.R.2885
Check the cosponsor list, your congressperson might be one!
For more info: Bill Summary & Status
I cannot express how much outrage this article has caused me. I would like to say something more interesting, but I'm busy losing hope in America and everything it "supposedly" stood for.
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
The RIAA has trotted out the usual liberal democrat congress persons to front this bill for them. When are you loosers going to wake up?
I'm sure they'll drop AIM from the final list. After all, that's the IM service of AOL Time Warner.
is that there will be a bill forcing us to use Microsoft products because of their restrictive DRM built-in. As preposterous as this sounds, think about it for a minute. Microsoft is pushing DRM all over the place, including in Office. RIAA is desperate to stop file trading so if they were get to an inroads to making people have DRM-enabled software, they would be jumping for joy. If a bill like the one proposed is pushed through, this is the next logical step. P2P software will have to have DRM and guess is more than willing to do this for you?
Preposterous you say. Again, think about it some more. MS is pretty good at buying politicians (and business execs, but that is for discussion on another day) so they could easily get something as ludicrous as this pushed through Congress. You think most Congressmen and women really have a serious clue about technology and stuff? If the RIAA successfully gets P2P associated with kiddy porn, the hammer will fall. I am certainly against child porn but this is a quite low-handed advertising. Nevertheless, this could be just the thing needed for Microsoft to really push the DRM. The thought of this just makes me shudder.
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
"Our artists' names are being used to lure kids and defraud them into finding pornography," said Mr. Glazier of the R.I.A.A.
yea.. and those files that the r.i.a.a. have released onto p2p networks aren't being used to lure music-seekers and defraud them into finding...
This is nothing but a pre-emptive strike at FreeNet (and the anonymously routed, stenographically encrypted networks to follow.)
.gov ... (When an irresistable force hits an immovable object, etc.)
The RIAA knows that once that happens, their ability to stop piracy will be absolutely NIL. So their only hope is to criminalize P2P software before it gets to that point. If they can make it illegal to distribute (and eventually own) file sharing software, then FreeNet ceases to become an issue.
And you know where those "beacons" are headed, don't you? Think mandatory on every new computer, automatically contact your ISP if you so much as ATTEMPT to run P2P software.
I always wondered how the next generation of P2P was going to mix with the
Microsoft's Palladium (and its ilk) is going to be the champion platform for this, because the users can't control what is going on. The government can mandate anything they want, Microsoft complies, and the users don't get a choice.
Expect Palladium type controls to become mandatory within 3 years as well. They're just going to turn the internet into a passive entertainment medium like they've always wanted it to be. Just with more advertising.
This product facilitates communication. As with all methods of communication, it may enable communication that you don't like, similar to speech, photography, and skywriting.
"P2p stands for piracy to pornography," quipped Mr. Lack.
"RIAA stands for RealIy, I'm An Asshole," quipped me.
Lets Look at the logic here. Child porography is being distributed via P2P. Since P2P is the method of delivery we must kill P2P.
Child pornography has been disributed by perverts by many diffrent ways before the advent P2P. Shall we make the US postal system illeagal for the same reason?
One could argue that it is much easier to get Child pornagraphy on P2P. There is a hole in that logic, you actully have to be looking for it to find it. The person looking for it in the first place is the root of the problem, not P2P.
In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
because I don't have a pornograph to play it on. ;)
All kidding aside, I think this is just FUD, because Kazaa & kazaa Lite can filter the Adult Content from the search results. This would be like saying that there should be the same laws governing Web Browsers & Servers. The RIAA can kiss mah grits.
Remember the days when MS was the most hated organization within the /. community?
The good ol' days.
Now RIAA is the Emperor to MS's Darth Vader. (Or is it the other way around? I don't know Star Wars...)
The power of Christ compiles you!
Until the RIAA manages to outlaw leaving your home or sharing legally purchased private property, it's still going to be easy to get free music.
Goo goo g'joob.
After all, they know all about prostituting talent ;-)
--Mods giveth, Mods taketh away--
It's not close even support. The Media supports democtats 10 to 1 over republicans. Look who is always carrying the media water in congress, democrats. /.ing liberals are such blind morons. The Democratic party is not about freedom it's about control. Look at who funds them. I am more afraid of Charles Schumer and Howard Berman than I am some right wing religous zealot. That Zealot can't pass laws, Berman and Schumer can and have.
You little kids need to grow up and quit blaming republicans for everything and get a grip on what is really going on. Take your nose out of all the left wing shit you read on the internet and look whats going down around you. The Democrats are as anti freddom as the republicans are supposed to be. A pox on all of them.
That sounds appropriate.
Insert multi-subject RIAA rant here
Cheers, Ed.
Not that creep again! Wasn't he humiliated enough after this own web site was caught pirating a Java program? :P
I urge everyone to write your member of Congress or the Senate expressing your thoughts and views about HR 2885 and inform them of this RIAA power play. We must both inform the ignorant politicians on the virtues of peer-to-peer, and convince all of them to go past the antipornography label and see what this bill truly stands for.
RIAA announced that there will be a series of lectures about morality. The preachers will include Jennifer Lopez, Britney Spears, Madonna ...etc
According the the artical they aren't even looking.. . has anyone else noticed that the "incest" and "underage" labelled files have exactly the same sha value as other files?
I noticed that one night on GAIM. It's a lot of what is labelled as child porn is just idiots putting their stuff up under any name they can imagine to get you to download.
Most of them are either unscrupulous porn site operators(the same ones who think putting a 35 year old in a cheerleader outfit makes her look like a teen) or viruses.
With P2P you really don't know what you're getting. You may think you're downloading The Lion King but you may end up with Debbie Does Dallas.
.zaa file format that uses a form of compression along with a header with a checksum, description, etc to ensure that the file it claims it has, really is that file.
.zaa file and submit it for community approval before it's checksum is added to a global database as "trusted."
On the web, sites are required by law to warn users before they can enter an adult site. Those that don't comply can be thrown in jail and/or fined.
P2P has NO SUCH MECHANISM to warn users about what they may actually be getting. Since the sharers have NO MEANS AVAILABLE to warn users what they're sharing then it's reasonable that the app itself must.
I don't see the problem with this.
Kazaa has become an abondanded street filled with hookers and the black market. If you don't want the law to clean up your street then you better do it yourself.
It'd be rediculously trivial to have a
If you want to share a file, you pack in into a
Users can then block certain headers and untrusted files.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
With a loosing battle, they will try to manipulate public opinion with distorted facts and figures to get the support from 'the unwashed masses'.
If people think ' its for the kids ' they will give up their rights faster then you can blink, giving the *AA a LOT of political power.
Its working for the fucking anti-gun idiots.. So why not try it with p2p too....
---- Booth was a patriot ----
err .. not gaim.. gnutella
does that mean that they're continually exposing themselves to child pornography at will?
They are doing worse. They continually market underage (or barely of age) girls in a way that sexualizes them (and their blind followers, the pre-teen crowd). Just look at what the latest so-called pop artists are wearing nowadays. Now look at the 12-year-olds at your local school.
I charge that the RIAA is responsible for creating the image of children (the ones on TV and our own) in sexually suggestive clothing, poses and attitudes.
No, I'm not a parent. But someday I'd like to be (getting married next year).
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
By that rationale, we should restrict access to TV, books, magazines, CD's, DVD's, VCR tapes, handwritten notes, drawings, all internet file transfers, art, imagination, speech, and the eyes in our own heads.
After all, there's just no telling what could be distributed via these media.
But, first and foremost, lets restrict RIAA music CD's, given that we have no idea what might be stored on them. Here's an article which suggests that their net harm is potentially worse than anything shared on a p2p network:
http://www.aap.org/policy/01219.html
It would be a nice show of support from the industry [that's wasting our government's time, our money, and challenging our freedom] if they would kindly restrict themselves.
PS - The congress link off the main article was broken. Here's a working one - just choose the first item in the list:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
Computer communication technologies have been used for piracy and pornography ever since the invention of the acoustic coupler modem. Higher download speeds and the prevalence of the internet hasn't really brought anything new with regards to actual content, only distribution.
They may as well tell hard drive manufacturers to supply warning labels as well, since if it weren't for the large hard drives existing, the quantity of piracy and porn would be a lot lower than it is too.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Parents who give their children unrestricted access to $2000 worth of anything (like, say, a computer with internet access) are idiots.
Problem: Some vehicles are used to transport illegal drugs.
Your solution: THINK OF TEH CHILDREN!!! NOBODY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DRIVE A CAR.
The P2P networks are a communications medium, based on the idea that there are routes from each user to everyone else on the internet. Everything - email, games, web, ftp, P2P - uses this mechanism. You can't arbitrarily stop a particular type of traffic or you'll break the internet. Saying that all P2P networks are filthy because they're used for child porn and then rambling on about beacons is about as stupid as saying:
YOU'RE USING THE INTERNET AT THE SAME TIME AS CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS!! EEEEWWWW!!
I don't doubt that illicit material is out there. However, P2P networks still aren't anonymous and it's easy to track down who is sharing any particular files. The RIAA managed to find and attempt to prosecute hundreds of music sharers. Their attempt failed because nobody cares for the RIAA given their bullying attitude. People certainly DO care about the children being abused because of porn, and I think there's no problem with the public wanting child pornographers prosecuted. However, linking sharing music and sharing kiddie porn is a crass, stupid and blatantly self-serving move.
(Besides: The music industry's been pushing ever younger stars, get their singers to show more skin, stage fake lesbian kisses on MTV for the sake of ratings, been accused and convicted of price fixing - and *THEY* want to take the moral high ground? [no offense to any lesbians, I just find MTV's sexual exploitation to be slimy])
The P2P networks do have many legitimate uses. In the future I will be pushing for my company to make promotional material (including demos and several hundred MB of example movies) officially released using P2P. Probably with BitTorrent, but maybe also Gnutella2 via "magnet://[checksum]" links (because I think linking the web and P2P in such as way is a fantastic idea). This should help relieve some of our bandwidth costs and allow users to still be get to the content while our conventional FTP servers are full.
I've never used a P2P app (swear to Shiva) and I had no idea I could search for porn on the P2P networks.
This is excellent news! I'm going to try all them all later today and post an analysis of the quality and quantity of porn found on the various P2P networks.
Good lord, why muck through the porn sites when I can just search for 'medium breasted teutonic goddess' on P2P.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - BF
Whats next? Is the RIAA going to claim that weapons of mass destruction can also be found on P2P networks?
One thing that I think most anyone who ever watches even a little bit of music videos on TV will notice is that there almost always seem to be some sort of attractive young dancers shaking their things. This shaking of things, in many people's opinion, often crosses the line between artistic expression and what could be called soft pornography, or near pornography. You may sometimes see parts of the image blurred because of some type of exposure. So certainly, sometimes, some of what you would see if it were not blurred out would definitely qualify as pornography without a doubt.
