Slashdot Mirror
States Threaten P2P Companies
The Importance of writes "C|Net News reports that 46 state attorneys general are warning P2P companies of dire, unnamed consequences for continuing to exist, 'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.' Read the letter here (pdf) [PDF], or the annotated text version."
So I guess they think it's worse to do something illegal with P2P software than with a gun!?
Geez, I can't even start thinking about how stupid this sort of thing is.
home
...as charging gun manufacturers with murder when a gun is used to kill someone. Just because vehicles are used as "get-away cars" in bank robberies should we outlaw automobiles? How something is USED, and what something IS, are two completely different things. Guns can be used for good or evil, cars can be used for good or evil, p2p can be used for good or evil.
be a letter to some 46 attorneys that they are boring with this kind of stuff?
bittorrent ?
from the article...
Marty Lafferty, chief executive of the Distributed Computing Industry Association, another peer-to-peer group, said he has seen what appeared to be a draft of the current letter and that it contained substantial mischaracterizations of the technology and the file-swapping networks.
I don't think BT is company anyway but surely they can see that p2p apps do have some legitimate uses ?.
If this quote from the letter doesn't tell you state reps are being manipulated by the entertainment industry, nothing will:
"At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes, to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed."
So we, the citizens, are the attorney general's office's "consumers" now?? Either it's a revealing slip of the tongue from the AGs, or more likely the letter was originally drafted by the RIAA/MPAA...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
The most popular P2P software vendor is AOL, maker of "AOL Instant Messenger" which allows for direct file transfers between users of the service. It's important to keep in mind that the chairman of the FCC, Mike Powell, has a huge number of shares of AOL stock. So when you go after American P2P companies, you're going after Mike Powell's pocket, and in turn that means you're going to be invoking the wrath of Colin Powell.
Like I said, not smart.
By the way, did anyone know that Colin Powell and George Bush are related? They share a common ancestor who actually happens to be quite famous. Name the ancestor and explicitly name how the two are related for a free Gmail invite (I just can't seem to give them away, *sigh).
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
Better stock up now if you can envision ever needing P2P software for anything -- even purposes that would be deemed by all to be legitimate. Reminds me of the argument firearms: it's the user, not the weapon.
Yup... Lets just throw away a very usefull technology just because a bunch of rich pricks in the *AA groups want to cling to an archaic, outdated copyright/distributiin business model. I mean it's not like technological progress and software innovation is important.
Oh, and take a look who is sponsorring this bill - our old friend, and official RIAA puppet, senator Orrin Hatch. It figures. Oh well, Hatch is back with a new ridiculus bill - been there, done that. Nothing to see here, move along...
All kidding aside though - could this kind of thing affect free software projects such as Bit Torrent or Emule?
I'm teminally incoherent
At what point did state governments start to unabashedly refer to its citizens as consumers? (Don't answer that.)
--
Power to the Peaceful
But reading /. is nearly impossible. due to 503 and 500 errors.
Aren't the most important P2P networks built on open source code anyway?
They are going to have to shut down IRC, tons of stuff being traded on there. Oh, also AOL. I don't know about now, but there used to be all kinds of Warez flying around there years ago. Shut down the web, there are warez websites around. Oh yea, I bought some pot over the phone the other day, better shut down the phones.
Freedom would be not to choose between black and white but to abjure such prescribed choices. -Theodor Adorno
The article needs to be loaded up into VI ...
:%s/consumers/Corporate Overlords/
Steal This Sig
Sounds a whole lot like going after gun manufacturers.
Next thing you know, congress will be trying to shut down GM, Ford and Chrysler.
'At present, ___________ has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
Fill in the blank with something else than 'P2P Software'. Try 'firearms,' 'painkillers,' 'penises.'
Points up the difference between what a tool is designed for vs. what it's used for. That's a key element in whether you make it illegal.
Dont you dare EXPOSE me to anything that I could actually USE! I love paying $20 dollars for a CD with one good song, and you have NO RIGHT to stop me!
This letter is ridiculous. They talk about things like: the way P2P allows people to raid your files when your computer is off.. It would be really funny if it wasn't coming from one of the higher US legal forces.... which makes it kind of scary.
I am especially amused by this whole tone of 'you P2P companies need to educate your users' while displaying only the most tenuous grasp of the Internet within the letter itself. They list P2P as an Internet 'alternative;. Riiiight.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They can't help that they have no soul.
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
Where the holy hell is IDADHO....
As a member of the UK am i missing something or is this just simple stupidity on a very stupid letter ??
Kingdom of Loathing (www.kingdomofloathing.com) Addicted is me
Replace the words 'P2P software' with any of the following (feel free to add your own) to see how ridiculous that statement is:
Let's be honest, there are a ton of illegal goings on on the various P2P clients/networks. That doesn't mean that P2P doesn't have its legitimate uses.
It's the people they should be going after, not the service.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
"At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes, to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed."
Glad they can help me decide what I should not be exposed to. Thanks!
It is rediculouse to say this about P2P, when there are tons of other examples, such as Guns, where their argument applies a 100 times more, but they don't do anything about it there!
who | grep -i blond | date cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger; mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount; sleep
Declare war on lawyers!!!!
(Sponsored by cheeseSource for President 2012)
{word} suggestions:
- Alcohol - get people drunk to make them do stupid things
- Drugs - the abuse of things designed to help you
- Planes, Trains, Automobiles - can kill people as a result of items 1 and 2 or terrorism
- Microsoft OS - used to trojan peopls machines to send SPAM to everyone
- Islam - bastard terrorists who pervert this religion
- Christianity - priests and children
You could go on and on. You could put any word in there and come up with soemthing that fits that statement. The method of making the producer of a product responsible for a user's action with that product is assinine.Bullets kill people. Guns only mediate.
So begins the start of the civil war that John Titor told us about!
I work for MetaMachine, authors of eDonkey. I find it rather funny that we don't have a copy of this letter...
paul reinheimer
Oh yeah and:
That's some spiffy new technology that will let you read from a powered down drive - I guess it's time to upgrade my edonkey clientAd in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
Errors! Error! Git your FRESH HOT 5xx errors. Right here RIGHT HERE, Git your fresh HOT 5xx errors.
503 finally stops!!
What the hell is up come on at least tell us your having problems and what your doing!
Anyway - There are legal uses for p2p but obviously the big companies just don't like not having central servers to run or to shut down others central servers when they don't like it.
From the letter:
"Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband. P2P users, including both home users and small businesses, who do not properly understand this software have inadvertently given other P2P users access to tax returns, medical files, financial records, personal e- mail, and confidential documents stored on their computers."
Of course! If we just outlaw being stupid people will stop to irresponsibly share their tax records online.
Computers are such intricate devices that millions of ignorant sheep can't be trusted to use them effectively...especially those sneaky computers which share files while they're "off" and you aren't looking!
Oh hang on, this is america...
First post? even if it isn't, it's not my fault...it's those 500s and 503s...
Is there nothing that can keep the evil that is P2P from getting to our computers? P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off"
After all, it isn't like you have to intentionally download P2P software, or anything, to get it, right?
Surely hijacked zombie Windows machine are much more damaging than P2P software ?
I read the letter (and Corante's a little-too-flip play-by-play), and one thing is clear: any sort of threat was removed in order that they could get the signatures of as many state AGs as possible. Some of their statements are downright silly, given that Apache could be considered P2P software. OTOH, some of the P2P behaviors they reference are clearly sleezy (stealth spyware installations, default sharing of all files), and should be stopped.
The fact that child porn is available on the P2P networks (as the AGs claim) is unfortunate, but we have existing laws to go after those creeps-- and that's what the AGs should be doing. However, none of that is a good reason to ban any of this software. The P2P companies would probably be smart to engage in some customer education, if only to cover their butts. Using a strict opt-in policy for sharing files would be nice, as would the ability to easily turn off file sharing (such as when "quitting" the program).
Let's not kid ourselves: some of these P2P software makers are scum. But that doesn't mean the AGs should be able to go after guys producing great software like Limewire. My advice to the AGs: back off the rhetoric, find the creeps sharing child porn (which is flat-out illegal), and go after the P2P companies who actively try to deceive customers.
Now, what I really want to see is the letter(s) the RIAA and MPAA sent to the AGs to prompt this action.
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
Line, meet toes.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Now the state attorneys have to figure out how to threaten P2P conventions that don't deal with a central network/company, especially ones that get great valid uses (such as BitTorrent).
I don't underestimate the zealotry of some people though, so it's not safe to sit back and relax yet.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
Funny, I read:
:-)
"P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed."
Let's see if this holds:
"Windows has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes (spam due to trojans) to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed. (we hate spam)"
Let's make windows illegal
Everybody is equal, right??????
kind regards,
King Edward the 1st.
Could you please send g-mail invite to ketchupratbitch _ at _ yahoo dot com?
It seems we are getting closer and closer to the point where the pivotal beta case will likely be overturned.
Wasn't it the beta ruling that included language about not preventing technology that could be used for illegal purposes if there were clear legal purposes it could be used for? That the mere ability for something to be used illegally is not reason enough to ban it or prevent its manufacture, sale, and use?
P2P does have other uses besides piracy. How many ISOs of legally distributable linux operating systems are distributed using systems like bittorrent? Unfortunately, the piracy makes all the headlines, and the piracy is what people hear about. Never mind the legal uses that P2P networks may be used for.
Isn't the Tor system a type of P2P system that is being developed with backing from the Navy?
Next, cars will be banned, because they can be used as getaway vehicles for bank robberies.
. 62,400 repetitions make one truth -- Brave New World, Aldous Huxley
if its the game you dont like.
p2p is a file sharing technology. Dont blame the technology, if its the "sharing" you dont want people to do.
If this has anything to do with those 'public' government documents appearing on P2P?
:(
How did I get FP?
There was a time where I wanted everyone to understand computers and how they could use them to make their lives better. I wanted people to understand what technology can do for them; the vast possibilities of it.
Every time I read something like this letter I die a little more when I realize how far from any hope of having a clue the vast majority of people are. The fact that all of AG's had a meeting and what they came up with was that uninformed piece is very, very sad. It shows a blatant lack of care about the real issues at hand.
100% Crunchier
for not using P2P for enough legit stuff.
..bandwidth isn't exactly cheap. Just post the MD5 hash / public certs on the websites.
Open source projects such as Apache, Linux, GNOME etc. should do releases via P2P exclusively. Not in protest, it'll save bandwidth too
I guess this means they'll ban guns then?
Although there is little evidence that child pornography or other criminal activities unrelated to copyright issues are any more prevalent on peer-to-peer networks than elsewhere on the Internet, entertainment companies and some policymakers have increasingly pointed to these issues as reason to impose new regulations on the networks and technology.
Won't someone think of the profits?
Uhm... children. I meant, think of the children...
Sure, you can use a car to drive to work or go shopping or take a holiday, but what about those people who use their cars to kill people or get away from the scene of a crime?
I say we put GM & Ford and all the other automakers on notice! We won't tolerate their existence for long if these kinds of things continue!
The people that wrote that letter should not be holding the positions they hold today. This demonstration of ignorance should be a criminal offence for an Attorney General. If they are this *STUPID* about basic issues like when something is "off" it no longer functions, what other areas are they lacking in? The fact that they wouldn't even do basic research or even a google search really frightens me.
E pluribus unum
The letter makes some technical claims that are difficult, if not impossible, to support, including a claim that a computer that is "off" can continue swapping files over a broadband connection.
This is one of two examples of the fundamental ignorance that politicians possess when it comes to technology. The other misunderstanding is the notion that a P2P company can actually filter out all the child porn on a P2P system. How does one do that? Require detailed metadata in XML associated with each file? How do you prevent that from being spoofed. Example: how many times have thought you downloaded a certain uh, file starring a talented actress such as Jenna Jameson and ended up with something alse?
The essence of P2P makes this kind of central control difficult if not impossible.
Clearly, the entertainment industry lobbyists are using this ignorance in their favor: get the states to legislate or sue for technically impossible requirements, thus forcing all the P2P out of business. Ingenious.
Oh, and by the way, the term isn't "consumers". It's "constituents". As in the ones who are going to vote you out of office for then blaming us for what's really the MPAA and RIAA fault.
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
:P Maybe those forty-seven AGs need to rethink who they go after.
Swap "P2P" for "Microsoft". Doesn't that make more sense?
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
One of the foot notes in the letter (which I can now read via PDF) states that the big issue is that by default file sharing programs share the entire hard drive of the user.
I am not aware of any P2P United client doing that, eDonkey in particular shares only files you have downloaded from the network by default.
paul reinheimer
...is it that feels threatened by people being able to talk (and share information) amongst themselves without someone watching or listening in? ALL POLITICIANS are nothing but corrupt, power-hungry human filth.
...when the AGs send a letter telling P2P software-producing companies to educate their users, when they themselves aren't fully educated on the subject.
Choice quote (page 2 of the AGs' letter): "Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband." They've made a dangerous generalization; for this statement to be true, your PC has to have Wake-On-LAN turned on, no login restriction (straight to the desktop), and the P2P client set to start and connect automatically.
Same page, same paragraph: "Consequently, P2P users need to be properly educated so that they will not inadvertently share personal files on their hard drives with other users of your P2P file-sharing technology." Sorry, but these folks need to follow their own advice, and get some education on the topic. With all the P2P clients I've used (and granted, I haven't tried every one of them out there), you are limited to downloading to, and sharing from, a single, default folder with nothing in it (except perhaps a copy of the P2P software itself - I believe Limewire does this).
I'd like to read more of the letter, but I really don't have time for lobbyist-supported government/legal correspondence.
Grrrr.
"I don't get it." -- ObviousGuy
OMG! This P2P technology is sooo evil.
Nuff Said.
Why we even need peer to peer as consumers. "Legal" distribution online isn't really all that challenging through corporate servers and mirrors. It carries a higher cost to the provider in bandwidth but other than that there's not really much of a downside. In the p2p world they're passing the burden of the bandwidth costs to the consumer.
Most people I know using p2p have used it to download copyrighted material and porn so I guess until someone can prove that there is a really urgent NEED for p2p I'm gonna have to side with the govt on it. It does make breaking the law easier than the other methods mentioned.
Not that I think killing p2p will really do much to stop illegal activity, people will just find another way. *shrug*
"Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband."
Yes. And maybe even they can send me a virus that blows my monitor up.
Another good example for the assumption that 42 individuals with limited knowledge can make the life harder for unlimited numbers of users.
Ni.
You know, seeing as how this is being paid for, it's no wonder the progress they're making towards endind p2p networking has gone rapidly after RIAA and MPAA started throwing money around, just imagine the results if spam were suddenly copyrighted...
Move to Canada where you can do what you want!!
They're waiting till they have a better name than "Son of INDUCE"
It would be a great thing if all of the people who are pirating one day decided to make a point and start sending stuff through UPS.. would they shut down UPS? Can't do US Mail, that would be mail fraud.. but how about Federal Express? What if someone figured out how to do it via Email.. emailing little bits of files around... would they ban Email? The concept is absurd. Some of these P2P softwares are nice, and provide a great way for not-so-well-funded sites to get out valuable information without having to have a ton of backbone to support it. It is stupid to blame a piece of software for the crime, when the piece of software itself is nothing more than an abstract assortment of magnetized/demagnetized positions on a plate of metal spinning around in a rectangular box.
Maybe it's time to boycott RIAA and MPAA products in favor of independent labels and films. Personally, I'd like to see a united subscription service for musicians and filmmakers who don't wish to be part of the RIAA and MPAA bandwagon. The RIAA is just shooting itself in the foot, and a new market is opening up for people to bypass record companies altogether to distribute music. Music can easily be produced without record companies now. Films, however are another matter. Not that far off, though, considering that video editing has become feasible on computers.
Bugger citizens, what about Customers.
consumers circa 1998. Corportate slang for not coprorate customers(people).
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
So they actually sent this to P2P software makers in hopes of swaying them? I'm gonna send a letter to the oil industry, asking them to lower prices, because expensive gasoline causes my car to rape children. Once they see how right I am, they'll drop prices for sure! Who's with me?!
do not read this line twice.
http://www.ancestry.com/landing/strange/bush3/answ er2.htm
As you can see on the graph, they are related by King George I and they share the same
great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather.
(six greats)
What a coincidence, I feel the same way about guns. Why can't these people try to curb something dangerous?
I'm not good in groups. It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent. - Q
Let me try this again. If the vast majority of guns or cars were used to commit crime, they too would probably be outlawed.
Here we have a vast majority of P2P users illegally distributing music, movies, and software ruining it for the people who use the tool for purely legitimate purposes.
Don't get mad at the government(s) here, get mad at the asshats who have turned P2P into a de-facto copyright infringement tool.
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
How many times did they drop the term "child porn" in that letter? It's a strawman. It's worded like a political statement, designed to evoke maximum emotion to make the people think P2P is bad, and all the while the **AA are pulling their strings.
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
1) p2p has not been "hijacked," its being used to share things that are popular.
2) We are not "your consumers," we are "citizens." I had hoped that at least state attourny generals would get this. I guess I was wrong.
3) We are not being unwillingly exposed to anything. You have to voulentarily search for things.
4) The reason p2p is so popular is not because the people dont wish to be exposed to it, but because THE PEOPLE LIKE IT. Why wont they just ADMIT IT?!
5) Copyright infringement is a civil crime, not a criminal one. The gvt has no case in trying someone under criminal law for copyright infringement.
I am both angered and annoyed.
Remember, these are people that think free access to every bit of music ever made in human history to every single person is a BAD THING. Grar. Maybe I wouldnt be so annoyed if the public domain still existed. Well, since they decided to eliminate it, the people found another way to FORCE it to exist.
no
Yeah, right. Been reading this site for years, and this is only the 2nd problem I've seen.
> It's no surprise that Slashdot is the only site using Slashcode. Fucking Movable Type is better than this hogwash, programmed by a bunch of bracegirdles from hardbottle.
test
The large corporations, the top levels of government, and the "elite" media have had a chokehold on American workers the last 30-50 years, THey have been able to determine the direction of the political debate in America, and even disenfranchise and alienate the voters so that the political machine is largely in the hands of the upper classes and a few interest groups.
They have been able to do this by control of the mass media. Such is the status quo in America. And it is not a conspiracy; it is just powerful entities and segments of the population acting in their own best interests.
But when wireless broadband comes down the pike in the next couple of years, if you combine that with p2p networks, mass media will no longer exist in its current form. Why watch bland, politically correct mass media teevee when you can have your choice of thousands of movies and documentaries produced using cheap digital cameras and editing PC software?
As long as the client server model is maintained, it will be too expensive for subversive, anti-status quo video to be propagated to the American masses.
However, I think these anti-p2p laws can be beaten in court. But we will need your help....
eat shiat and bark at the moon
It's King Edward I, which interestingly enough, would mean that they are related to Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles.
:)
I knew being a history major would come in handy...someday!
--Teechur007 (teechur@hotmail.com)
Seems to me, they should be warning Microsoft. After all, 90% of people who run Microsoft products end up being infected with many, many varieties of spyware, viruses, worms, and other sorts of Malware. Clearly, Microsoft platforms are the hosts of a wide variety of ills to which consumers would prefer not to be exposed.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
yeah, why not just take the generalisation one step further and be done with accuracy altogether:
"$thing is used to perform acts, including criminal acts"
I just can't get enough of this, I love this part in particular: We take seriously our responsibility to protect our citizens from misleading or deceptive
practices, and to ensure that our citizens are given the information necessary to making an
informed decision.
Why don't you protect your citizens from CDs that won't play in their car stereo? Why don't you protect your citizens fair use rights to make a copy of a DVD for personal use? Why don't you protect your citizens from being mislead into beleiving that when they purchase a media product they will be able to use it as they see fit, not in the pigeon holed subset of uses envisioned by the industry?
(the views expressed in this post are my own, and not nesesarily those of my employer).
paul reinheimer
I use Windows XP and Internet Explorer for all my illegal activities.
All 50 States' AG Warn Automakers: Your products are too dangerous!
We are writing to encourage your companies to take concrete and meaningful steps to address the serious risks posed to the consumers of our States by your company's personal transportation products("PtP"). By addressing such problems today as the use of these PtPs as getaway vehicles for bank robberies, perform drive-by shootings, not to mention the 40,000+ fatalities, hundreds of thousands of crippling injuries, and untold billions in lost wages and productivity, PtPs may one day realize their potential as a means for facilitating a wide range of transportation, recreation, sporting, and educational activities. At present, PtPs have too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.
If you can't or won't fix your products voluntarily, we will.
One major controversial one that comes to mind is gun makers. The government wants to hold the gun makers responsible for what idiots do with their guns. Once the gun has been sold, there is nothing the gun maker can do about it.
Same here.
The p2p software makers are simply trying to put food on the table. Once they sell the software to an individual, they cannot control what the individual uses it for.
If you want an odd thought, think for a moment that the p2p companies would be allowed to exist, but get regulated like the gun makers - because their software is "dangerous to the general public" or whatever. Funny how once we let the gov't into an area of business (i.e. gun control), they want to control all of it _for our good_ (tm).
P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes
So have airplanes. Are we threatening the airlines with "dire consequences" next?
...seems to be what they are mainly concerned with here. What I don't think they realize is that these P2P software clients are being used all over the world where, although generally morally unacceptable, they are being used for something which in their country may not be an illegal action. I for one am tired of the United States imposing their laws on the rest of the world!
The only solution to THIS problem would be for the software manufacturers to create a US version and a EVERYWHERE ELSE version of their software. But really, what pedaphile in the US is really going to download the US version of the software if they know that the sort of thing they are looking for has been effectively filtered out.
It's nice that the AG of Idaho can spell.. he signed right by the word IDADHO. And since when were the Virgin Islands a state?
Seriously, though - how in the hell is a P2P network sharing data from a computer which is switched off? Are they referring to a password screensaver or something?! ...and how is it a "violation of privacy" that a software vendor needs to correct just because people don't know how to use the software and share their entire hard drive?