Now... we have child stars, probably the most notable amongst these, in a genre where go-go dancers are commonplace, for example, and I am not trying to pick on this artist in particular, but - you have artists in the style of Little Bow Wow. How can one be 100% in the current "style" without having something fairly promiscuous going on behind the scenes when it comes to "hip" music . If you look closely at some of the younger, or "child" artists' videos, you will in fact see very young girls (and boys), probably well under 13 yrs old, shaking their thing. Of course there are no "blurs", but in a music video style where it is not unthinkable that a "blur" may need to be added to retain decency, this is really, in my opinion, cutting a little close. You have very, very young dancers emulating a very sexually expressive, at times explicit style.
Obviously, these videos are more than likely produced by people who have the integrity to manage this situation just fine, but... music videos, in some genres (obviously not christian rock), are becoming synonymous with soft porn and go-go dancers and stripteasers dancing around a pole. What I find interesting here is that the music industry does in fact like to get many stars started early - Leann Rimes, for instance, has gotten a very early start. This is great, there are many very talented, very young artists. But shouldn't the music industry be a little more careful where the post-18 go-go dancing that is so commonplace in music videos these days, so common it has become a cliche, and the pre-18 child talent merge before they go and launch a media attach about "risks"?
Aspiring to be a dancer in a music video is different than aspiring to be a "dancer" is different how?
Install a P2P system that lets you see what people are searching for, and guess what...something like 99% of it is indeed commercial music and porn of questionable legality.
It is pretty amazing to watch.
> The whole friggin' INTERNET "could" have pr0n on it, so why don't we shut it down, for the good of mankind?
No, for great profit.
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!
if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
So, are they going to start putting those warning labels on MTV because of all of the soft-core porn going on in there too?
"Be a beacon...?"
"Give him head?"
Fuck you, you wannabe French asshole. Stop trying to spell shit (explicite) as if you're fucking French. It's as bad as Madonna and her fake British accent. She's a dirty cunt and so are you.
While I'm at it, you misspelled bizarre, you shitmonkey.
You fucking idiot!!!
I've called my Congressman. (Congressman don't pay attention to e-mail). Have you?
Point out only sections 4 b 2 J as disabling every Instant Messenger such as AOL, MSN and Yahoo, and section 4 b 1 C as providing a source for the worst plague of Junk E-Mail the world has ever known.
Good luck all! SlashDot Congress.
...link Child pornography to Spam instead?
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
Maybe we should just completely shut down the Internet. ...".
Listen for the cry of "... if it will save one child
The whoremongering cokeheads that comprise the record industry have discovered that a segment of society other than their own is immoral ?
Give me a call when they stop distributing rapsongs that advocate killing cops.
Obviously the DirectTV model is in effect here.
1. Get the distributor of (still legal) products to keep a customer list.
2. Raid them for said list under the DMCA.
3. Extort users without a shred of actual proof.
4. Profit!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
What we have here is a simple case of having so many laws that our [semi-]elected officials do not know what laws already exist and how to call for enforcement of those existing laws.
As with this case - several 'law-makers' cannot be bothered to discover the many laws regarding child pornography (banning the manufacture, possesion & distribution). So they incorrectly believe that writing more laws will be the answer. Naturally, the lobbying by certain corporate interests to encourage the writing of new laws that are not in the public interest by law-makers that do not have a bit of common sense and do not have the technical knowledge of a ten year old child is extremely troubling.
We need a letter writing campaign to stop this bill. Any takers? I would write a letter but my writing style is too abrupt ("hey sh*tforbrains!" is not a good way to get your point across). Come on, somebody write a sample letter... Somebody?...
There are tons of informative sites all over the net.
There are MP3s all over the Net.
There is child porn on the net too.
It doesn't matter that its -there- but the fact that its the user's choice to go look for it, download it and look at it.
Its not like when someone connects to P2P, NNTP, e-mail or the web in general that there are giant signs saying "Download child porn here!!!!". People have to look for it. Much like MP3s. MP3s might be easier to find but one way or another they have to have motive to find and download it.
If you read the Congressional FIndings in this bill (the facts that Congress bases the need for the legislation on), and replace the term "peer-to-peer" with any of the following:
browser
FTP
instant messanger
etc....
The statements are just as true.
The DMCA is not unconstitutional. It's overly vauge and allows for great abuse, but let's not call it somthing it's not. Fair use was never part of the constitution. The vaugness can lead to possible abuses of the first amendment, but that in itself doesn't make it any more unconstitutional then the limits on public pornography.
The DMCA was a voice vote and was a rather unknown generic bill. The concept behind it was rather needed, which is to say extending copyright (or at least atempting to define copyright) for digital products. But it's fately flawed in some of its more vauge points. The DMCA was a sheep with fangs that no one really noticed until it started being abused. None the less, it or somthing like it was needed to fill in the legal holes that existed.
*This* bill however, does nothing to clarify the legal code, nor does it help to resolve any existing problems therin. Further most people know what P2P is and they can imeditatly see why such a bill would be a bad thing. It's not going to go anywhere.
A rally call of "Remember the DMCA" is all well and good, but there are much more dangerous pushes for legislation (see patriot act II) out there with a far biger push (see Ashcroft and the US goverment) to get them passed.
This bill is a small fish, and it should be pretty much ignored until it gets some "real" support behind it.
Intelligence has limits.
Ban the sale of prescription glasses and contact lenses. If you can't see it you'll be safe. Oh, you can't drive either? Sorry, that's the price of perfect safety.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Somebody please inform Google we'll be shutting them down, would you?
After all, we already determined a search engine is synonymous with a P2P application.
shut down usenet, irc, email, ftp, and every other system that could be used for trading pr0n/music. why don't they just unplug the whole fucking internet
Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it
Lil' Bow Wow and Lil' Romeo's music videos aren't softcore kiddie porn
It's fundamentally wrong to blame the medium for the content. The role of a public library, for instance, is simply provide information to everyone, not to decide what information is suitable for whom. The internet is like a gigantic library.
People should accept that not everything on it is going to agree with their views. One person's right to have a copy of Hustler and another person's right to have a copy of the Bible are the exact same right. It's dangerous to think otherwise. Likewise, the technology that may allow people to spread things like child pornography (which I agree is horrible and should be illegal) helps make other forms of information free as well.
It's scary that some types of information are more free than others, because who ultimately decides what's appropriate for whom? And why is it so easy to convince people that the technology is the problem?
Ok so they want us to provide information? Ok.... everyone register with names of the RIAA chiefs and use their corporate address.....
Then download all the traci lords movies you can find
1. Click on URL, you're redirected to registration/login page
2. Go to URL bar, replace "www" with "archive" in the URL, leaving the rest alone, and hit ENTER
3. The system will bounce you around a few erroneous URLs, before returning you to the homepage
4. All NYT links will now work without registration, thanks to a special cookie set by the bouncing process
I made a PHP/MySQL library that prevents SQL injection & makes coding easier!
I'm currently watching "The Crucible" on (German) TV -- how come this malediction of all things P2P reminds me of that? :-(
Are the Allman Bros. on an RIAA label? Don't they have an album cover that features a naked 14 year old? Isn't this kind of hypocritical of the music publishing industry?
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Actually, I meant that and govt employee convicted of a crime automatically gets the maximum possible sentence for that crime. But you are right, I'm not extreme enough.
HR 2885 was the Statistical Efficiency Act of 1999... so does anyone know if there really is a HR in the pipes for this and if so, what number it really is?
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
Who says the "beacon" has to actively search out and destroy P2P programs? The "beacon" could simply be a file marked "beacon.txt" on the main hard drive of the computer. And then the feds would simply legislate that if a P2P program finds the "beacon.txt" file on a computer, it has to stop installation. If not, huge fines. If the program (or anyone else) attempts to remove the file, huge fines again, possibly jail time.
With this "Joe Everybody" dipshit waxing on about how piracy probably doesn't hurt those "fat cat" producers, but it sure does hurt him, just a lowly workin' man.
It made me psychotic for a few minutes, with the pathetic attempt at manipulation.
Some cocksucker marketing (recent) graduates sat in a room and "brainstormed" about all the "excuses" people use to pirate. Then Little Franky Simms had his 8th grade breakthrough!
"Let's show them that it doesn't just hurt the rich people, it really hurts the working folk, like them!"
Beatrice Bouvier thought this was really fucking original and this "Joe Everybody" genius idea was the best they could come up with.
Jeses Christ weeps for the lack of imagination of today's marketing force. It's beyond insulting how stupid that commercial is.
Concerned citizens: To protect your children, your dearest children, we urge that you support us in banning all useful activities. Why? Because they may lead to the distribution of child pornography. The modern postal system currently transfers millions of pieces of mail a year, but unknown thousands of those pieces could be child pornography. That is our children at risk! The interenet with its information zipping from place to place has untold millions of innocent children being exploited for the satisfaction of sick perverts. What is worse, our movie and music industries not only support child pornography, but act to make money off of it! That's right, your little Suzy or Timmy are being exploited by these evil cowards selling equipment that could be used to produce more child pornography! We must work together to ban these evil overlords, for the Good of the Children!
I serious won't be surprised when someone walks into their HQ and pumps round after round into all of them with an AR-15 gas powered rifle or pull a Matrix lobby scene.
Idiot.
I think I've found a couple of link's you'll find interesting...
The nice congressmen that introduced this bill have public contact info:
For Joseph R. Pitts (anyone)
For Christopher John (only ppl in his district)
Please be polite, because that's the only way they'll take you seriously. If they don't realize that some hardcore republicans (such as myself) will vote for the other guy if they keep proposing crap like this.
Let's drop Pitts a good old-fashioned mail-bomb, letting him know how the public feels. Also, you can find your way to this place and contact your representative, telling them that ratifying this might be a 'bad thing'
You can get child pr0n, donkey pr0n, alien pr0n, any kind of pr0n you want on p2p systems. Additionally, you can get terrorist tapes of people getting shot, tapes of combat, books about anything and everything from cookbooks to military training manuals to bomb making manuals. The information available on p2p networks is unlimited in both quantity, quality, and diversity.
This bill is basically saying they're going to shut down the roads and conduct searches and siezures whenever they want on anyone they want because they might be harboring child porn. I agree, child pr0n is fucked up but I'd rather have my freedom than throw a bunch of pricks in jail.
Yeah, I think it'll pass and that they'll just drive p2p farther and farther underground; they can't stop it, they can stop this generation of p2p applications, but can they stop the next, and the one after that?
Candy-Coated Knowledge
Why not go the source? Pornography transfered over the internet is displayed on monitors. Therefore the only way to really stop porn is to ban all monitors!
there's just no end to the life of lies you lead, is there Vlad? Yesterday, it was "SamuraiJack == Vladinator, plz disregard previous SJ!=Vlad assertion". Today it is "Vlad != Scott, plz disregard all previous assertions to the contrary".
Take Shareaza for example. It does checksumming of all files ( I'm not sure off the top of my head what type ) so unless a LOT of people decide to spam a file, the chances that you will get the wrong file ( as long as you choose one with many sources ) are very minimal.
And so we go, on with our lives
We know the truth, but prefer lies
Lies are simple, simple is bliss
Remember when sony strong armed bleem out of production. Their entire court case consisted of:
"You must have reverse enginered our product, so you broke our copyright, and we can prove this so you might as well just give in to us."
I think the programmers of kazaa, grokster, mule, emule, es5, (and the one that I use that I won't mention here because I don't want the RIAA to fuck with it) should just encode the ip address of the source user, transmit it to the dest user, decode it, and repeat. Now, the only way to get the users ip address is to break the encryption of the software. Bam, the RIAA gets screwed by a copyright.
Now I know that the more tech savy people here(hopefully all of you are) are saying "but I could just run netstat and see where my computer is sending and receiving bytes from." This is true, but how can we prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that the netstat ip address coincides with the kazaa username? Truth is, we can't.
This could be accomplishes as easy as doing a simple shiftleft on each digit of the ip address. It doesn't have to be great encryption, it just has to be encryption. Then in the EULA, just specify that it is against the TOS to break the encryption.
Anyway, I have a bad habit of being an idealistic idiot, so I'm sure there are errors in my ploy.
What the hell are you talking about? Every evil copyright bill is supported by one democrat and one republican. You think Orin Hatch doesn't have a few "fuck the consumer" bills under his belt? Look closer. This issue is not a partisan one; an equal amount of democrats and republicans are bought and paid for. If you want to look at it from a more partisan viewpoint, the democrats support hollywood and "artists" (thus copyright protection) and the republicans support big business (thus copyright protection). Your right to "steal" (aka freely use) music and movies is not represented by either party. As far as I know, it's not even vocally represented by any 3rd parties. When freedom of speech and freedom to make a profit collide, the latter always wins. As is the case with copyright.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
A far better way to approach the problem of offending the parents of children is to declare that the entire Internet is for adults, except where specifically labelled otherwise. We could have a Rated G Bit in every packet for this. Meanwhile, either watch your kids when they use the computer, use a whitelist, or password-protect it so they don't get on the Internet at all, if you don't want them exposed to 'pornography' (whatever that is).
Personally, I figure if Monsterette 2 (her older sister has flown the nest and is no longer a child) wants to see something sick and perverted, the fact that she wants to see it is the problem, not the images themselves. And if she sees something by mistake, she knows how to delete it, and won't be traumatized by it. Besides, if I put up a firewall, she'd probably hack her way past it anyhow.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
Block google and search engines too since you can find porn through it.
Image search?
"Other distributors of pornography have also embraced the file-sharing networks as a promotional vehicle. They distribute sample pictures and videos in an attempt to attract paying customers to their Web sites.
"The adult industry, like others, is against the illegal downloading of their videos," said Gary Kremen, the chief executive of Sex.com, a directory of sexually explicit Web sites, "but they are much smarter than the music industry. They see p2p as money to be made."
"
like this?
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
Surely that should be Pirate 2 Pirate
I bet they spend hours trying to get "terrorist" in there somewhere...
They are REALLY getting desperate, aren't they?
How long did it take somebody to first have sex in a car once it was invented? Especially once the backseat was added...
If it can reproduce an image, a sound, a moving picture, somebody was going to figure out how to put porn on it.
If the technology could help transfer this media, same thing.
(And those cellphones with cameras? Those things weren't even on the store shelves before some moist-palmed perv was thinking of an angle for it...)
For crying-out-loud, the whole Internet is swimming in porn, and many prudes have had wet dreams of clamping down on all that.
The RIAA is just engaging in a cynical attempt of saying "think-of-the-children" as they beg for their own special law to clamp down on P2P. And since they're looking to hook up with the Republicans, they want to play the porn card. If the Democrats were the golden child, they'd be playing up P2P as a medium for racists, white supremacists, and just generally politically incorrect communication.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
The worst kind of porn is pee to pee
Yuck!
Even better... let's see who supported/introduced this "Protecting the Children from Peer to Peer Pornography Act of 2003" .. Shall we?
Mr. PITTS (for himself, Mr. JOHN, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. PENCE, and Mr. DEMINT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
Pitts, Joseph R. - REPUBLICAN
Pence, Mike - REPUBLICAN
DeMint, Jim - REPUBLICAN
John, Christopher - DEMOCRAT
Sullivan, John - REPUBLICAN
So, it seems this is a bi-partisan bill, with primarily GOP support. I expect you to join the democratic party today. And since when do religious zealots not pass laws? Remember the Defense of Marriage Act? A law was just introduced the other day to make it "not unconstitutional" (never mind the obvious stupidity of a law stating such a thing.... either amend the constitution or shut the fuck up) to display the 10 commandments on gov't property. And sine we've become a rule by majority country (screw the minority; it's not protected anymore b/c it doesn't speak for the majority!) it will pass.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Britney Spears, Christina, Jessica Simpson etc. Ok, maybe they are "barely legal" but regardless, the RIAA makes most of its money by selling images of half-naked children. And the younger they look, the better they sell, and the more support they get from the recording industry. Shit, madonna just stuck her tongue down one of their throats on TV the other day. Death to kiddie porn! Death to the recording industry!
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Reading the bill HR 2885 on thomas.loc.gov, I noticed the following:
DISCLAIMER: The following is just commenting, not the truth.
The combination of Microsoft Internet Explorer and a web browser would be "peer-to-peer file trading software" in the United States. The server would perform functions (A), Explorer would be (B), and (C) would be satisfied by the fact that the server lets the user pick what files to distribute, even which file is the home page and how to link the files.
Then Explorer would be regulated by the Act: it would have to require a warning that it could access pornography; young children would have to send personal info to Microsoft. Also, interestingly, I would be able to set up a 'do-not-install beacon' preventing Explorer from being installed on a computer, and it would have to be possible to remove Explorer from a computer. This would cripple Windows.
But read the act more closely. The Windows version of Explorer is actually part of Windows, and Windows' "primary function" is not file sharing, or even network use. So Explorer may be exempt from regulation by this bill. But competing web browsers may be at a disadvantage because they meet the "primary function" requirement; thus Mozilla may have pornography warning labels while Explorer does not; meanwhile Windows' new default do-not-install beacon prevents Mozilla from running.
Also, notice that I mentioned an Explorer-web server combination, not Explorer by itself, so Explorer without a web server wouldn't qualify as "peer-to-peer", because Explorer would not meet (A) and (C): it can't send files to another computer, and it can't make files available for upload. Actually, Explorer allows web pages to include a file upload form widget (Mozilla and Konqueror support this also), which could be used to "transmit files or data to another computer," meeting (A), and also meeting (C) since I pick which files are available by choosing them with the widget. The web browser will only send files if the user has selected them with the widget.
Except (C) contains a crafty exclusion. Here it is again:
The exclusion creates the passage: is a web browser, such as Microsoft Internet Explorer, necessary "for the operation of" "the Internet"? The "Commission" (Federal Trade Commission) would have to decide. So it seems this bill has much language to protect Explorer, just in this one section.
But what about other software, like rsync and CVS? Does it co
==========
There are two types of people: those who are in the world, and those who aren't.
Using a p2p application and you don't want them to get porn, set up some drop rules (Always drop by name; IPs change):
:p
if name contains "porn" then don't display
if name contains "fuck" then don't display
if name contains "sex" then don't display
I'd bet those three alone will block almost all the porn (because you kind of have to use words like that to make porn show up in searches for porn, duh). There might be some innocent victims, such as Sex Pistols mp3's, but you can write exceptions too.
Meanwhile, if you're an adult, you can turn the rules off and (if you've got time to kill), report IP's that generate 50 references to results that contain every sex word in existance.
Or you may have ulterior reasons for disabling the filters
And cars are equal to date rape, because date rape happens a lot in cars.
And Dungeons and Dragons leads to witchcraft. And Marylin Manson leads to killing. And watching Arnold Shwartzengovernor movies turns you into a carrot. And masturbating leads to killing kittens. And being a catholic leads to pedophilia. And using linux leads to never having sex. Ever. And watching too much anime leads to a sudden fascination with schoolgirls and tenticles.
Wait, the last one was true...
Still, what I see this as is a final act of desperation. The lawsuits are just giving them a bad name, and finally they realized instead of letting the internet badmouth them, they should badmouth the P2P services. What next, badmouth Sean Fanning?
Still, the scary thing is what I see here is a potential legion of child porn pics being uploaded onto the networks by the RIAA, with the titles 'michaeljacksonsfacemelting.jpg, madonna.jpg, coolpic.jpg, or tatugirlskissing.jpg,' then they'd somehow (using secret RIAA black magic) track these files, and turn the hapless bastard who downloads them into the authorities. That way they'd save money on lawsuits...
You can find the PDF version of the GAO report at the following link: "File Sharing Programs: Child Pornography is Readily Accesible Over Peer-to-Peer Networks."
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Privacy in one hand, up holding the laws on the other hand. How do we balance both. The RIAA may want to collect your information for bad purposes, but also use it for good. Illegal file sharing is still illegal so how do we monitor content and enforce the laws on p2p networks, while still allowing legitimate users there privacy? Here on slashdot I hear a whole lot of bashing on every time the RIAA does something, but I never hear a good example of another solution that solves the problem. Prove your smarts, and lets come up with a solution that everyone can live with.
Later,
Phil
Internet used for porn!
"The meek shall inherit the earth, the rest of us shall go to the stars." Isaac Asimov
Let's just start a grass roots attempt to outlaw the RIAA and MPAA as harassing whiners.
They seek to enlist the aid of a government which has been rampantly trampling (say that 3 times fast!) the civil rights of its Citizens. And doing so with increasing enthusiasm for the past few years.
Their argument says, essentially: "We cannot see what a given individual is doing. They could be doing anything!. Therefore, we MUST monitor and regulate each individual!"
The premise of our society (in the US) is exactly the opposite of that view: "...Chief among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." The "liberty" part means that Yeah--you could be doing anything. Go ahead. We presume that what you're doing is none of anyone else's business.
In that context, the RIAA's argument "Unmonitored, unregulated private citizens are probably criminal, and must be treated as such." sounds absurd. Not to the folks making the laws.
This or similar regulation has a good chance of being enacted. Remember the "war on drugs" in its heyday. I personally know people who had property siezed and sold at auction because the property (a car) was "involved in a drug-related crime".
Problem is--the "crime" was an alleged crime--the person involved was never convicted of anything. Yeah, that sorta violates the fourth amendmant of our Constitution. And the law was overturned. But, he still lost his car.
The upsot of it is that there is (and always will be) a persistant layer of the legal system which undermines the same rights that are guaranteed by that same legaly system.