Incredible. Under those kinds of terms, Microsoft and every other OS vendor could be sued. If you misconfigure *ANY* OS, you're opening yourself up.
I don't suppose that the States Attorneys General could be persuaded to tell the same thing to M$ about Windows, IE, and Outlook Express.
The whole platform, but most of all IE and OE are the real problem for normal users of the Internet. And, there are alot more people using IE and OE than P2P software.
Maybe we could get it certified as a class action. . . ????
That would be an exciting one to watch.
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
hmmm. public telephone service, cities, the legal system, federal highways; heck, even the federal government have all been used for illegal purposes too. as a consumer i don't really want to be exposed to this misuse either. maybe we should shut down all these services..?
It would seem that the emphasis on music/software has changed somewhat. Again, our buddies in Congress are attacking music; only in a much different way:
Several years ago, the emphasis was placed on the fact that all [new] music was bad. You had Senators attempting to pass legislation banning rap, punk, skateboarding (since people listened to music while skateboarding), and video games.
Now, they paint the recording companies as the poor kid who's getting beaten for his lunch money. You should purchase CD's, because if you damned whippersnappers are gonna listen to that crap, then at least we need to make some cash from the deal.
Such tripe.
The logic of war is such that if the beligerent can fight, they will.
"At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes, to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed."
Well, supposedly the majority of P2P is used for "illegal" purposes. It's then easy to extrapolate from there to say that the vast majority does wish to be exposed to "illegal" offerings.
Although there is little evidence that child pornography or other criminal activities unrelated to copyright issues are any more prevalent on peer-to-peer networks than elsewhere on the Internet, entertainment companies and some policymakers have increasingly pointed to these issues as reason to impose new regulations on the networks and technology.
Yes, that is called FUD. What they fail to mention is that this is a vicious attack. The "we need to protect our children" bullshit. It apparently works for FoxNews why not laws?
In Washington, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is sponsoring a bill that would hold file-sharing companies liable for the illegal actions of their users, a measure that could push the existing commercial networks out of business.
I want to hold Orrin responsible for wasting Utah's tax dollars on fucking horseshit. There are much more important evils in Utah to deal with than P2P disrupting the conservative way of life out there.
The letter specifically asks that file-sharing companies stop encrypting network transmissions in ways that make it difficult for law enforcement to investigate and enforce the law.
Fuck them. I ask specifically that they keep their snooping eyes out of my business. Are they going to start asking that SSH tunnels be regulated because it may harbor criminals? We should all be required to run plaintext everything so that our information is out there for all eyes to see.
The EFF needs to write a letter back that simply says, "In the best interests of our children we have to say, 'No.'" It might be too simple for them to understand without all that legal mumbo-jumbo but it would certainly be easier than fighting with them over what is obviously a bunch of uneducated nonsense.
More and more you see the inablity our governments face when it comes to catch individual criminals...
Mainly because the corperate and governmental is so closely linked to the largest criminal acts on this planet...
1 example:
Do you know how many Congolese and Ruandese people died for the Coltan that is needed to build your cell phone?
Only by criminalizing everybody else and imposing stricter laws they can get away with their criminal acts.
Also hyjacking every bad news situation as excuse to impose these tougher laws.
This story says that in principle you can either obey these laws or not as it makes no difference if you do, when it's your turn to get nailed you get nailed anyway...
This kind of thought-process scare me ... so what happens if P2P technologies are ultimately outlawed, just to "filter" out illegal uses of P2P?
In my mind, pretty much everything on P2P could be defined (loosely) as illegal. Fine, government declares P2P sharing as a narcotic next and busts down your door because you happen to have "backed up" your aging collection of Blake's Seven from video tape to DVD or something? What happens is that the rest of the world continues to use P2P, the technology advances, and ultimately nothing really changes except that in the US people end up behind bars for trading MP3s and pr0n?
Trying to make this stuff illegal seems to me to be the ultimate in Indian Giving. Hmmm, let's make a bunch of technology and deliver extremely powerful tools to people in the form of a computer ... include a CD-RW/DVD-RW, a broadband connection, and make all of it cheap, then BAN it!
Stuff's going to get copied (backed up). Things are going to get shared. We're on our way to the Star Trek kind of digital universe where art/literature/entertainment ultimately go to free. The unfortunate reality is that there's going to be a continuous back and forth between the security freaks and the hackers, constantly breaking down barriers as fast as they are erected.
I believe that the only way to regulate P2P sharing is to make broadband, recording devices, and computers in general illegal. Like that's going to happen, so people better get used to the idea that P2P's here to stay!/p?
Find your AGs contact info here.
And for good measure, copy, paste, and submit your letter to the National Association of Attorneys General here.
And if the AG in your state is not independently elected, send a copy to your governor as well.
By addressing such problems today as the use of P2P networks to disseminate pornography,...
Last I checked, in the People's Republic of the US, pornography wasn't illegal. But I guess it's just a matter of time before anything deemed by the Old, White, Male, Jesus-Freaks that run this country to be "harmful" will be illegal. Jesus H Christ... I think it's time to move the movie Brazil from the "Fiction" section of the video store to the "Documentary" section. I think it's also time that I move out of this fucking country.
his will, of course, make it very difficult to download Linux. Without BitTorrent, I would not have been able to get my hands on the DVD iso for Fedora Core 2. I wonder what percentage of bandwidth on a typical P2P network is consumed by PERFECTLY LEGAL ISO distribution. Maybe we should all just swap Linux ISOs ad perpetuem to jack up the stats.
Another question to ask is, how many copies of Linux will not get distributed to people because of this RIAA/MPAA/BSA(Microsoft) backed initiative?
Yet another, how about companies that want to distribute their software but can't afford to be the sole host? Seems to me this would hurt small business as well.
Suits against gun manufacturers have been tried on many occasions (google on: gun lawsuit), without much success.
Hell, even McDonald's has been sued by some dorks who couldn't figure out that lots of Big Macs might make them fat, and wanted to blame McDonald's for their stupidity. That didn't work, either. So there is some justice.
Okay, how about this. Since file sharing companies would be liable for their users actions under Sen. Hatch's proposed law, how about extending that to other markets.
Roads come to mind. I want the owners of the roads held liable everytime they are used for criminal purposes. If someone drives drugs from Miami up I-95, I think the owners of I-95 should be liable! The same goes for roads used during robbery get-a-ways and the like.
Networks are INFRASTRUCTURE, like the road system. They are not enclosed locations like retail stores or private businesses or buildings.
Where's a cluebat when you need one.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
What's next, FTP?
"Our research people have also discovered that large numbers of pirated files are being transferred over something called 'FTP.' Our lawyers have advised us that we should immediately sue everyone who uses FTP software."
What has the USA come to when state attourneys, the safekeepers of public justice, are puppets to big business.
This makes me sick. Apparently all Americans are consumers of their gov't, who can be spoken for without survey or referendum.
Has the US coffer become so bloated that democracy is leaking out to make way for more $$$?
I love how everyone on /. gets up in arms when someone threatens a P2P company. I work at a University and have to remove P2P software from someone's computer at least once a week. I have yet to see one case where the user was using P2P for something legitimate.
/. heard of ITunes, WalMart, Real music stores. Buy the songs you want.
If someone produces a product they have a right to be paid for it. Even if they are a greedy money grubbing Record Label, or Motion picture company. It seams like people have forgotten that these companies are successful for a reason the get paid for their products.
People say that they don't like buying CDs because there is only one or two good songs on it. Has no one on
If you don't like their encryption try TotalRecorder works great for me. Format shifting is still perfectly legal. As long as you paid for it.
One day it'll be released to the masses.
:)
It'll be the "consumer's" way of saying, "Hey, govt., why don't you go fuck yourself?" with a big grin and the finger high in the air.
Ah, I can't wait
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
I wonder about the legalities of issuing these sort of threats against a legally operating business?
My rights don't need management.
But the vast majority of guns that are used at all are used to commit crimes. Period.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Sooooo, apparently electricity need not be running through my computer in order for P2P to just snatch the files right out of my computer. Well, as long as the computer is connected to broadband. Hmmm...I wonder at what broadband speed these nefarious actions are possible? Does it start at 128kbps? Or am I safe up to say, a 1Mbps connection? Or is the speed of the connection going to determine how *many* files they can get out of my turned "off" computer?
I've got a friend who's an attorney, and he's not this stupid. I guess if you're an attorney *and* a politician that just sucks all the common sense right out of you.
rant over.
Who said anything about using p2p illegally? Did it occur to your dumb ass that I might have been suggesting that the record industry use the technology to LEGALLY distribute their wares, instead of providing such a poor value which encourages folks toward illegal downloading? No, you didnt, fool. Did I strike too close to home? What might be suggestive to your dumb ass, might not be so suggestive to others. You can remove your foot from your mouth now, dumbshit.
C2C - Citizen to Citizen.
...richie - It is a good day to code.
If allowed to go forward, this will aid precedent to suing companies in other industries over what their customers do.
I guess we may need to start a "bad customer" web site, listing people a company should not sell to because the company may get sued over it.
From the article:
Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband.
Because, as everyone knows, a broadband connection is so powerful, it can steal bits from a stopped hard drive!? I'm sorry, but this is sheer ignorance:
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Anything can be hijacked for use in "evil" plans.
Boats, planes, cars.
Why not ban boats, planes, and cars? Or anything else that could possibly maybe be used for illegal activities?
Why not ban just teh intarweb, and get it over with?
When teh intarweb is banned, only criminals will have 0-day appz.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
It's certainly a lot easier, and you wouldn't want folks believing that P2P is used for anything but purely legitimate and legal purposes!
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband.
Nice to know these are some of the watchdogs keeping us safe from Microsoft's excesses. It's amazing 46 AGs read this and actually signed it. Yes, ladies and gentlement, even when your kid's computer is off it is being used to traffic porn.
Apparently the demonic forces in Doom3 are also possessing the computers of a lot of silly lawyers.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
Okay, so people use a product in an illegal manner and it's the products manufacturer who is liable for the illegal activities? As well, it's the product manufacturer who is supposed to prevent people from breaking the law? WTF? Okay, lets see - I got up this morning and turned on my TV. My TV has a built in DVD/CD/MP3 player so I played a few MP3's that are illegal on it.... Then I got in my car and went atlesat 5mph over the speed-limit the whole way to work. On the way to work I used my cellphone to make illegal prank calls to people. When I got to work, I instantly pulled out my PDA and used it to illegally download some files. Then I got on my computer and illegally downloaded some files. Poor me, for all these manufacturers have provided me with such temptation! JAIL THEM ALL!
Seriously -- every complaint in the letter sounds like the last 10 years' worth of windows criticism. IANAWindowGeek, but aren't many of P2P porblems related to underlying Windows issues?
Ah, but isn't illeagal to own heavy machine guns in most parts of the counrty? While any inanimate object is neither good nor evil, the potential misuse of such a weapon is judged to outweigh the use it posesses. Similarly, if P2P is determined to cause more woe than good, shouldn't it be similarly banned?
(Not that I actuall believe that P2P realy is bad. Orrin is a congressional whore, who creates new anti-P2P bills every week.)
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
So they want to punish P2P companies for creating software allowing people to share software, because some of it may be pirated stuff.