At any given moment, we can fight more or less diligently and determine the weight of that layer.
Make no mistake, however--it is the nature of power to concentrate itself. And if you don't take some of that power by speaking out, embarrassing politicians, joining your local zoning board, challenging that traffic ticket, etc.--then you are giving that power away.
Don't be embarrased to "take power" by taking action. Your very desire to protect your own freedoms conflicts with someone else's desire to regulate (restrict) those freedoms. You are in the game whether you like it or not. "I'll leave you alone and you leave me alone." is good in principle, but impossible to implement in practice.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
The Internet industry is trying to enlist broader public support with a campaign intended to show that its nemesis -- books and magazines -- are used not only to exchange knowledge but also pornographic images, including child pornography.
"As a guy in the publishing industry and as a parent, I am shocked to learn that books and magazines are being used to lure children to stuff that is really ugly!" said Lackie Andrew, the chief executive of NothingSuspiciousHere Books.
I see two problems with this:
1. p2p networks are being actively promoted in middle east, china, etc. by the U.S. government (or so I hear) to undermine the censorship controls of foreign governments. Everyone agrees that p2p networks are on the road towards substantially greater freedom of communication than exists now
2. The idea that p2p networks do more to spread porno than email, website popup banners, email, etc is ridiculous. If anything p2p systems are getting better at ensuring that you get the real goods when you download music or videos, using file sizes, bitzi, etc.
simon
home page
I'm in awe at the complete and utter ignorance of a certain Laura A. Ahearn quoted in that article.
She states that Kazaa has been deliberately used to "attack children".
The mind boggles.
If you give your kid a $2000 computer, broadband internet access, no supervision, and they type in "porn" as a search (on Google, newsgroups, P2P or even just as a URL) - is this an attack? No.
YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN WATCHING YOUR CHILD.
It's called good old PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. The same way you shouldn't let your kid roam around town alone or talk to strangers.
And they think that's going to discourage people?
guess the trolls are becoming mods. damn shame.
---- oh no - it's the RIAA and their $100000000 fine. I'm gonna take that so seriously...
- People they harrass and threaten are challenging the RIAA in court. When the evidence is presented, judges may well agree that the RIAA is violating privacy rights and overstepping their bounds
- Targeting university students, young music fans, and other completely benign people is making the RIAA extremely unpopular. People who enjoy music are not criminals, they are human.
- The RIAA is rapidly alienating the precise crowd they really should want supporting them. They are pissing off their customers.
- The RIAA is removing their own music from P2P networks; thus making the artists they represent unpopular. When they are done with this P2P networks will be full of non-RIAA music. The Association's own artists will be unrepresented among the current, popular music that is traded and enjoyed.
- They are starting to take ridiculous actions, like "offering amnesty" to music traders (ha ha) and now trying to link P2P to child pornography (double ha ha).
Their days are numbered. I'm involved with university research into developing stronger, more secure and more widely applicable P2P networks and know that the implications of this technology reach far beyong trading music or porn. There's a lot of neat stuff we're about to experience.That's Pete TownsHend
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
Heh but its ok to show young half naked girls (Britney Spears) on music videos and little boys like Bow Wow having 12 year old girls running after him wearing tight ass clothes on the video.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
True.
Mind you if RIAA managed to keep the prOn out of my email, I'd thank them! Yes, I'm having a bad spam day...
QUOTE: "P2p stands for piracy to pornography," quipped Mr. Lack. yeah, catchy. QUOTE: "A study in March by the General Accounting Office found that KaZaA would be effective for someone looking for child pornography. The agency searched for files associated with child pornography, such as "incest" and "underage." It did not actually download the files it found, but it determined that 42 percent of them had titles associated with pornographic images of children." so someone done a search on kazaa, and read the titles of the files. and this is what a newspaper article is based on? every dumbass out there knows that at least 70% of all kazaa files are fake/misnamed (ie different than what they purport to be). the nyt is over. i would rather read my local newspaper than the kind of ameuterish trash that fills nyt pages these days.
---- oh no - it's the RIAA and their $100000000 fine. I'm gonna take that so seriously...
Conservative folks just need to get laid. People would probably stop being prudish if they came every once in awhile...
You know I'm right:)
Yes (warning: adult material). :)
Try not to pound my webspace too hard.
Observe the status bar of the window on the left for the exit URL, and the pr0n window on the right for what was there.
The injection of "interstate commerce" all throughout this bill is clearly a patch attempting to stretch federal jurisdiction over something quite clearly beyond its bounds -- that is, out of the scope of the constitution, hence literally unconstitutional. It's a pretty common and sickening tactic among corrupt legislators and their corporate owners.
Would the courts consider open source licensing (e.g. the GPL) to be "commerce"? Perhaps more important, would prosecutors and federal police even pay attention to the "interstate commerce" restriction at all...?
There's a lot of kiddie pr0n exchanged on port 80. Also pictures of Osama bin Laden. And articles supporting Saddam Hussein. And stuff in French.
Don't drop the soap, Tommy!
I am a resident of Pennsylvania, and felt that it is my duty to at least make my displeasure known. I do not however live in this congressman's district, so my message may never be read. If I get a response, I will post it here.
Congressman Pitts,
This message is a response to H. R. 2885, which has been recently introduced. First of all, let me say that I despise the amount of pornography that can be found on the internet. I applaud Pennsylvania's recent stand against child pornography, where several hundred child pornography sites were banned from Pennsylvania. The result of those actions were good, and made the internet a better place. H. R. 2885 promises to not yield similar results. The only parties that will benefit from this act will be the corporations that have backed it.
I've used p2p(pier to pier) software for several years. I use it for legitimate purposes, sharing poetry, or short stories with other novice writers. I have never once come across any child pornography that was misrepresented as anything else. I fear that the restrictions that may be put in place will do more harm to the civil liberties of the users and authors of software. I believe that I have a right to my own privacy as I share my works with others who also have a right to their own privacy.
The issue here is not pornography on p2p networks. The issue is the sagging music industry. The music industry has every right to ensure that their works are not stolen or pirated, but I do not believe that they have a right to influence how I access the p2p network. The legal uses of p2p networks are being threatened by the short sighted executives in charge of a relatively small industry.
Also, if the RIAA can get the identities of the persons who are sharing their copyrighted works, then why can law enforcement agencies simply get the identities of those that are sharing child pornography as well? The act of having the chile pornography should be enough evidence to warrant a legal search/siezure of their computer hardware. I agree that those that break the law should be punished for their crimes, but those who do not break the law, should not be punished for the crimes of others.
At the end of the day, we are all still living in America, the greatest country on earth. We take our civil liberties very seriously, as many people have fought and died to protect them. I fear that soon our civil liberties will all but dissapear. Please think twice about H. R. 2885, and what it means for the legitimate file sharers. Please realize that we can identify those that are breaking the law, and those that are not, and also that action can be taken against those that break the law without affecting those that do not.
Thank you for your time, God Bless.
Yes, in retrospect I realize that the issue is child pornography and not chile pornogrophy. Please leave my spelling alone, there was no spell checker on his site, and I'm a programmer so I can't spell worth dick.
Ah screw it, you're not paying attention anyway.
...the music the RIAA puts out *could* be used by pedophiles to draw kids into their homes for easy molestation. Therefore, the RIAA is guilty of attempted child molestation by association.
That coin has two sides, RIAA.
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
Since nytimes.com really insists on having a registration system (stupid, I agree, but they seem stuck on the idea), they eventually find ways to close the bypass. I sure hope they don't tell Google to stop spidering their site!
Registration is free, and you can tell them not to spam you. Go and register, and spare us all the noise.
Well, since people are saying we need to write congress, and one person even asked for a sample letter, here's a sample letter from a history guy:
,
To Senator/Representative
I am writing to you regarding H.R. 2885, the act cited as "Protecting Children from Peer -to-Peer Pornography Act of 2003." Despite this bill's good intentions, I fear that I must inform you about this bill's pitfalls.
This bill does more harm than good. It attempts to criminalize the usage of Peer to Peer (commonly referred to as P2P) programs. Despite the negative publicity that is associated with these programs, P2P is a revolutionary idea in the computing world. P2P programs helps to connect people in new ways. Simply because P2P can be used in malicious ways does not mean it is a bad thing.
If the express purpose of this bill is to prevent child pornograpy (which is a terrible thing indeed), why not disconnect the Internet altogether? There is no Act to do this because of the public outcry this would cause. Only an evil, Communist nation such as China or North Korea would contemplate such a thing. But the lobbyists pushing for this Act are attempting to solve the simple problem of music piracy through banning all P2P programs and the installation of a "beacon". There are still other ways to pirate music, and they will be used, from copying a friend's cds, to creating new networks, etc.
And the idea of a beacon violates my right to be free. If I install a government "beacon" into my computer, how do I know it does not have bugs in it, something a virus could attack?
As a computer specialist, even the implementation of a beacon system would be very hard. The technology does not yet exist, and even if it did, there probably would be someway for criminals to break it anyway.
Please stop this bill from passing. If you require further information about computers, I am at your service. My contact information is below. Thank you for your time.
Signed,
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
My letter:
Dear Congressman Inslee:
I am a registered voter in your district, and serving my country in the Navy; currently stationed in Pensacola, Florida. I am writing to voice my strong opposition to HR 2885, "Protecting Children from Peer-to-Peer Pornography Act of 2003".
The findings in Section 2 of the bill could easily apply to regular web browsing (HTTP) or USNET Newsgroup readers. As reported on the 7th of September 2003, by Saul Hansell, in the New York Times, "Aiming at Pornography to Hit Music Piracy", the RIAA strongly backs this bill, obstinately for the "protection of children". The truth is that this is another attempt by the RIAA to infringe upon the rights of consumers, to limit the use of new technology to distribute music, and to prevent independent musicians from legally distributing their music outside of the RIAA's monopoly.
The irony of the RIAA's stance is that they are guilty of sexualizing children through the behavior of performers like Brittany Spears, Christina Aguilera, and other young women who project a hyper-sexual image. Teen and pre-teen girls view these performers as roll models, and try to dress and act in their image. Young girls dressing in skimpy outfits encourages the deviant adults who prey on children. The RIAA and MTV put children at greater risk due to the behavior of the artists they promote.
Child pornography is evil, and those peddling in such material should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. However, excessive government regulation of an entire class of software in the effort to "protect children" is the wrong direction we should take. Sufficient laws are on the books to effectively prosecute Child Pornographers, and more importantly to protect children. HR 2885 is an oblique attempt by the RIAA to further protect its monopoly on the creation and distribution of music.
If this bill comes to a vote, please vote "NO".
Very Respectfully,
Craig Newcomb
That'd be Peep @ Porn
BAH!!!
the 1600 lawsuits were really just a smokescreen all along..
makes me wonder what SCO is up to?
--
|-_-| . o O ( bEef!)
Live with it.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The courts have repeatedly upheld things as "interstate commerce" which had no clear and obvious limitation to only interstate and only commerce. Nice try though.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
You know, I can't help but wonder how this kind of legislation will affect anonymizing projects like Freenet. After all, Freenet is designed to protect political dissidents from their own governments while providing a forum for free speech by protecting the identities of the speakers and the listeners alike. If everyone who uses P2P systems like this have to register their identities with some organization, that would defeat the purpose of something like Freenet in the first place. Would this result in Freenet being criminalized? How will this affect anonymous free speech?
An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
Since they are getting into levels of disconnection, then why don't they go after Windows since most of the users they are after are probably using Windows to do it...
I just checked out the Kazaa site and the software they have only runs on windows.....
Interesting that the RIAA suddenly "cares" that child porn is being distributed over P2P. This HAS to be a noble endeavour to creating a better, safer world... and they have no other motives. Right.....
But on a more serious note....
I believe all technology can be used for good and evil purposes. To merely condemn a technology because of its potential bad seems rather illogical.
One could argue that VHS or DVD acts as a carrier of child porn since it is a medium that can distribute child porn.... but I don't see the RIAA linking DVD == child porn. I don't see DVD players have a warning label saying that you MAY be exposed to child porn while using this system. I don't see stores selling DVDs taking down your personal information (except Radio Shack) and verifying your age before using the system. Hmmm.... i wonder why the RIAA doesn't take out these other technologies.
By induction, lets do case n+1. With the same logic, one could argue that the Internet is a medium for child porn; therefore, we should verify age and stick warning labels onto the Internet. Lets all jump on the anti-technology band wagon and ban computers, broadband, etc since they are all guilty of possibly distributing child porn. Oh, and electricity has to go since it's used in the creation of child porn.
This seems like a pretty good proof. End of proof, QED!
If the RIAA is *SO* concerned about the moral state of our world... why do they continue producing music and videos that promote violence, sex, drugs, money, etc.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
forgot to add that subject to the last post of mine.
Would their definition not include server's too? Lets take Apache for example:
(A) enable a computer on which such software is used to transmit files or data to another such computer;
This is Apache's main purpose.
(B) enable the user of one such computer to request the transmission of files or data from another such computer; and
HTTP is a two way thing, not broadcast. The "client" needs to be able to send data to a server to request files. If not GET, the POST directive meets this. I'm using it to send this post.
(C) enable the user of one such computer to designate files or data available for transmission to another such computer, but which definition excludes, to the extent otherwise included, software products legitimately marketed and distributed primarily for the operation of business and home networks, the networks of Internet access providers, or the Internet itself;
Okay, this part is kind of vague. Designation of the files is program specific, but but Apache and most P2P software do something along the lines of "you put the files in a shared dir". The excluded part is REALLY vague. P2P software IS legitimately marketed and distributed. It only fails to meet that part is it is already illegal by this bill.
The actual exclusions seem to be written by someone who has no clue about networking. Lets see... Home(non-business) and business networks are excluded. Government networks are about the only thing that isn't excluded. ISP networks, which are yet another business network, are then specifically excluded.
Of course, if that isn't enough, the internet itself is excluded. WTF do they think "the Internet itself" is??? Some palpable item? The internet is formed OF the other types of networks(most of which were excluded). They either include the application layer in these exclusions, or they don't. P2P is excluded if the other servers are excluded. For that matter, it's possible to use Apache FOR P2P type things. P2P is just another service on the internet.
Or is there something I'm missing and I need to RTFA better next time?
Child porn on p2p services? Please. I've downloaded a ton of music and porn from gnutella, and never ran across anything that I thought the girls looked too young.
If you don't like porn, that's fine -- you don't look at it. But stay the hell out of my bedroom. What makes you so sure that yours is the one true way?
'Wake up, RIAA. The whole friggin' INTERNET "could" have pr0n on it, so why don't we shut it down, for the good of mankind?'
I'm sure the RIAA is fully aware of this - which is probably why they *don't* mention the entire Internet as a problem. All a lot of people know of the Internet is the great 'Information Superhighway' and how wonderful it is. It is in the RIAA's best interest to separate out the P2P networks as the seedy underbelly that needs to be dealt with. Their task now is convincing Joe Senator/Jane Congressperson of it. The RIAA is playing the game and doing it effectively. They're playing politicians, courts, and media to get what they want and so far everything seems to be going their way...with the exception of stopping file sharing. You don't see anyone on Fox News Sunday or Tim Russert's show questioning exactly how the RIAA got the authority to go into anyone's PC and poke around to gain evidence to sue it's user but that's what needs to happen. People need to understand just how much power has been handed to corporate entities and how much influence their lobby groups have. I imagine it is going to have to get a lot worse before it gets better though...
That's enough to switch sides and offer artist and musicians a much much much bigger cut.
Is that databases are most often not creative works but compilations of data that other people own. If someone farms your email address or phone number from some source? Anyone else can get it from the same or different sources, and ultimately its your personal information, not theirs. I think one should be afraid that later there will be legislation, or even the twisted interpretation of this legislation, that would say the data itself was owned by the database compiler, allowing people to sue you for having a telephone number they farmed. Yes this is an extreme example, but we have seen equally stupid examples that became reality. If our elected lawmakers wanted to help us they would stop companies from selling their databases, make it so that every company has to work for their data, but I live in California so I concede the point.
Isn't this equivalent to outlawing any networked computer? What do networks do except to transfer information of one sort or another?
As the RIAA's ill-fated campaign against P2P music sharing continues, one has to wonder how this will all affect the future. Although I am no prophet, the most likely and beneficial outcome I can forsee is the dissolution of the recording industry, at least as we know it today.
I have a plea for all musicians reading this forum today: Who needs a record label? With the introduction of computers and the digital formats, composing music and distributing it can all be done with a standard desktop PC. Anyone from a world-renowned artist to your average garage band can use software to compose music, and use the vast, free P2P netoworks to distribute it. There's no need for multi-million dollar equipment to record and distribute music anymore! But, you ask, "Where do the artists make their money?" The same place they always have: Live performances! Everyone knows that the record companies keep the overwhelmong majority of the profits from CD sales, and the artists themselves recieve a miniscule share.
So what's the point? The recording industry has found itself to be an unnecessary middle-man. Who can blame them for trying to fight for their own existance? But let us move on, the future of music is a bright one. Your local garage band will have as much opportuninty to succeed as any platinum-selling artist.
--Eric L. Haese
(Anonymous coward my buttox!)
I found ZERO "child porn." And I didn't use stupid fucking words like "lolita" and "underage" because there are thousands of websites using those same keywords and you can bet the stuff they're selling ain't really "underage" at all - not even at "Seventeen" magazine.
It doesn't take a genius to find CSV files on the web. And yeah, even csvs of "those" files can be found. So I typed in keywords based on filenames of real, actual "porn" listed in one of those csvs. And ya know what turned up?
Nothing
Nada
Zip
Know why? Because child porn is very fucking illegal. Not just in the US, but just about everywhere, that's why. Only a moron or a cop would even offer the shit for download over a service like kazaa, because your IP is just sitting there naked as your asshole will be when they deliver you to the state prison.
Then, I decided (so long as I have it installed) to search for someone I might actually be interested in looking at: Aria Giovanni. That turned up many more hits (keyword "aria"), but basically it revealed NOTHING I ain't already seen posted in the newsgroups a thousand fucking times. What images there were were scattered about willy-nilly (and of course not a csv to be found), and the few videos were mostly ancient rehashes of stuff that was posted to usenet long ago in much (much) higher quality.
But, just for the hell of it I clicked "download" on one, anyway. When it FINALLY connected (And people say FREENET is slow? Get a fucking grip!) the data trickled in a couple k a second. I let it get to about 100K, clicked "preview" (to see if it was even the video I asked for) at which time windows delivered me an exception and promptly killed the app.
If this is the technology that has the record industry running for cover (not to mention all those thumpers in congress) then, for god's sake, don't ever give one of these shaved apes the keys to usenet!
Notice the usage of the term "file trading". Used to describe P2P networks in general, this is a gross misnomer. Trading implies that each file transaction consists of a mutual exchange explicitly agreed upon by two or more parties. One does not trade, for example, $20 in exchange for nothing in return. That's simply giving, donating, or sharing. Trading involves mutual benefit or gain such that one party would not render goods or services at all except in return for something else. This distinction is important because in the context of illicit copies of copyrighted material, trading is what has been traditionally called and prosecuted as "piracy" under copyright law.
Some P2P networks, such as those built on FTP or IRC fileservers, often employ transfer ratios and are, in fact, file trading technologies. However, on many of the newer public networks which come to most people's minds when the term "P2P" is mentioned, a downloader is not required to give the client hosting the file anything in return. Nor are users even required to give anything to anyone at all. This kind of use is called "leeching", and leechers comprise the overwhelming majority of users on networks such as Kazaa and Gnutella (about 70% in one early study of the Gnutella network) since making files available to other users is purely voluntary. Clearly these users are not engaged in trading. In fact these networks were not designed to facilitate trading at all. Are these file sharing networks to be exempt from this law? This is obviously not its intent, but on these confused terminological grounds, this law could easily be sidestepped or thrown out in court.
Since lawmakers must make rigorous semantic efforts (if not always coherent) in the drafting of legislation in order to avoid having it nullified when the law is eventually tested in the courts, this mistake is quite revealing.
The parties involved in pushing this legislation obviously mean to supress both file trading and file sharing, and their faulty semantics demonstrates the fundamental lack of understanding which is ubiquitous among lawmakers and racketeers like the RIAA and MPAA regarding information technology, networking, and computers in general. People who are too ignorant to understand even the basics of something, who don't even bother to try, or who are spreading misinformation for their own gain, should not be allowed the power to govern or otherwise solicit control of that thing. The sponsors of this bill should be immediately removed from office for such irresponsibility; passing legislation that affects millions of people should not be taken so lightly, especially when it restricts constitutionally given freedoms.
Nowhere in the US Constitution does the freedom to profit take precedence over the freedom of speech and association. This bill needs to be stopped.
Now the RIAA is attacking P2P because of the free exchange of kiddie porn. So does this mean that the RIAA is also trying to protect the kiddie porn industry from bankruptcy?
Man, these guys really are buttmonkeys, aren't they? ;-)
If you really want to find irony in this: consider how many 16-year-old singers whose only merit was sex appeal have been made famous by RIAA companies in the past decade, then ask what their problem with kiddie porn is.
Man, I wish I had some mod points- this is one of the best points I've seen on this article
If they want 'incest' porn, all they need to do is trawl over to the alt.sex.stories text repository site, at http://asstr.org . There are whole collections dedicated to 'pedo' fantasy stories, incest stories, etc. etc.