Why not punish weapon companies as well, since some of their users are using guns to kill?
pro: "blah blah blah, there are substantial legal uses. How else would anyone have discovered modest mouse? My company uses p2p to distribute updates to all five of our users. Guns are legal, so filesharing should be legal too. Go linux!"
con: "blah blah blah, its only used for pirating, you guys just don't want to buy CDs, maybe there's a use for bittorrent but certainly not kazaa, wtf do guns have to do with it, windows came installed on my comp and i'm fine with it"
very good idea.
I read through the whole thing, and I don't know if anybody else noticed how often the phrase "child pornography" was used, like every other line. I do resent such a crass attempt to manipulate the emotions of the reader into agreeing with the rest of the letter. Still, obviously it worked on the Attorney Generals who signed it the instant the RIAA showed it to them.
Don't put off until tomorrow what you can leave until the day after.
46 state attorneys general are warning P2P companies of dire, unnamed consequences for continuing to exist, 'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
Of course 'the vast majority of our consumers' agree with them - the consumers he is talking about are their consumers, ie those who use state attorney general services.
Read it again. Why talk about consumers? Why doesn't he instead mention the public interest? Because he's not conerned about the public interest (which he is supposed to protect). He's concerned about the interests of those who consume his services - in this case copyright holders.
Also notice how they are carefully going against service providers. They are simply going to settle with the ability to tap or access any information they want or need on these services without writing new laws or having to get court orders.
That's fine. I don't use these services anyway, and I'd use a non-centralized service long before I use a commercial or centralized service.
But let's not be blind. There are those who use these networks for terrorist activities and other activities which many (if not most) on this board would disagree with. It is worthwhile spending time to weed out the bad uses of these technologies so that we can still use the technology for good uses, instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Wet and soapy flying babies are very hard to catch in midair.
-Adam
Wow
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
P2P != sharing files.
The article/letter tends to flipflop : do they want to pull the plug on P2P in general or just the function of filesharing? The way the article is written, it makes it sound like P2P is used soley for the purpose of file sharing, while other applications such as Skype use P2P as a method to get your voice one place to another.
-K
Remember the bill in congress to prevent gun manufacturers from being liable ( and sued into bankruptcy ) in these sorts of cases? That should not have even been a need for such a bill.
The fact something is stupid wont prevent it from happening.
I fear that the days of what is left of 'free' and unencumbered digital speech is about over.
It was fun while it lasted.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Over the last few years of reading slashdot, i've realized that its sort of pointless to debate this issue. 'p2p' as an issue is to computing as abortion as an issue is to society. Your opinion is almost necessarily one of two choices (with a few people saying "well, its okay in certain circumstances, but not others", but they're really just fence-sitting). There is no middle ground between "privacy, and the p2p companies aren't responsible for illegal use of their product" and "p2p is used only for illegal stuff and everyone knows it". Everyone decided a long time ago, and no one is going to be changing sides anytime soon. Anyways, just trying to point out how ridiculous the comments get on p2p articles.
They could also add this in P2P software:
State Attorney General Warning:
This software can cause porn on your computer
from the letter:
addressing such problems today as the use of P2P networks to disseminate pornography
oh, do they mean you can distribute pornography, like on the whole internet?
invade privacy and infringe copyrights
invade privacy? what? so someone can actually "see" you're using this program, and someone can actually see "which files" you have on your harddisk, but still only those you "share", aka make willingly public?
infringe copyrights?
talking about a file on my pc, can't I just share it, like I want?
or are they talking about warez? well then, I haven't seen any p2p aps that actually rip a cd for me or do something like. That's not a problem of p2p
. At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.
I doubt they actually robbed a software store for their p2p software.
Our consumers need to be provided with the information necessary to understand this technology and to make informed decisions concerning its use.
actually, most p2p programs I've used were well documentated. I don't know what they are talking about.
This type of direct access to one's computer differentiates P2P file-sharing technology from garden-variety e-mail accounts and commercial search engines such as Google and Yahoo.
but not that much. if you email, you select a file to be distributed, and then click send.
here, you can't decide "when to send" or "to whom" but you still select the files directly. there's no difference in "access to one's computer" in my eyes.
and what google/yahoo have to do with that..I cant figure it out
Consequently, P2P users need to be made aware that they are exposing themselves, and their children, to widespread availability of pornographic material when they download and install P2P file-sharing programs on their computers.
I don think so. you also have to run the program =)
and, isn't it like the whole internet's like this? there's no sense in that.
Furthermore, P2P file-sharing technology can allow its users to access the files of other users, even when the computer is "off" if the computer itself is connected to the Internet via broadband.
what? if my computer is "off", there's no p2p program running, and therefore no access to my shared files. there's not even something running, no activity (okay nearly)
P2P users, including both home users and small businesses, who do not properly understand this software have inadvertently given other P2P users access to tax returns, medical files, financial records, personal e-mail, and confidential documents stored on their computers.
oh...yeah. and a stupid user can delete his whole hard disk just like this, deleting his tax returns, medical files, financial records, personal email...
hello?
You actually "have to" select files as "shared". what do you think shared means? private?
Its like saying "you have to write on those cars that if you drive them into a wall, you might get your arms broke"
Peer-to-peer users and distributors of child pornography particularly believe that their anonymity on P2P networks protects them from detection by law enforcement.
well, very few p2p programms are actually anonymous, and if, there would be no prove someone had this file or that. so what?
However, more needs to be done by your companies to warn your P2P users as to the specific legal and personal risks they face when they use P2P technology for the illegal ends of disseminating pornography and "sharing" copyrighted music, movies, and software.
so they actually want a warning like "hey, if you do something illegal, they might get you"? Isn't that some kinda..basic knowledge?
Encryption only reinforces the percepti
Basically, their battle cry is "consumer protection," claiming that people need to be "protected" from the content they may find on P2P networks. Oh, the children! Oh, those unsuspecting parents who suddenly find out there is PORN on the INTERNET!
Reading the letter proves these people are completely clueless about technology. A few choice quotes:
Look, Ma, no power!
First of all, the whole point of P2P is to empower normal Internet users to share information without fear of being swamped with traffic. The "popularity" of your shared information could be because it is illegal or purient, but it could also be because of your artistic talents or the importance of your political or social message. Sure, it's a small baby in a very large bathtub, but you can't dismiss an entire technology on the count that it might actually accomplish its goal.
Second, legal porn, like anything else sold on the Internet, is sold through web sites, not P2P, because P2P doesn't have any built-in ecommerce capability. Anything on the P2P networks is either (a) pirated, (b) advertising, or (c) truly amateur. A porn company would have to be out of their minds to share their archives on a P2P network.
And since over half a million people died in auto accidents last year, perhaps the auto manufacturers should be forced to do more to "educate their users" in how to not drink and drive, or at least how to safely hold a Bic Mac in one hand, a cell phone in the other, and the steering wheel with their knees.
So, by "deceptive practices," they mean distributing file-sharing software that might, if you aren't careful, share your files. Are we assuming that all P2P users are also Florida voters?
And auto manufacturers avoid software design changes such as automatically calling the cops when you break the speed limit. Every useful tool has potentially illegal uses, and any attempts to regulate that tool will also decrease its legal usefulness.
You do realize that this is only going to push these efforts offshore? This will change nothing. Now, stop wasting my taxpayers money on these efforts and come up with a real solution.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
From the article:
We view with equal alarm reports that at least some P2P file-sharing services are adding encryption features to those services.... Encryption only reinforces the perception that P2P technology is being used primarily for illegal ends. Accordingly, we would ask you to refrain from making design changes to your software that prevent law enforcement in our States from investigating and enforcing the law.
I find the notion that encryption implies criminal activity particularly troublesome, especially considering:
The problem with the "only criminals use encryption..." mantra is that it just isn't true. Encryption is used far more often for legal, productive activities than illegal ones.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Perhaps they are refering to the cable modem triggering a WOL (wake-on-LAN) event? Does anyone know if this is possible? I think it might be...
The short answer to your question of if they will start regulating SSH tunnels, is yes.
Its a matter of time.. All encryption will be regulated ( again ) so that you cant hide *anything* from Big Brother ( and his little sister, The entertainment industry )
"Ah, but they cant read encryption I write myself" you say.. They don't need to, if you get caught encrypting anything with other then an approved algorithm, you go to jail for using "munitions with out an appropriate license".. content would become moot..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If you ever read an article on /. , this is the one to read.
...and it starts with the first paragraph where your locally elected attorney general of your state refers to you as a "consumer" instead of a citizen.
I knew lobbies and industry groups were powerful but this is a concrete example of just how bad it really is. There are so many obvious problems with this letter that it becomes clear that these AG's had nothing to do with the actual creation of the letter and only signed their names because "it was a good thing". I guess I am just stunned at how blatant it is....
I could type all day about this, but please -- go read the article and form your own opinion as I am completely confident that, after
Please, think of the chiruns! Give me a friggin break.
If p2p companies sit on their hands, they diserve the inevitable outcome.
The most obvious counter to such misinformation and distortion would be a national ad campaign dealing with the bad behavior of the National Association of Attorneys General. Their use of the child porn card is a fig leaf. Alowing the MPAA and RIAA to use them is unforgivable and lets us know who the association is really looking out for.
This is about control. Control of the internet and its exploitation by the MPAA and RIAA. To these parasites the intenet is one big marketing channel and their aim is to gain as much control over this medium as they possibly can to ensure their ability to exploit any who come in contact with them.
The Federal and State government revenue departments are not above preying on internet service providers and users for a revenue stream.
After all they have to think of the chiruns. AFreeMan
Some people have already posted comparing file sharing the use of guns and the like. That because a tool can be used to commit a crime does not invalidate the usefulness of the tool.
The powers that be dont care that much about what your sharing. What they do care about is their ability to enforce various laws. A gun can be traced. Vehicles have to be registered. But the article specifically mentions two things that stand out.
1) People are trading child porn and copyrighted material over these networks.
2) These networks are in some way encrypted.
So these file sharing networks are having much the same effect as a popular crack house. They are generating alot of complaints that they are unable to adequately respond to.
Now, its another question entirely about how valid those complaints are. The child porn and the spyware are worth looking into. The copyright violations might not be.
END COMMUNICATION
It was interesting to find this letter on Slashdot since I worked for the National Association of Attorneys General up until April of this year as the IT Director.
As for your concern about the word "consumer", you are correct in your assumption that the AGs consider you their consumer. However, the word consumer in this sense is defined as "citizens that are under our jurisdiction", not as "our customer".
The prosecuters are upset because they can't decrypt the transmissions on newer P2P networks to find real crime, but this all came about because of ridiculous copyright laws which forced P2P apps to add encryption and anonymous routing.
The correct solution is to make filesharing of copyrighted works legal for non-profit corporations and people. Then there's no reason to encrypt, do anon routing, and no reason not to add filters to stop illegal traffic.
This 'letter' is worded to prey upon the same people who would 'unwittingly share files, even when their computer is "off".
The more I read it, the more pissed I get - not at the people who wrote it, but the supposed 'smarties' that signed it. You guys and gals do have assistants, right? Run things past them, first.