Eventually, I hope, people will see child pornography for what it really is: a weapon. Then maybe they will be able to see what is really behind it, and learn to deal with it rationally.
But that won't happen until people decide to reject the ideology of child pornography. Until then, it will continue to carry weight and power, and will continue to be used by the powerful, or by those seeking it.
If mom and dad don't want johnny and suzy on the big bad internet, than it is their responsibility to restrict it. NOT the government's.
In fact, P2P IS a big part of the child porn subculture.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
As many posters have noted, pop music promotion, which is targeted at teens and pre-teens, has become blatantly sexualized.
As an (ahem) modest proposal, perhaps it would make sense to introduce a hostile amendment to the bill to identify and outlaw those communications companies and media which have the longest history of targeting children with sexual content, starting with the largest, most organized and egregious offenders: Sony Music and Universal Music.
Any bets on how long this bill would take to die in committee?
Can anyone deny now that these Mormons need to be dealt with. They control the FBI (Ever wonder why the FBI so fucked up and inept?) Mormons are the people behind SCO. Now Hatch is going to try and push this through while we still don't have secure borders and are being taken over by illegal aliens out here in California. I hate to sound bigoted but this shit has got to stop. Fuck these dammed religous zealots and their rich friends.
Go ahead mormon boy mod me down and I'll just repost. You can't stand have anything that might make you all look bad. I know you will because you did this last time I pointed out how out of control you people seem to be. You are entitled to your religon but not entitled to make me a second class citizen or infringe my rights so you can look good to your elders and get rich and give tons of money to your stake.
As you can see I don't care about my karma.
From the article:
"A bill has been introduced into the House [...] that would require children to get parental consent before using sharing software."
That's kind of funny. When I was a kid, I didn't have to get parental consent to use the computer. It was almost the other way around. My parents were always asking me "How do you make it do _____ again?" "I hit a wrong button. What do I do now?" "Oops. I think I lost my file. Can you get it back?" If I had wanted to, I could have turned on the "parental locks" to keep my parents out.
Too many people here still thinking the internet begins at the US border.
Question: all that stuff comes to pass. What do you think the governments of places like China and Cuba are going to do? North (and even South) Korea? The former soviet states that are hungry for anyone's dollars?
You'll see a booming trade in anonymous proxies, even more "unidentified" open proxies left "accidentally" exposed in places like China and Korea, eastern euro usenet and p2p services that guarantee anonymity...
Ironically, the best thing for "freedom on the internet" might well be for the US to crack down on cyber freedoms. The money that would flow into "cyber free" nations could do great things in third world countries. I saw a program the other night on some Mexican workers in NYC who sponsored the construction of an entire baseball stadium in their hometown. Cost all of $52,000 and would have cost at least fifty times that here.
Imagine what would happen if there was a sudden tide of money available to people who could offer reasonably high quality anonymous internet presence to all those US citizens living under the thumb of big brother.
That means they are going to force companies like Kaza to spy on their customers! They will probably install this software right away, what copany wouldn't love to have a law that allows them to spy.. err protect their users. Heck, they can call the stuff spyware... err protectware!
Oh wait, they do that already. Besides, what is forcing most p2p software like Kaza to do this? Last I heard Kaza co. was hiding its self from US law, and the hypocrites only like the US law when it works in their favor (i.e. DMCA involving KazaLite on Google).
Unless they get bought out by the lables like Kaza planed, I doubt we will see them doing this anytime soon.
I'm sorry, call me dumb, but can someone translate this line for me: 'To prohibit the distribution of peer-to-peer file trading software in interstate commerce.' Does this mean they want to prohibit the sale of P2P software, or what? I mean I don't see how P2P software is involved in 'interstate commerce', perhaps maybe the lack there-of. :o)
Either way- man, talk about grasping at straws here.
Just happened to catch a trailer for a show on MSNBC tonight.. some "documentary" along the lines of "When using internet file trading software YOUR child could be innocent PREY to EVIL internet PORNOGRAPHERS who hide PORN in music files! YOUR CHILD could be at risk without even knowing! Shock! Horror! Film at 11!" etc
I think it's on at 8, but to be honest, I wasn't paying much attention
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Is it porn made for children?
Is it porn with children in it?
What is porn?
Greek (as in big fat ) prostitute pictures
or I SEE PRO (ICP)
The age of consent seems to wooble a bit depending on..
but if there is grass on the wicket, lets play cricket!
Hey that kid's kid ain't my kid are you kidding?
I am Knacker of the yard and I caught you looking out of your window during the school run, shame on you, any hooo this transmugraphcation device spoted you where going to "Toss the Caber" over those school uniform clad teeen bitchs {CLICK HERE, FREE PICTURES!}, or would you like to open the box?
OPEN THE BOX! OPEN THE BOX!
Yeah thats right, same people man, the same people!
An American industry tries to legislate in advantages for itself using a supposed social good as an excuse, and this is news?
What industry doesn't try to go that. Go ahead all you fans of honest industry, find a company that DOESN'T lobby the Congress.
They are all liars and they lie so often it should not even be news!
This is my sig.
Want to get the RIAA to back off and leave you alone. Consider setting up an RIAA Tarpit. I'll leave that up to the Nerds to figure out, but something like this would really cost the RIAA a lot of money and resources as they scour the internet looking for people to supena.
"It looks like one, it smells like one, it bahaves like one, but is it someone really connected to a P2P system"?
The idea is simple... run a program that makes your computer "look" like a peer system. When requested, it would display the names of your music share folder. But really, it isn't. It's just a list of BOGUS files and all your favorite "decoy songs" you want the RIAA to know you're sharing. When requested for a download, it would just spit out random data, or even if you're clever, an MPW Header block.
Now, imgine if EVERYONE ran their RIAA tarpit....
Of course this would generate other problems for our other music sharing folks, but at least the RIAA may think twice about scanning IP addresses for suspected "music terrorists" or whatever they call them.
Come on you Nerds, there ARE technical solutions to these issues.... lets work it out.
Oh come on now, the RIAA are just trolling! If they want warning labels on kazaa then I want warning labels on Outlook warning people that they may be subjected to penis enlargement spam and also visual basic script viruses because of a security hole. I want warning labels on CDs to tell people it might be crippled.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The DMCA is still not unconstitutional.
e al s/opinion.html (read the whole appeals court opinion)
The *defense* of 2600.com said that it was. They however did not prove their case.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/NY/app
DeCSS isn't just controversial, it's illegal. Just as certian other speech is ( United States v. Featherston, (First Amendment doesn't protect instructions for making explosive devices) or States v. Raymond (First Amendment doesn't protect instructions on violating tax laws) )
(more precisely it wasn't that DeCSS's "speech" elment was illegal, but that it's funcationality (non speech) element was...)
Now if you want to claim that the courts are incorrect in their interprutation of the consitution, that's up to you. But the DMCA isn't unconsitutional because it's vauge. (at least not until a court decides it as such.)
Imagine Jabba the Hun
Only not so slim and goodlooking
Now gaze upon my face boy, as I make you a man!
No hang on was not Daddy your first?
Sigh. As soon as I thought that my congress critters were doing a semi-decent job, Rep. Mark Souder goes and supports this.
Who would think first of sexualizing kids for profit? I suggest that this kind of thought would first come to mind to people who already thought of children in a sexual way.
Who are these specific people? The names of the major players in entertainment industry and those who are leading the movement to criminalize P2P using phony kiddie pr0n are a matter of public record.
How good is the security on their personal computers?
Wouldn't it be terrible if any private individuals were to take the law into their own hands and to do the kind of random fishing that the RIAA/MPAA organizations have been doing by subpoena?
Wouldn't it be just awful if the press and the FBI were informed as to which of the people whose intent is to abrogate our civil rights for profit are the proud owners of their own kiddie porn collections?
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish and you have fed him for a lifetime.
All you have to do is teach someone who doesn't know. Explain to them how to aquire MP3s and how to go about downloading them. If they're worried about the lawsuits, introduce them to usenet, the land of the plentiful.
If they don't already have a CD burner, talk them into getting one. Explain to them that a CD burner is around the cost of 5 CDs.
Show them these articles and explain the manipulation the RIAA uses to get their way.
Last, but not least, explain to them that they don't ever have to buy another CD ever again. It's about time the general public raises their voice and responds with, "Yeah, whatever. We're not afraid of you and we're not going to give you another dime."
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
No, it is the end. You can't partially restrict people's freedom of press. I can either publish what I own how I want or I can't publish it at all. These jackasses might as well say that printing presses are used to distribute porn, that porn is their express purpose, and they must be eliminated.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The NYTimes has become more of a shill for the RIAA and conservatives in the government. In the article they actually printed this as credible information:
They go on to present the opposing side of the issue, but it doesn't really refute the meme of massive amounts of child porn on the net:By even lending any credence to a study that did not actually download the files the NYTimes is showing how easily they can be used.
A little clue here folks, these descriptions are what's commonly referred to as false advertising. 99% of that "42 percent" will not contain child porn. At most you'll get some badly dubbed European movie from the 80's where some 30 year old woman is wearing pony tails and trying to act coy. Those sorts of mile-long filenames with every sex search term you could think of are leftovers from files that have been passed around for years on services like Hotline where you either pay or upload other files in trade to download pirated porn or software.
These file names are just like the stupid search engine spamming where porn sites used to put as many porn words in their meta tags and white-on-white body text to get to the top of the results. Someone sharing on Hotline wanted to generate as much traffic as possible to their server. Then in order to download this forbidden fruit, you had to upload more warez or pr0n or pay them, thus increasing the size of the server owners collection and/or wallet.
Later in the article they (correctly) pick up on another reality of P2P porn: a lot of it is now just advertising for pay sites. Now let's see... do you think that the porn site operators name the files that they share in a way that clearly shows that you're going to download an ad? Well, no they also use the same sorts of filenames with every graphic description that you could imagine - which often doesn't have much to do with the actual contents.
If the RIAA members had half a brain, they'd stop pouring money into getting songs on the radio and MTV and just load up all the good singles and videos onto KaZaA. Then they'd all take a few clues from Apple and UMG and make it easier and cheaper to get the albums electronically or on CD. Oh, but wait, they've stopped making good albums.
Maybe this is a bad example, but I really can't comprehend the school of thought in journalism where you just report the statements of opposing sides of an issue with equal weight and little personal analysis. In this particular case it would be very dangerous for a reporter themselves to download potential child porn. If they actually found some they would be committing a serious crime.
The real problem here is that I read far to many articles by journalists who are generalists. They are taught that there is this universal approach to researching and writing stories and they can apply it to any subject - which is complete bullshit. Sure you can start learning from a general standpoint, but journalism should be about trying to present the facts as they are. That requires an understanding of the subject matter, which requires some expertise and experience.
Unless this particular article was completely watered down and edited to death, I get the impression that the reporter has never actually downloaded porn through a P2P service.