We need people who actually know how to turn computers 'off' to weigh in on these issues.
And I thought it might be challenging to be a lawyer. Apparently, it just takes a good pen and a lack of personal responsibility.
The word consumer does not always equate to "our customer". This this case, the AGs always refer to the citizens in their states that buy things as "consumers", which is perfectly appropriate. This is standard operating procedure in all 56 AG offices that are a part of the National Association of Attorneys General.
Note: IAAP2PD
I already typed up my thoughts on this letter here.
Choice quote: (paraphrased, since I'm too lazy to copy from that link I posted)
P2p allows users to have files uploaded from their computer while the computer is off.
Man are we smart!
Gimme a break...
-dave-
NOTE: I do not represent the views of either the owner of officers of FreePeers, INC.
The pig browse. With Google. Sigh is to the chicken. Chicken is fool. Giggle. The DailyWTF giggle.
You've probably already seen a large part of the MPAA's letter ... I wouldn't be too surprised if some paragraphs were merely copy & pasted. Do you really think the attorneys general made this stuff up themselves?
How something is USED, and what something IS, are two completely different things.
:-) You should know that logic is irrelevant here when it comes to politicians trying to justify something. They use rhetoric for effect, not to conveny logical reasoning. (And AG's are politicians, possibly the most dangerous kind owing to their long-term power and elevated status.)
You're using logic.
When you're a politician, you're in the power game, the power to regulate and to dictate what others do. You're a coercer, in every bone in your body.
Now consider P2P networks. They bypass every possible point of control, totally undermining the ability of coercers to impose their will. The idea that P2P can be allowed to exist is utter anathema to them. And they can see that it could get much worse, with P2P traffic becoming practically invisible in addition to being effectively anonymous. This is beyond the pale. They have not worked their way up the tree of political power for 30-40 years only to be undermined like this.
If you can imagine a bunch of people totally freaking out, you've got the right picture. Don't expect logic.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
P2P software is a small problem compared to a much older technology, that has for years been used by terrorist and governements alike, as a tool to manipulate the general public, often to incite violence and undermine authority. In a new move, the US government has decided to ban paper!
"I don't think BT is company anyway but surely they can see that p2p apps do have some legitimate uses ?.
"
Do they? I'm serious. Looking at things from the "average joe" perspective, instead of the "geek" perspective. Is there average day legitimate uses for P2P for average joes? So far the only thing Ma and Pa Kettle are using P2P for is copyright violations (not necessarily intentional, but...).
One really odd thing I noticed in the footnotes:
Footnote 2: It also has come to our attention that P2P file-sharing technology is being used as a means of transmitting computer viruses and worms because conventional virus protection programs, such as those marketed by Novell, do not scan files exchanged via such technology. If such is the case, then it would be incumbent upon your companies to warn your users of this risk.
Since when did Novell sell anti-virus products? I don't see any on their website. They do make a firewall called BorderManager (which arguably could be used to block a number of P2P services) but it's not an antivirus program.
I could be wrong, but even if Novell does make some AV program nobody's heard of, it's not a very good example, since nobody uses it. More likely they meant Norton, but it's hard to keep straight all those software vendors who have names starting with N.
Between that and the comments on your computer sharing files when it's off, one wonders why they can't find one person with a high-school level of technology expertise who can act as a consultant for the AG's. Probably because they can't find someone who knows anything about technology and is willing to bash P2P.
I have blog like everyone else
Now, what I really want to see is the letter(s) the RIAA and MPAA sent to the AGs to prompt this action.
Where's TSG when you need it?
BTW, anyone else notice that this was only signed by 47 AGs? Anyone want to find out which 3 didn't sign this and send them a thank-you note?
sed will do the job perfectly adequately.
The "designed for" argument is weak. One should instead be looking at what the actual consequences are of anything we create, and deal accordingly. P2P much like guns may have a dual-purpose. That however doesn't exempt it from social controls which most of it's advocates are against.
Also guns are a part of the constitution. Were's the constitutional right to P2P?
Why stop at gun. Consider all the illegal activity performed on MS computers thanks to the bugginess of MS? Trojans and viri bringing entire sections of the internet to it's knees and causing billions of dollars annually, thanks to MS's inability to secure it's own systems and their insistance on embedding IE. Surely that's got to be illegal at least on some level - why not send them a letter? Microsoft, your computer systems are being used to DoS the internet. They're being used to crack systems by way of your "features" and are being hijacked by those that would do evil...
...fits Microsoft all too well. "At present, Microsoft software has too many times been hijacked..."
I would have to say, the statement:
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
But... no, don't send a letter to Microsoft. They're poor innocents who have no control over their product and it's "features"...
You should be ashamed of yourself for attaching your name to the letter set out recently by the National Association of Attorneys General to P2P software companies. Your ignorance about P2P technology and the Internet in general is proven by the ridiculous factual misrepresentations in the letter.
As a software developer who is interested in legal and innovative uses of P2P technology, I am deeply saddened by the sheer Joe Sixpack-level stupidity about technology issues in the highest levels of our governments. P2P is not "an alternative" to the Internet, it is the Internet as it was originally intended: in the hands of the public. I would think that in a state that considers concealed handguns a concept worthy of legal protection, the Attorney General might have some backbone about conservative ideals such as personal responsibility.
Also, I'm personally offended that you refer to Texas citizens as "your consumers." I'm not your consumer, you are a public servant. At the very next opportunity I have, you can be sure that I'll be casting my vote towards someone who has a clue about how government officials should not simply regurgitate every piece of prose handed to them by Hollywood companies pretending to be interested in "protecting the children."
Comedian Chris Rock thinks that the way to stop crim isnt to make guns illegal; its to make bullets expensive. Really expensive.
You want to pop a cap in someones ass?
You better be damn sure cuz your ho is gonna have to do extra time on her back to pay for that expensive mutha...
From the letter: ... to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed."
"...serious risks posed to the consumers of our states by your companies' peer-to-peer file-sharing technology
Hoo boy. Sounds like this evil p2p technology is going to jump through the screen and grab the user by the throat.
Wait a minute - I just got a great idea. I'm going to write a movie script about an malicious p2p program that does exactly that. Evil software that sucks unsuspecting users into the "computer world". Fakes and uncompletes everywhere. The MPAA is going to give me millions!!
...is that the Attorney Generals have been lulled into believing that sites and software such as Suprnova and Kazaa are the only uses of software known as P2P.
Unfortunately for us, the consumers the AGs seek to protect, it isn't. One group I work with -- the Firearms HL mod team -- has repeatedly run into problems with providing substantial mirror locations for their releases. Using BitTorrent we were able to provide substantial bandwidth from a large number of providers during the necessary period (one week, roughly) -- without negatively impacting any one site or person.
These uses of P2P software are transient but very real. Modding, one of the largest reasons the gaming community exists and colloborates together in my opinion, has become a large user of BitTorrent and P2P software. You can find any number of their releases online at one time.
The reason these are discounted by the legal field is that they aren't "corporate" or "official." An individual using BitTorrent to some success isn't acting responsibily, or doesn't represent the norm. I find these torrents all the time as I surf the 'Net looking for new, free games and such.
Consider SourceForge -- if it were to disappear, how do you think large distributions would continue to exist? It probably wouldn't be via a large corporate donor; many distributions would rather give up their thumb or die than to bow to a corporate sponsor. No -- they would probably begin to distribute their files via P2P software of some sort with an unofficial network of seeders making efforts to be online.
It is unfortunate that the AGs choose to listen to the "entertainment industries" without soliciting advice or comment from the users of the software. The companies that produce the software may know only of the illicit uses of it but the users of the software are those who find legitimate uses for it.
Modding, independent musicians, shareware authors, graphics artists, and even porn companies can all benefit directly from P2P software. All of them would benefit directly based on their popularity and the willingness of the public at large to seed their software. The more popular your software the easier it is to get ahold of, giving you more users and more funds to continue development making it even more popular -- repeat cycle.
The distribution channel and the control it provides has dried up in the digital arena because of this cycle. This is what scares the large corporations. It isn't the loss of profit. It's the loss of control and the future ability to make profit.
Finally why are we threatening companies that are not directly responsible for these actions? The seeders of illicit software are very easily identified, even with the roadblocks the US Courts have put in place in regards to lawsuits. Why not pursue the individuals who are seeding the files? Existing laws are sufficient to successfully prosecute these people; why do we need to add more crap to our lawbooks just to satisfy a particular situation for a particular lobbying group or groups?
And those laws will only be a complete mess if each and every state passes their own version.
My reality check bounced.
Hi-
This whole anti-P2P thing and the DCMA thing is wrong and will most likely fail to stop piracy. Consumer fair use has to be balanced against copyright. The old system of copyright and fair use worked reasonably well until the internet and widespread adoption of PCs made digital copying ubiquitous. My proposal is that DCMA be abolished and P2P networks should be treated as any other legitimate business. The government should tax data transfer at $0.01 per megabyte and blank CDR/DVD at $0.01 per 10 megabytes of capacity. This puts digital media approximately on the same footing as paper media. You can photo copy a book but it will cost something and you don't get the nice binding, color art, etc. Under this proposal digital media would be the same- it would cost a nominal amount and you wouldn't get the nifty case, inserts or disc art. It seems to have worked with the photocopy technology- it just might work with digital too.
Lawrence Wasden Attorney General of IDADHO
Its hard to take the Attorney General from IDADHO seriously since the state doesn't exist.
Or did they?
I seem to remember a certain amendment IX that might come into play here: In other words, unless the government specifically denies you certain rights, you have those rights. The Bill of Rights isn't a white-list of acceptable rights, but merely a guideline that specifies which rights absolutely must not be denied. What part of the law or constitution says that the people are denied the right for P2P?
What's the dual purpose of guns? They're designed to kill. Kill people. Kill animals. Kill stuff. Of course in patriotic god-blessed america its a worse offense to have certain plants in your garden than to kill people.
I never said that banning one thing justifies banning another. I'm pointint out that there is president for doing so.
/. go berserk over issues such as this, and mock the subject by suggestion the similar banning of things such as cars or kitchen knives, on the grounds that they can be lethal weapons when used properly. I would counter by reminding you that cars are regulated, via liscencing, and there are laws in many places about having large bladed items in public.
/. agrees on that point.
from your example, we do ban nuclear warfare research. Keep in mind that we are speaking about private individuals here. If you, as a private individual, attempt to conduct nuclear weapons research other than just reading books and running some equations, you will be investigated and probably arrested. And should that occur, I doubt that you will garner much sympathy from most people when your story hits the evening news. People accept that they aren't allowed to process plutoninum themselves, as the risks to the population at large far outweigh benefits.
The Law is a trade-off of freedoms vs. public safety. My comment was that at some point, the right to produce P2P software (or machineguns) might be overshaddowed by the illigitimate uses for said product.
People on
Finally, I want to say that I am done playing devil's advocate, and that Bennifer a menace to society, and SHOULD be banned...I think that most of
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I should have marked the humour in my post as such. I am replying to you in hope the other guys down there look at this reply, too.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Second, a car can hit innocent bystanders walking in the street. With P2P, only people using it could suffer any consequences.
The consumer should be able to redistribute the music that he or she obtains, but whenever it happens, the artist needs to get paid. And if the consumer could make a couple cents for every redistribution, then he or she would have the incentive to start sharing files legally.
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar
All is redundant... This post. The idea of the article. But sory. I have to say it again. I just read article and the first reply. It said it all. But here we are:
How stupid ?!
Then close car companies, pharmaceutical industry, gun producers... Hum. How about stoping human reproduction for it has such a negative impact on the planet. Including many animals who "do not wish to be exposed".
Bon sang de bonsoir, mais c'est pas possible!
How fekin stupid ?!
foreach $second ( @time ) {
print("How fekin stupid!\n");
}
assert("Human is not stupid.");
The very concept of justice should also be bared for it also wrongly impact, from time to time, some people "who do not want to be exposed".
Please confirm I'm gonna wake up. Pleaaaaase.
Truly a well thought out response to the anti-gun garbage that is stuffed down the throats of billions around the world...
Of course, the fact that this is so entirely distinctive from any normally understood state of "off" is what makes this comment so ludicrous.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Wow, next thing you know they will outlaw pistols in the US because they are used illegaly...
I'd say it's so distinctive that, in fact, it's not a credible explanation at all. The letter gives, so far as I can see, no evidence whatsoever to believe this is what was intended - so far as I can see, you simply made it up from whole cloth yourself.
The letter says that P2P programs continue to share files when the computer is turned off, but connected to broadband. Plain as day. The AGs that signed this shouldn't be trusted with anything more complicated than a hoe - if that.
"At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed"
replace "P2P software" with "Microsoft Windows"... ya think they're gonna go after microsoft next?
(hey i can dream can i?)
'At present, the government has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
Yeah, right. All those people logging onto P2P aren't trying to find pirated software, movies, or music. No way -- they don't want to be exposed to that!
Give me a fucking break. That's the entire reason that P2P services are so popular! People go there to get their pirated goods because it's one of the few thriving places left where you can actually find what you're looking for and get it for free.
It's the same reason Usenet still has a cult following today... it's not because it's a haven for people to converse about various topics. It's because it's one of the few places left where piracy hasn't been stomped out by corporations and government. Buy a good Usenet subscription for $10/month, and you've got access to all the pirated content and software you could ever need.
I won't get into the debate about whether it's right or wrong to pirate, or whether it helps or hurts the corporations. But you do have to acknowledge reality here and apply some common sense based on your own observations. People overwhelmingly use these types of services to facilitate piracy, and that's the entire appeal of them.
Now, that said, BitTorrent and FreeNet are often lumped into the P2P category just because of their underlying technology. Hell, even Skype uses P2P technology. But to lump those into the same category as file-sharing programs like KaZaa is bullshit. They have completely different purposes and designs.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
Whether or not you would have bought it is irrelevent. Whether or not you derive benefit from the illegal use or possession of someone else's property without paying for it, is what's at issue here. You play, you pay. Simple as that.
If the lawers are going to blame P2P software developers for (some) unlawful use, then certainly they must hold Microsoft accountable for all the costly damage done by their shoddy coding being taken over by virus writers and their spammers.
I expect there are a lot more infected Windows users than on all the P2P networks combined, and that they are routinely used to commit breaking and entering, denial of service, unlawful and unauthorized use of another's resources, illegal transmission of objectionable material, theft of private documents, etc, etc.
What's the difference?
You have a huge problem with viruses. But at the same time you post to Slashdot, that's a bit odd. You really might consider switching to an Linx distro instead of whatever you're using that gets all the viruses and causes you all those problems. Of course then you wouldn't really need P2P as much either because you could just have all your software for free.
"The real problem, as I see it, is that the whole copyright/patent/ip issue is much more sticky than originally proposed. The idea that a person can sell their ideas is odd, at best."
That's because that's not what's happenning.
copy-right is about what can be done with copies, and the implimentation of ideas.
"Here is my proposal: copyright should be eliminated except in the case of individuals--corporations should not be allowed to hold a copyright. That means that a Jerry Bruckheimer or George Lucas film would be copyrighted to them, not Lucasfilm Ltd or Disney or whatever. This would also apply to book publishers (the author holds the copyright, not the publisher, as is often the case)."
George Lucas's work is "work for hire". Copyright can be transfered, because unlike "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", it isn't an inaliable right.
"The entire purpose of copyright law and patent law, as originally conceived, was to foster competition and invention. At this point it no longer serves its original purpose, and has become its own antithesis. As such, it should be modified so that it serves its original purpose once more. IF THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE, THEN IT SHOULD BE ABANDONED!"
It serves it's purpose, despite the rather singular nature of it's reporting.
"P2P has legitimate uses (bittorrent has proven that conclusively). No one can argue otherwise without ending up looking like a fool (unless their debate opponent is an idiot). Lawmakers should be aware that EVEN IF they manage to make it completely illegal to distribute or use P2P inside the US, there will always be areas of the world that they do not control, and therefore these applications are not going to go away. If any lawmaker thinks otherwise, they need to talk to a few people who are technically competent about the likelihood of eliminating anything on the internet."
Legitimate uses, yes. Free of social controls, no.
"This being the case, I am willing to conclude that the ONLY interest that they have in restricting the use of these is to make themselves look good to the ??AA, so that contributions will continue."
Such an attitude blinds you to any abuse done in P2P's name, thereby reducing the effectiveness of any legitimate arguments for P2P.
FYI- All of the states Attorneys General have a "Consumer Protection Unit." They are charged with protecting consumers from fraudulent activity. That is why you as citizens are considered consumers in the letter.
It sounds like you know what you're talking about here, so could you please explain something that totally eludes me?
My understanding of "Attorney General" is something along the lines of the most eminent judicial office in each state. People with a clear and balanced view, and easily able to distinguish fact from bullshit. Although their position inevitably makes them political figures, nevertheless they are highly independent and probably contemptuous of commercial lobbies trying to push them in certain directions with a blatant profit motive. OK, so that's a highly rose-tinted view, but hopefully there's at least some foundation of truth to it.
Unfortunately, this view of AGs totally fails to correlate in the slightest with the completely opinionated and unadulterated rubbish contained in that joint letter. We're talking about a level of unreason and unsupported factual nonsense of which even Darl McBride would be proud. This is simply not the kind of thing that senior, clear-headed legal experts could ever possibly even think about, let alone write. I mean, the lowest judge in the land would trivially dismiss 98% of it as not substantive, factual, or germane to the topic.
And the fact that so many pretty unique "individuals" apparently were willing to act as a unanimous cabal and put their names to it is equally incredible. It's more common to get 3 different legal opinions when you put 2 such people together.
Something's wrong here. I'm not sure what, but the pieces of this puzzle just don't fit together. Do you have any insights on this aspect of the AG office as well?
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
I'm not a lawyer but didn't Mr. Murray break the law? He installed Kazaa and downloaded some music and a pirated copy of the movie Chicago. It doesn't seem like you should be able to break the law to demonstrate how easy it is to break the law.
"I'm not a consumer. I'm a %$@#! citizen."
Yes, that's how this mess came about.
Then what imaginative cry baby motherfuckers?
Why don't they try doing something useful like prosecuting people who rape, murder and blow shit up.
Your statement intrigued me. I was under the impression that military grade weapons and ordinance were pretty much off limits to people.
.30, .50 and larger caliber fully automatic weapons, typically used for shooting holes in anything up to and including light armored vehicles. I decided to look up a class 3 to see what it said.
# type03>(ATF page on topic)
To be clear, when I say heavy machine guns, I am referring to
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nlc/ffl/ffl_types.htm
I figured that the ATF is probably a pretty good authority on the subject. According to the page, a class 3 covers 'curios and relics'. No real suprise there. I know someone who has some submachine guns from WW2, and I'm sure that this falls under that category.
My question is, at what stage does a person have to acuire a class 9 (dealer in destructive devices). I personally would consider a heavy machinegun a destructive device, but when I started googling for a leagal description of them, I didn't find anything very solid. At what point is something not a 'relic' and is a destructive device? (What IS a 'destructive device', legally?) If I have a WW2 bazooka is that class3 or 9. What about a old german 88mm field gun? A 500lb bomb?
I know that somewhere the line is drawn, but I am now very curious at where. What class of permit will I need to buy a Tiger tank or a old Mig with a chaingun?
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
"Guns don't kill people, physics kills people!" - Dick, trying to interest high school students in a career in physics.
"I do not think you are in a position to testify to the "intent" of people who are not you. "
By this logic. I submit that we should then hand government funded guns to people exiting the following institutions.
Mental Hospitals.
Prisons.
And government funded condoms to.
Child Molestors.
Rapists.
The good and the bad...my take. Summary of article:
/. answer, but the reality is that this is a abstract morals issue. Let's not debate whether pirates wouldn't pay for the product if the free distribution methods weren't around...let's just agree the financial loss to the entertainment and software industry is real, and actual people are being harmed by the loss of revenue. Perhaps having the files in open sight and on a common network would simply allow police to find violators more easily? ./ global community...solutions. How about this proposal:
Blah, blah, child porn bad, piracy bad, encryption bad, we've done a lot against spam and spyware, you've done nothing, stop it or we'll bitchslap you. Lots of signatures of important people.
Right. Now on to the real world.
1) It is incredibly obvious to anyone but demented individuals that child porn is bad. AGs and police officers work hard to stop this plague, and certainly P2P networks don't help...they offer a wider distribution network and complicate surveillance. It is arguable that shutting down all common P2P networks wouldn't stop anything, just force it underground. Perhaps having the files in open sight and on a common network would simply allow police to find violators more easily?
2) P2P networks create a copyright enforcement nightmare. "If aforementioned AGs and police officers weren't so busy with chasing copyright infringers, they could spend more time on issue #1" would be the standard
3) The examples of users commonly sharing their full hard drives and being subject to identity theft is a violent defense for stupidity. If you're dumb enough to a) load a common P2P package, b) share your whole disk to the world, then c) you should reap the rewards of your stupidity, including identity theft, legal repercussions, etc.. Consequences should be faced by the people dumb enough to do this, not the software publishers (assuming the software doesn't abstract what it's doing).
3) Encryption being touted as bad, and comments about AG's successes with spam and spyware are downright laughable. Let's face reality; a) the law has failed miserably to stop or even deter spam, as has industry, b) the law has failed miserably to stop or even deter spyware, as has industry. In both cases, the laws of natural selection of "where there's a profit, there's an offending product" prevail. With regards to encryption on an open P2P network...the adjective "idiotic" comes to mind. Encryption on a publicly-available data set seems counterproductive, no?