Find your Representatives Here
Simply enter your zip code, and type your message to your representative. You can also e-mail the president, although I'm not sure it will do as much good. Let's defeat this one!
OoO
Please do not publish outside of
...and you'll have a REAL uprising on your hands RIAA. Someone really needs to take these fsckers down, since when could corporations just get laws passed for anything they please? Does anyone know anyone who works for RIAA? I mean there must be some techies working there who are just hating all the curruption!
#include <sig.h>
Wow, somebody is using the P2P technology for something illegal. That goes for HTTP, FTP, IRC, and so on.
I never saw any advertising on any P2P services saying "Here kids! Look at this disgusting porn!"
Companies only do things through motivation. What are the entertainment companies' motivation for smearing P2P? Obviously, because their music is being traded on P2P.
If some people are using the technology for trading child porn, law enforcement agencies have many ways to track those people down and send them to jail. Why is the entertainment biz trying to get involved? Are they really concerned citizens? Hardly. Every one of us is a number to them. They want to "monetize" us all using any means necessary, even to the detriment of society's values. They are the last people who should be trying to uphold what is right.
Sure, okay. If you read between the lines, what they want is everyone to either be of legal age on P2P, or make the parents knowingly allow their children to use the services. That way, it's a sure bet they can either sue who's using the service, or that person's parents. No more fruitless crackdowns on 12 year olds.
Wow, lawmakers need to know stuff like how viruses are spread. Better talk to them REALLY LOUD so they can hear you over the Microsoft Windows vulnerability reports.
Better brush up on your acronyms, Lackey.
Only those without a basic understanding of how the Internet works would dispute that.
Here's a good one. So, if you're sharing child porn on your P2P node, you should disclose that fact? Uh. It's highly illegal already, what the hell is a label going to do? It's not like the labels on an album cover say "WARNING: This package contains cocaine."
I
Well, yeah, but if you can't stop your own member organizations from defrauding kids, why do you think the gub'mint will do any better?
Oh... you want us to think you're talking about Kazaa... riiiiiiightttttttt.
mmm... yeah... You see, we're putting the cover sheets on all TPS reports now before they go out...
why isn't this rated a 5?
Just that they're called "servers" and have better I/o etc. doesn't mean it's not a "peer" from the network standpoint.
Everything's "peer to peer".....
Actually, considering the sexual content of many of the RIAA's most popular current "music" works, I find it most hypocritical that these people would attempt to clothe themselves in piety. Disgusting and cynical.
Now, the RIAA has really done it. If all the free music didn't make everyone want to get P2P, all the free porn will be sure to convince the last few hold outs.
An anti-P2P law would be violated much more than copyright law is now. There are people who do respect copyright law; but almost nobody would have any respect for an anti-P2P law -- its violation of the 1st amendement would be obvious to the casual observer.
I know of nothing to compare it to. I am unaware of any law that has been utterly scorned, disregarded, or ignored by practially everyone. Anti-P2P enforcement will make the RIAA's crackdown look trivially easy by comparison.
If you ban porn then the terrorists win. Remember,
they hate porn.
Well, great. Florida (my state) has 2 senators supporting it. Does Florida's votes even count anymore though? I mean the stupid people can't even VOTE RIGHT. Oh well, I bet a hanging chad will make it look like they voted against it.
- Joe
99% of it is indeed commercial music and porn of questionable legality. ...but in reply to an article about P2P being full of child porn, that sentence came out terribly suspect. Now I don't know what P2P nets you participates in, but those I go to stick to "legal" porn...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Give me a break...
I had to laugh when i read this though.
2 things.
1) Britney... No kiddin. Look to MTV for the reasons there! I believe that many outraged people (who wrote piles of letters to newspapers) would consider the 2-second kiss to be of that nature.
2) So, the lessons to be learned here are:
a) Files can have misleading search information associated with them, and
b) Some people will use "common" search terms to attract attention to specific files that have no association with them.
Well of course they say they didn't download them, admitting they did if they did would be a crime.
But wait, didn't we learn from 2a & 2b above that often people use search terms to attract attention to files that don't necessarily have any association, just to generate interest?
Non sequitur and propaganda, plain and simple.
So which US slashgeeks are going to run for office and replace these incompetent people?
Toss the two named terms in google and find dozens of "legitimate" sites seeking the same type of attention.
This is sad.
-dave-
Looking for YOUR peer-to-porn engine? Get it here!
The pig browse. With Google. Sigh is to the chicken. Chicken is fool. Giggle. The DailyWTF giggle.
Actually, I wonder how many people will read the NYT article and think, "Wow! Easy access to porn! I gotta download that now!
Can anyone point me to the Linux-PR0N-Webmaster's-HOWTO?
This sounds like the kind of crap we were fed when the web first "appeared" in the public eye.
The media made it out as if you could open up your web browser and all of a sudden naked pictures of children would just start popping up out of no where, and you could do nothing to prevent it!!!
Ignorance breeds fear breeds knee-jerk style legislation.
What an interesting situation this would put The Freenet Project in. So we'd have an anonymous system that the owner of the P2P network would have to keep track of everyone on.
The thing I always come back to is that the internet itself is a peer-to-peer network. Start suing everyone with an ISP, that'll solve the problem, that'll make us all go out and buy CDs.
"God is dead!" - Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead!" - God
I don't have kids, but I wouldn't want my kids searching for Matrix Reloaded and getting porn instead.
Why, would you prefer that they grow up gay?
There can I go to get the mailing addresses of senators? I'll definitely be writing a letter about this.
- Joe
Microsoft bought an option on both Madonna's and Britney'y record contracts about four months ago.
For all you crying censorship, why dont you look up "lolita sex" or "child f***." I called the FBI when scour was big. There is a lot of child porn available. Maybe the RIAA is not the one to point it out. We should be because all of you should be ashamed that a program you love so much is use this way. Those pix show child abuse, and the trading encourages the abuse. Someone out there download a preteen girl giving head may one day rape your little daughter. One of the problems with Sharman networks is that they make money with an engine that can be used for so much, but DO NOT CARE how it is used. Worse than anything Microsoft has done, they have traded morals for money. Whether or not you think its sharing music or stealing it, anything that allows such a sick activity to go one should be taken care of by law.
Ok, here's why I hate slashdot. When you have a great argument on a discussion, you post so late that none of the moderators even get around to awarding it karma.
Ok, here's my thought. RIAA argues that p2p is depriving the content creators of their fair buck. They are saying, if p2p survives, it will drive content creators out of business.
Well, guess what, porn is a content business also. By their reasoning, p2p would drive content creators out of business, rather than the other way around. Maybe we could say that p2p is the best way to fight commercial porn!
I don't blame RIAA for trying to throw this argument out. But it reveals the shaky foundations on which they argue that p2p kills content creation.
On the porn/harm issue, I have two thoughts. First, the typical 13 year old (boy and girl) today probably has already viewed hardcore pictures and maybe videos. It's unavoidable,and perhaps will inure them to these images/video experiences. Second, it would be easy enough for kazaa to filter out certain keywords, although ultimately kids understand the technology better than adults will. Although not very sophisticated now, it's only a matter of time before traded files to be rated by other traders (if only to prevent viruses and other malicious software).
With regard to videos pretending to be something else, it's more likely that a vid will promote itself as a hardcore and turn out to be a music promo or some ad.
Robert Nagle, Idiotprogrammer, Houston
"Our artists' names are being used to lure kids and defraud them into finding pornography," said Mr. Glazier of the R.I.A.A.
Like say... R. Kelly?
"But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
"The right to privacy" "Fair use" et al. are not de-facto in the constitution. They can be ascertianed from the constution and constution law, but if there isn't an explict "rule" or case on which to go by then it's essentialy meaningless to talk about them.
What does it mean to say "fair use" - that it is granted via the First Amendment's Freedom of speech? Fine then what does that mean, one is free to do whatever they want with a copyrighted work?
The problem is Fair Use only exists as a concept derived from balancing conflicting parts of the constitution. It in itself can't be said to be a part of the constitution until such a conflict actual occurs and is resolved by the courts.
Which was the crux of the question I imagine, "Where in legal precident does fair use first emerge?"
Ah hate the RIAA They should just change their name to "Big Brother" and get it ovar with...
This proposed bill is such a laughably stupid pipe dream that it'll never see the light of day. Nobody should lose a wink of sleep over this political fumbling.
On the other hand, there is a general lack of understanding which is causing silly bills like this to even be considered. This is in dire need of correction. There seems to be a common trend assumption that computers--software especially--are something controllable. Ultimately, this is a failure to realize their very nature as programmable devices. People who start talking of "beacon software" and prohibiting certain types of generic program design prove that they have absolutely no fundamental understanding of computers whatsoever. There is a strong "manufacturing fallacy" as well -- the false assumption that software can be viewed as a manufactured, scarse product. As such, software begins to sound to them like something they can regulate to protect somebody's interests, much as safety belts were eventually required by law in all new automobiles. Some of these guys probably mean well--they're just poorly informed and as a result, knee jerk reactions get made. The big question: how to educate these clueless politicians.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Kazaa has become an abondanded street filled with hookers and the black market. If you don't want the law to clean up your street then you better do it yourself.
I wouldn't go that far. IMO a simple warning when the program is started for the first time makes sense. It's just for those people who (1) don't automatically click anything away without looking at it and (2) didn't know that there is pornography in the system, some of it even labeled as a Disney movie. Hopefully the intersection of both sets of people isn't empty, then a warning may do some good. I don't think that the creators of P2P software would have a problem with that.
A number of posts here on Slashdot, such as the previous one by Magic Thread, have expressed interest in the methods and techniques required to deprogram an individual that has been programmed by excessive exposure to RIAA propaganda. This can be done, but requires persistence and hard work. I will provide, in this post, a workable framework that will help anyone convince the uninitiated of the error of their ways. Follow this program and the results will be well worth the effort: your friends will ultimately thank you. If you have any friends left by then, that is, but that's not my problem.
... one good track, maybe two ... a dozen tracks of useless filler better suited to scare away wolves ... for $20. Hm. That's an effective rate of ten to twenty dollars per song. What a bargain!
... I forgot, we don't have those anymore. The awesome music or the 45's. Ask if they've noticed how limited FM radio playlists have become. If they express actual curiosity and a sincere desire to know more, you may provide additional details, but don't bury them in information and frighten them into running for the nearest record store, as that would be counterproductive.