4) How do we make a better world, where nobody starves, and all P2P is used for good, not evil? Difficult at best, impossible most likely. Forcing P2P vendors to magically "recognize" content as bad porn, good porn, grandma's home videos, free software versus pirated software is the stuff of fantasy only Disney could conjure up. The real world is otherwise, and that's what I'd like to see from the talented
a) Force P2P software to support easy file "previews" that are easily downloadable, whereby the law enforcement community could discern whether movies are of grandma's birthday party--or grandpa molesting children--and let the law act accordingly.
b) Let's leave encryption for where it belongs...and open share systems aren't one place. See point "a" above.
c) Force people to suffer the consequences of their own stupidity--directly or indirectly--and without the recourse of whining to their state's AG. How about a federal law banning the installation of Internet-connected computers in the rooms of children where an adult is rarely present, has not installed some sort of content filters, and has not informed aforementioned children of the real threats that exist on the Internet?
d) Let's apply some common principles to the whole affair while the law figures out this new technology stuff.. I mean, if you had a phone, and it was free for everyone to call you, would you gladly play your music for them (it's "sharing") or tell them yo
This is all quite academic, until you've been shot.
... same life ... I found myself in 2 separate situations, that without that pistol handy the BAD people would have another notch - both instances they back up slowly, turn and ran.
... what the hell am I going to do.
I have.
It was in a parking lot some years ago. I was picking up my girlfriend from work - minding my own business.
Sawed off 20 gauge will rock your world
Shot right above the knee.
Your mind will change, not to mention your politics.
Long story short, I then purchased a Walther PPK-S, a fine, small weapon, later,
You have no idea how badly I wanted to fire a warning shot right through their head.
So kids, until you know how this feels, or REEEEAAALLLY thought this through, save it.
Backed up in a corner looking at a fucking idiot maniac, I hope you do think it through - as in slow motion
Good luck , man.
Happiness is a warm gun.
~hylas
So far as I can see, you're being intentionally ignorant.
The quote literally uses "off" in quotes. When writers do that, and they're not quoting another source, it is generally understood that there is a specialized and larger meaning to the term.
And frankly, your interpretation is even LESS credible, because it assumes that someone who has graduated from both college and law school believes that a computer can "do stuff" when it is literally turned off.
Of course, if you have experience running many of the Kazaa-like applications, you'll know that several of them run in the background or as a tray application, while a somewhat clueless user would believe that the application was running only while the interactive client window was open.
Most likely, you're one of those clueless users.
In one sense that statement could be considered correct, however. Once a file hits P2P networks, it is very difficult to remove.
One can shut off or even destroy one's computer, and the files will still be available to all.
The broadband bit doesn't seem to fit, unless they mean that the broadband connection will allow other P2P users to get all the files on your hard drive in a reasonable amount of time.
If they outlaw P2P, then only outlaws will have P2P, which means it won't really affect us slashdotters. Seriously... I wouldn't want such a thing to be outlawed, and while it may stop one thing it won't stop innovation, peoples desire to do what they want, or peoples desires to do exacly what they are told not to do.
Wow, bullets that emulate old videogames?
n ary&va=maim&x=0&y=0
http://www.mame.net/
Sweet, get me some that will emulate Space Invaders, so when I fire them they turn into giant white pixels.
(Yes, yes, sarcastic and pedantic. The mental picture amused me though. And I think the word you want is maim.)
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictio
We should just ban Windows right now, because people hijack it to sent out Spam (which aparently is not bad at all when comparing to P2P networks), DoS (Also not bad too!) and various other acts. OTOH, hdd mp3 players are bad too since their can store more than just MP3, (which is already bad) like software and (gasp!) P2P software (The ultimate evil).
We are writing to encourage your State to take concrete and meaningful steps to address the serious risks posed to the citizens of our States by your State's attorneys ("lawyers") legal practices. By addressing such problems today as the use of loopholes and misinformation to disseminate corporate fraud, invasion of citizen privacy and infringe on their basic human freedoms, lawyers may one day realize its potential as a means for facilitating a wide range of crime prevention, justice, fair business activities, and efficient government actions. At present, the law has too many times been hijacked by those who use loopholes and poor moral practices in the assistance to those who have enguaged in illegal practices to which the vast majority of citizens do not wish to be exposed.
We have carefully considered your actions in a vast history of legitimate court cases. However, we find that this history fails to address and help prevent the actions of many false accusations and unjust verdicts.
Our fellow citizens actively need to be provided with the information necessary to understand this law and to make informed decisions concerning its use. Many lawyers make their living by allowing their clients to propigate false claims and mislead the public as to the actual facts and events related to the client's practices. This type of direct manipulation of public opinion differentiates the misuse of the court system from its original intended purpose.
etc, etc...
'At present, P2P software has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed.'
How many different programs can you think of that'd fit logically into that sentence?
At present, Internet Explorer...
At present, Sendmail...
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
Increasingly I feel like we are living in a Philip K. Dick novel. How much more unabashed can our government leaders and their corporate sponsors be, as they outright run a country supposedly governed by "We the People?" Some years ago I started saying that Americans don't live in a real democracy any more (I know, it's a Republic, but try to get my point). We live in a pretend democracy, like Student Council in high school. Adult citizens, or "consumers," have about as much real political power as we had in high school.
Do you honestly believe that 46 state Attorneys General think software can run on a computer when it's turned off??? These people aren't idiots, they are attorneys. Say what you like about the ethics of some lawyers, but I've never met anyone genuinely stupid who made it through law school. Okay, maybe Orrin Hatch, but we are talking about the Attorneys General of 46 states here.
I have, however, known many people who could straight-facedly offer up a document such as this, knowing it was full of crap, if they were confident that the other side didn't have the resources to fight them. And that's what we are looking at right here. What are the "consumers" going to do about this? Nothing. Watch tv. Have a beer. Write comments on Slashdot. No problem for the people who run things, because they have their shit together and we don't.
It's not the public's fault for having too little time or energy to care about the fifty million problems the government inflicts on us. People have lives to lead, diapers to change and floors to vacuum. They only rise up when things get bad enough that everyday life is directly threatened. When Safeway is empty, and armed guards are escorting shipments of food into gated communities, then we might see some real action, but it won't be about copyright laws.
The button pushers know that all they have to do is move slowly and deliberately, taking step after step but never doing anything that makes the average Joe feel threatened. They can thumb their noses at the few of us who have issues, because they know we'll never get enough people interested in this until it's too late. And when all unmoderated copy-making technology in the US has been banned and we go to war with a country that still makes plain old DVD burners, because they might be hiding terrorists or something, "consumers" will watch it on Fox News and then flip back to American Idol VIII. And this will go on and on until five or six corporations own the world.
Anyway, Phil, thanks for trying. Sorry we let you down.
I think you mis-spoke...
There is no such thing as a "semi-automatic machine gun." Semi-automatic is mutually exclusive to machine gun.
Firing types....
Full-Automatic Fires multiple rounds for as long as the trigger is held.Legal to own in the US after a background check and purchase of a special permit.
Machine gun See Full-Automatic Semi-Automatic Fires a single round when the trigger is pulled. Automatically loades the next round in the chamber. Will fire only a single round if trigger is pulled and held.Most hunting rifles are semi-automatic.
All of the weapons banned under the "assault weapon ban" are semi-automatic weapons with 'scary looking' features (flash suppresors, bayonet mounts, pistol grips).
Bolt-action Fires round in chamber when trigger is pulled, user must preform manual action to load next round. Also called Lever action, Pump, etcThere is also something called selective fire (if I remember correctly) that limits the number of rounds fired in a full-auto capable weapon. Since full auto fire is very very difficult to aim accuratly, the weapon can be set to fire bursts of one, three, or "until I let off or run the clip dry" modes.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
What is it with this guy and stupid, utterly wrong-headed legislation? If he came along with a proposed bill that said 'murder is wrong', it'd incline me to look a lot more favourably on caving somebody's head in with a bat!
You must think in Russian.
In a seemingly unrelated story today, it was declared all airlines would be shut down, since they can be used for illegal activities and terrorism.
Roadways and Highways across north america are now closed, because too many criminals drive on them to achieve their criminal activities.
Telephones will be officially shut down next week, and all citizens are expected to remain home unless escorted by government officials.
America the Free.
P2P networks are only as illegal as the peers they connect. Those people are committing the acts. The sick criminals putting naked children before cameras, violating them in front of the camera, and in perpetuity, aren't themselves frequenting the networks. Neither are the pirates and spies who are making and distributing most copyright violations. They're just picking on P2P because it's easy, not because it's effective. They're too lazy to even use the P2P networks as a new, traceable and auditable marketplace for the evidence of crime, which would revolutionize their efficiency. That would require a bit of overhead labor on the part of the flatfoots, too intimidating despite the tremendous return. They'd rather surf the marketplace without accountability, and shoot off flimsy threatening letters to network operators, than trap and confront real criminals.
If P2P were as popular among the public as are cars and telephones, the providing corporations would be as safe from complicity liability as are Ford and Verizon. With the virulent spread of mobile networks over "phones", they shortly will be. So The Man is sniping now, before popularity prevents their smothering this liberating technology in the dark.
--
make install -not war
OK- that is a really stupid thing to say. I agree. but I think that what they meant was not if the computer is powered off, but if the P2P program was shut down. There are a few maliciously written P2P programs that will continue to share files even after the main interface screen has been shut down.
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
:wq!
karma be damned:
// we're all consumers
I'm sure you've never taken an economics class but let me break it down for you.
Consumer(s) = individual(s) of a large/small demographic who buys good. i.e. they consume.
Customer = said specific consumer of which is more personal, human, than the aforementioned generalization.
(this next part is oblig. b/c of some nut jobs)
citizen = member of a country, society; consumer, customer, human being etc etc.
What everyone fails to acknowledge here is that the market-droids or other execs use "consumer" as just a way to simplify what we are. We are consumers. It doesn't change the fact that we are customers (of bartering, by purchase or other method) of any company and it doesn't change the fact that we want to be recognized as human beings.
Lax concern for peoples easily hurt feelings isn't their problem. You're in control of your emotional state (for the most people, bi-polars and schitzo's exempt) and you're in charge of your education. If you become offended at the notion of being called a consumer then I suggest you get some more education by whatever means you deem fit at that period of your life by university or independent study. Face it, we are ALL consumers. ALL OF US. YOU CAN NOT, NOT, BE A CONSUMER. This is a fact of life and their non-nonchalant, trivial use of the word hurting your own feelings really shows character of what you don't know.
Ignorance is not a plea, and by whining about it because you demand "respect to the people" (which is valid in many situations) won't change the fact that you may need a little more of an education to realize that it's a general blanket statement to cover the entire buying population.
sans some obvious mis-moderation, I'm not trolling or trying to be condescending. But this kind of reaction of "I'm not a consumer, I'm a xx xx citizen/customer" from people gets old, and truly shows how ignorant you are.
Mods' please be gentle!
Is it just me, or does the phrase "P2P companies" strike anyone else as an oxymoron? I mean, isn't the whole point of a peer-to-peer protocol that you don't need some centralized service that needs a company to run it?
-- Alastair
Fire bullets. What that bullet hits is entirely the responsibility of the person firing the gun.
Yes, I know originally guns were designed to kill (for hunting, mainly), but clubs were probably originally "designed" to kill (or harm) as well. Yet you wouldn't object to someone owning a hammer and using it to hammer nails, would you?
Also, whether or not guns were designed to kill, they don't *have* to be used. There is something empowering in owning a device that tells others not to violate your rights unless they want a fairly large hole in them. It gives freedom to individuals, and draws a line in the sand most will not cross.
Nathan's blog
Guns are not designed to kill.
Then what are guns designed to do?
Guns are designed to shoot.
Perhaps this is just the first try, you know, 'think of the children' phase. Watch for a later tightening of screws.
I am struck again and again by the similarity of the arguments against P2P to those against guns.
"Guns kill people" ignores the fact that they also have legitimate uses for target and skeet, as well as hunting. Of the millions of guns owned in America, far less than 1% have ever been used in an act of violence against another person.
Now along comes P2P, and the law is making the same argument against it. "P2P is used for copyright infringement". Its also used for sharing legitimate files. People steal copyrighted material. P2P is just a tool.
Guns are 'hard' technology; P2P is 'soft' technology. That's the only difference. That, and guns kill people, while P2P 'steals' from the MPAA and RIAA, which as we know, in this country is a greater crime than killing.
Serving your airship needs since 1995.
http://www.naag.org/ag/full_ag_table.php
List of all state attorney generals including Puerto Rico.
...however in the general, such a generic label is accurate. no matter how offending it may be.
The sheriff od huddersfield locked in his castle, he's up in the Hollywood hills.
> Hmmm, strange indeed, I feel much safer knowing that when the shit hits the fan there will be some firepower around to neutralize the situation properly.
Before I came to Canada, I lived in a place where quite a few people had permits to carry "concealed" guns for the stated purpose of self defence. I had a 9mm S&W myself but I rarely carried it.
Anyway, accidents and near-accidents were too common.
A particular case that I rememberer was when several vigilant citizens shot a guy that was trying to plant an explosive device in a shopping district. A policeman later said on a TV interview that 5 or 6 bullets hit the terrorist while DOZENS more struck random targets, some OVER TEN METERS from where he stood. That policeman went on to say that it happened early in the morning when all the shops were closed and there were almost no people around to be hit by those stray bullets.
> The last thing I need is some wacko 'tazing' a rampaging heroin addict and accomplishing nothing more than pissing him off. But that's just me.
The effects of the taser are a bit more practical than just "pissing somebody off".
I don't know what is your experience with firearms but it is not as easy to hit the right target with a handgun (particularly one that has enough stopping power to be effective against your "rampaging heroin addict" as it seems.
In summary, in order to be effective with a firearm (and not a threat to your surroundings) you have to train regularly and the safety procedures must become your second nature, and unfortunately (or, IMHO, fortunately) that means that your weapon is not constantly ready to go off in half a second.
However, most people either don't realize that or cannot invest the required time and effort.
--you can own howitzers, rpgs, m-79s, 20 mm, etc. although not a lot in private hands, they are there. Totally legal, just no new ones on the market, all the older ones got grandfathered in.
And any used ones are gosh darn expensive.
The whole idea of the second amendment was exactly with no ambiguity t whatsoeverso the citizens had equal quality weapons, and more of them in quantity that the gooberment. It was *preceisely* for the situation for when the government became dictatorial.. We also AREN'T supposed to have a full time standing army, and I wish they would realise that, including all the doods who go join up and follow any order they are given. THAT was so any dictator wouldn't have a ready pool of willing lock steppers at his beck and call. I suggest these above the obvious law guys re-read a lot of our old history and documents. Getting kinda tired of macho flag wavers who swear an oath then immediately violate it going to fight illegal wars-or "police" illegal laws for that matter. They "swear an oath" to the "commander in chief" but the constitution-that they "swear an oath" to as well is supposedly OVER the commander in chief. Too bad not enough of them can bingo to that fact , maybe we wouldn't have gotten into a buncha unnecessary wars if we didn't have as many "ask no questions STFU follow any order" types out there..
If you look around the planet, dictators always have people who follow their orders and do the tyrannical stuff. There has never been an example of a dictator who wasn't supported by his military and police forces, else, he couldn't be a dictator. Unfortunately, they are the last ones to realise what's going on, the last ones to abandon support for the dictator, (milosevech is a good example semi-recently) and given human nature, they tend to (for the most part) like the power they get over the "effin civvies".
It's ridiculous to blame the companies for actions that users are taking. It's like blaming the phone company for people who use the telephone for illegal activities. Definitely time to make sure our voices are heard by the politicians. Be sure to contact your congressman and senators. Also your local politicians. No point in being silent about this kind of foolishness.
Jim Lynch
Tech Analyst and Community Manager
I hate to state the PAINFULLY obvious here .. that ought to mkae them re think a little .
but have those 46 attourneys (SP) woke up yet
if they look at their office network they might just find it is P2P so they had best follow there own instructions and cease to exist themselfs (or face the consequences that is) hung by the nuts fried in hallal oil then soaked in pigs blood then hung then drawn and quartered
Pete.
I'm reffering of course to the Bibster project
Bibster Partners and Participants Which is aimed at the shareing of scientific and research documents. All of which are by the fact that they are published, copyrighted works under the Berlin Treaty. Amazing how the world looks when you suffer from cerebral anal insertion syndrome(CAIS). Guess you can't trust those dadgum anti-American fools in them there Unerversilties. They might growed up and learned hows to think fer dem selbes.
I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.
Did anyone else notice that this letter is sponsored by the the Republican party?
RIAA behind this? Hmm.... Thoughts anyone?
Iwouldn't call the distinction trivial. Voters are not consumers, how can you consume democracy ?
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today.
Nobody died when Nixon lied.
I'm meeting you half way you stupid hippies!
By addressing such problems today as the use of P2P networks to disseminate pornography, invade privacy and infringe copyrights ..snip..
Lets do a little reading between the lines shall we...
Pornography is listed first, not child-porn. Probably unintentional for the sake of brevity but their is that chance they are thinking in broader terms. I hope not.
Invade privacy, heheh well if the morons are sharing their C drive then.. never mind, but it does add to the total number of 'bad things' which is a 'good thing' when your trying to get the 'consumers' (choke choke) to fall for it.
Infringe copyrights, well maybe the public doesnt want copyright holders to own copyrights indefinately?
Attorney General: No, no, no, put Infringe Copyrights last so they dont know the RIAA/MPAA are buying the laws we are working on.
Its funny to me how much they play these word games to get it past the average joe. Its even funnier to me how many of these games they played in this rather small letter. Oh well, the average joe is gunna figure it out when theres no more P2P places to go to.
But will joe be upset when he finds out? Lets hope so.
Or better yet, the P2P companys could declare war against this BS.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt. --E.C. Stanton
replace p2p with 'attourney general'
Another arrow shot in the big battle of our age.
Computers and the Internet have made scarcity of certain things needless. There's no reason why anyone in the world couldn't have easy access to any text, song, film, or image. The technology is there, it's affordable, and the only thing holding it back is a last-century power grab that attempted to eliminate the public domain so a few dozen fat cats could forever squeeze us whenever we watched, read, or listened.
If some future technology turns garbage into weatherproof, self-sufficient homes, would society allow current home-builders to make such technology illegal, just so they could continue to build homes the inefficient, expensive way? Or should we safely house the world and move on to solving the next problem?
Guns intended for self defense have the objective of stopping an attacker from succeeding. Death is an unfortunate side effect, not the objective. Ignorant Hollywood directors would have you believe that dart guns or tazers can do this without risk of lethality, but such devices are unreliable. With a dart gun you must use a dose heavy enough to take out the largest attacker without killing the smallest from overdose. Similar issues arise with tazers and electricity. A firearm attempts to accomplish the same objective using a chemically-powered projectile to apply hydrostatic shock. It's relativy cheap, simple, and reliable. (One could make an analogy here comparing the modular simplicity of a firearm with Linux, while the complicated and fickle dart gun or tazer are comparable to Windows.)
And right in the heading, Mr. Lockyer is identified as the AG of Californi . . . must be saving money by not having to print as many "a"s.
And to nitpick, last i checked, dc isn't a state, either.
My family, my friends and myself have been suffering through all of the trials and tribulations of "Microsoft Windows for Workgroups" since it's inception.
r r0dsl1,321 Go MMPLAY with yourself, ok junior jblist?)
We are not Nerdy geeks who live and breath PC BS; we are typical people who use the stinking things because we have to and know better than to fight City Hall.(chicago3.net/kernel32.dll/n2button.pan.icc.
Now that I have finally trained my machines to keep the messy dos shell alive despite msn.gs=0000+1.0001, now the All-Star GOV States want to kill the whole deal anyway?
COMMENT: aaaarrrrgggghhhh!.aiff, E-Platinum YHOO-NASDAQ-News-Websites Slashdot News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.(Globe.ico)Internet Community-2+click[1].htm_L!=>[English(United States)]in a plain brown wrapper.
REMARKS: STUFF-IT UP YOUR ASSET CONFIGURATIONS PUS BRAINS('!')powered by [(hp)]hURL = http://www.howstuffworks.com Microsoft shared IBM on you and you and you@sbcglobal.net Oh, GMAIL/?
CALL NOTES YOU CAN TEXT MESSAGE YOUR CINGULAR FRIENDS@PRODIGY.NET.BIZ Error#01800PRODIGY! About.COM+>TALK FAST, my secretary is on her knees under my desk.
Clearly, the US under G W Bush, by its actions, is becoming an enemy of the freedom he *talks* about all the time. Development of P2P should leave the US and move to countries where freedom is still valued.
Only boring people are ever bored.
While I hear your point, I'm left wondering -- if not "all guns are manufactured such that it is intended that they will kill," then what are they manufactured for? I thought guns were precisely for killing; historically there have been few other purposes for which a gun has been used*. Your analogy seems to fall apart here -- a gun is a weapon, period; whereas P2P applications, or Boeing aircraft, are designed for completely different, non-belligerent purposes.
While I am uncertain of the historical wisdom of legislating gun control, from the point of view of safety and what guns are meant to do, I can understand the reasons for attempts to do enact such legislation. We regulate cars, because they are dangerous; we regulate many chemicals for the same reason. There are countless other examples that I could name. Extending this logic to guns is not wholly spurious. Extending it to P2P applications beggars the imagination -- at least, until one brings notice to the underlying unpleasant smell of money politics.
* At least, that I'm aware of. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm honestly interested in your point of view.
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
I strongly suspect that the linked AG letter is in fact a slightly-reworded draft of what the **AA sent. Notice the complete scaremongering idiocy of the statement about file sharing when the computer is off -- it doesn't take a genius to figure out this is crap; my grandparents (and they are decidedly not geekish in any way) are smart enough to figure out that when the power's off, ain't nothing happening. That's like claiming that your neighbors will be able to listen in on your household conversations via the telephone, when the receiver's on the hook. Or better yet, flat out unplugged.
To wit, sounds suspiciously like raw **AA BS'n'FUD to me. Tack on a couple paragraphs of intro for the AGs explaining how they want the letter formatted, and there you have it.
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
It's sort of ironic that it's politicians who created a military, the military created the Internet, and the Internet is the undoing of the politicians...
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
The 18.5 minutes of silence finally explained: Richard Nixon was reading "My Pet Goat".
Well, a copy of Alice's Restaurant *was* found in the White House attic when the Carter family moved in. It would be a better fit time-wise, and I think that would be quite likely to have been erased from the wiretaps.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?