What we are trying to accomplish here is a substantial reduction in the gross income of the RIAA and the Big Five, in order to encourage them to change their way of doing business. Therefore, since money is at the heart of the matter, and is a concept well understood by most people, the thing to do is to keep the initial discussion on completely monetary grounds. Start talking about legal principles, rights, DRM and so forth and you will lose your audience in the first thirty seconds and receive nothing but blank stares for your trouble. First step: at every opportunity drive home the fact that Compact Discs are NOT A GOOD DEAL. Give them some hard numbers. Let's see
I've pointed this out to several individuals thoroughly indoctrinated by the last twenty-odd years of RIAA/ClearChannel monopolism, and they actually gave me looks of stunned amazement and dawning awareness. "I never thought of it that way" one acquaintance told me. People that will spend half an hour in the grocery store trying to save fifty cents on a jar of spaghetti sauce will cheerfully blow incredible sums on what passes for music nowadays. That never fails to amaze me.
Another important point: bring up the lack of quality, originality, and variety in available commercial music. Remind those old enough to remember what the Sixties and Seventies were like: when was the last time you heard that really awesome piece on the radio that made you want to run out and buy the hit 45 RPM single? Oh wait
Once you have them thinking about this (and it may take a while for them to acknowledge, and accept, the obvious Truth of your words) drop a few subtle hints that there are alternative methods of acquiring good music. At this point, things are looking good, and you have a chance to deprogram them and break through the RIAA conditioning.
Wait a few days. If they have truly understood your words, they will ask you for some of those alternatives. If not, they are probably very busy and/or stupid people, and may have completely forgotten your previous conversation. Remind them about it. Mention that there are these newfangled things called Indie Music and Internet Radio. Show them how it works. In addition, send them to some local music groups that sell their works on CDs and as MP3 tracks. Give them the addresses of some good used CD stores, and ask if their public library card is current. Follow these few steps as laid down above, and you will soon have an RIAA-free circle of friends and acquaintances. Provide each of them with a copy my post (provided free of charge as public service.) Encourage them to do for their friends the same service that you performed for them.
In all seriousness, however, the current state
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I thought the problem in Florida was that they voted too right and wound up supporting Buchanan?
common sense: noun
What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
Exactly. I do wish Slashdot editors would reject "reg req" links out of hand. I realize they likely don't have time to go find the Google or Myway or excite "partner" link to the same page.
Perhaps the person submitting the story should look for an alternate link themselves. News.google is just a search query away. That should be in the mini-FAQ you're given when you submit a story.
No wonder we have these bad laws when the voters don't even know the difference between the House and the Senate.
Use kazza lite, it has a smut filter, that works well (i just want movies, and music thank you very much) i don't see what hte big deal is, i think you can even password lock it, too kazaa lite for everyone!
come comment on the madness at http://slashdot.org/~phreak03/journal/
Glad somebody appreciated it...
Who in their right mind provides ACCURATE information of him/herself in the internet? Think about it.
There are NO quarantees that whatever is input to the systems requiring registration is valid even remotely! Why do they insist in doing so? If they need a valid e-mail address, then that's the only part being valid (from sneakemail.com or othersuch use-and-dump email address sites)... So why do they bother? Why, why, why? What does a person get for being honest with them? Nothing?
I, for one, have been e.g. a CEO grandmother from some obscure African country, with as many children as you can throw your stick at, with millions of income per year and living in 2 room rented apartment.
Then they'll find out how much music is there and start downloading that too.
...and require P2P developers and distributors to obtain and store users' personal information -- ostensibly for age verification.
And since when is the RIAA having permission to access information on systems totally out of their control considered legal? For Moore's sake, they are a business entity, not a law enforcement agency!
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
You'd think the Pornographer's Industry Association of America would be concerned about the volume of copyrighted pornography being traded using Kazaa (or worse, Kazaa Lite). This must represent a serious chunk of their business, especially among their teen-aged potential customer base.
...let's just hope they do it while they've got their foot in the mouth.
Tierce
Tierce
Who sponsors your feelings?
P2P lives from participation, and it normally requires the user's consent to get child pornography to his computer. The percentage of users that really want that is very low. If some such content still get's through, maybe by disguising itself, most users check what they have downloaded (hey, you don't use file sharing just to keep your line busy, do you?), and material they don't like is deleted at once.
Still, I personally have never had and never heard of an incident that child pornography got onto the hard disk by mistake.
Yes, any mall is full of 12 year old girls dressed like complete skanks. Music and music video set a lot of the "fashion".
And it's quite OK to make a living selling music that advises people to "smack da' biatch ho'".
The RIAA's moral high ground ignores its own efforts to peddle sludge.
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
I use FTP, Free Tradable Porn.
If pron is marked as an MP3 file, Windows (which is what most people use) will try to open it as such. IT won't work. Epople will delete teh file, that they presume to be screwed up.
A study in March by the General Accounting Office found that KaZaA would be effective for someone looking for child pornography. The agency searched for 12 terms associated with child pornography, such as "incest" and "underage." It did not actually download the files it found, but it determined that 42 percent of them had titles or descriptions associated with pornographic images of children.
In other news, searching for "murder" and "torture" is likely to bring you results with titles or descriptions associated with violence, searching for "cuddle" and "kiss" will bring the results associated with tenderness and sentimentality. Like searching for "robbery" and "burglary" bight turn up some links to materials associated with criminal acts and searching for "shithead" and "moron" will give you some RIAA-related materials.
Sometimes I feel like Anakin from Attack of the Clones. We need someone to make all people behave right. Someone like Darth Vader. No kidding.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Try this innocuous photo of a sunflower field. Then select the image using Ctrl+A (works only in IE).
:]
See? BAN THE INTERNET.
P.S. BTW, the idea that Internet is full of child porn is so 20th century.
P.P.S. I am proud and happy to live in a country where you are legally allowed to store any materials on your computer, including child porn. How is that for you, you pediatrician-hating Brittons and Yankees?
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
In the article:
A study in March by the General Accounting Office found that KaZaA would be effective for someone looking for child pornography. The agency searched for 12 terms associated with child pornography, such as "incest" and "underage." It did not actually download the files it found, but it determined that 42 percent of them had titles or descriptions associated with pornographic images of children.
So, without actually verifying that the files are child porn (which would, of course, be illegal) they've decided that results from something as innocuous as "underage" must be child porn. Makes me wonder what else they searched for. "Baby", "child", "young", "not-the-mama"?
So, at what point is the RIAA (and all the censorship-loving idiots) going to demand that the internet be "turned-off", VCRs and cameras be banned, parents forbidden to have children, and artists and writers arrested and "re-programmed" since each and every one of them can, in some way, create or contribute to child porn.
PRetty soon we'll all be mindless zombies, unable to think for ourselves, unable to reproduce, and within a generation the human race will have disappeared.
These people are truely stupid.
Hey, that worldview reminds of the worldview that only corporate closed-software professionals can produce "real" software, and that anything produced and shared legally -- open-source software -- is "bicycle grade software", per SCO.
As long as the P2P code is OpenSource so the poor little kids can just turn the locking code into a nop and recompile, what's the problem?
Big Brother Bush is doubleplus ungood.
Writing your reps and voting them out of office if they don't "respond" can make cause for dramatic change. The most important part is VOCALIZING and forming a strong clear opposition to Ginny Brown-Waite, Jim DeMint, Trent Franks, Christopher John, Charlie Norwood, Mike Pence, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Mark E. Souder, John Sullivan, Thomas Tancredo, and those money grubbing fuckers in washington. ha. --votes;
Equally just because it has happened to you doesn't mean it is common and will happen to everyone !
I'm thinking of distributing illegal drugs by pressing them into the shape of a CD. The pressed material will be perforated so that users will not need to concern themselves with trying to measure the correct dosage. Inserting the CD shaped pill into a sleeve for distribution will make it easy to adopt an AOL-like "Free for 30 days" advertising model.
I sure hope that they don't outlaw the products that are required to implement this plan since things could get ugly without delivery trucks, envelopes, paper, ink, postage stamps, cellophane and industrial strength hydraulic presses.
They are pumping out "music" filled with sex, bad language, violence, and gang glorification MARKETTED TO CHILDREN, and they are saying P2P must be stopped. What hypocracy!
It's hosted on Geocities so those of you who grab it first, mirror it and spread it around before it bites the dust:
_ pr 0n.png
;)
http://www.geocities.com/britneyfan6662003/RIAA
From a concerned citizen
Whew, it only applies to interstate commerce.
I'm virtually certain that an ordinary free download falls within the absurdly broad interpertation given to "interstate commerce".
Lets put it this way. Courts have upheld federal laws prohibiting the mere possestion of obscene porn on "interstate commerce" grounds. Were does crossing state lines come into the picture? Would you belive they successfully argued "interstate commerce" applies if so much as a single screw in the camera crossed state lines? A camera manufactured within the state and used within the state to take the photo. A photo handed for free to an otherwise innocent person, within the state. That person can be held subject to a federal law on interstate commerce grounds for possesion of that photo.
This bill's claimed purpose it to protect the children. Not only that, they are supposedly protecting them from kiddy porn. Congress and the courts are more than happy to twist interpretations beyond the breaking point and even even violate the constition the name of a Nobel Cause.
Sigh. This moronic bill will probably pass because anyone who opposes it will be accused of promoting child molestation.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Simply put this is the same as outlawing cameras because they can be used to take the child pornography photos. It is a moronic and flimsy case for the RIAA.
That we cannot have free speech without child pornography. As everyone here I am all for capital punishment for people looking at naked 17 years old children, but we have to remember that if we have any way to stop the distribution of such pictures, soon we'll discover there's no way to distribute deCSS, anti-DMCA articles and telling the truth about Bush real motive behing the Iraq invasion. Besides, shouldn't we arrest webmasters of websites like this one instead of Joes Sixpacks using a P2P system?
No else reply it Illbay. The user is a total idiot and any attempt to use reason is hopeless.
I can't afford a sig!
Change "they" to "the RIAA" in the above.
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
No, it's in case you can't read French (or what passes for it in Quebec). So they can attract American tourists without running afoul of Quebec's infamous language laws. Quebec: the only place where you can advertise a nudie bar by encircling the door with neon tubing in the shape of labia, but not a sign that says "Nude Dancers."
(OK, they changed somewhat, so now you can have English signs, so long as they're only half as big as the French.)
Sigh. This moronic bill will probably pass because anyone who opposes it will be accused of promoting child molestation.
I've got an idea, though it's an idea I'd normally not be too happy with. But given the circumstances, I think it's something worth taking into consideration. Considering that one of the attacks in this is a child's exposure to pornography, why not create P2P services with parental block measures, just like they have for browsers? I think our congressmen should support that idea, that way they're less likely to be accused. Now, what to stop the claims of sexual molestation of children?
http://mediagoblin.org/
After all, they want to villify the program - since capturing the hearts and minds is the only strategy that'll effectively work for them
come on, everyone knows "it's the p2p software, stupid, not the user," hasn't gun control taught us anything? ;)
that's all I have got to say. Check it out, http://www.earthstation5.com
I was trying to get an episode of Spongebob Squarepants, but somehow ended up with some anime from the 80's dubbed in Spanish. That's about the only mis-named file I've ever gotten.