Slashdot Mirror
Terrorist Link to Copyright Piracy Alleged
xbsd writes "John Stedman, a lieutenant in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in charge of IP violations, testified in front of the Senate Homeland Security committee that some associates of terrorist groups such as Hezbollah may be involved in copyright violations. According to CNET's Declean McCullagh: 'Even though Stedman's evidence is circumstantial, his testimony comes as Congress is expected to consider new copyright legislation this year. An invocation of terrorism, the trump card of modern American politics, could ease the passage of the next major expansion of copyright powers'."
Have comparisons to terrorism become like comparisons to Hitler and Nazi Germany on /.?
Exactly.
Why the hell would a Terrorist outfit pirtae Sith? For money? Please, they can get it much easier other places.
Is that a shock? Terrorism is the new buzz word, slap it onto anything you don't like and it's instantly evil.
Hell lets just call Nazis terrorists now. They are pretty much interchangable if you ignore the "short" gap between the end of the second world war and today
I like muppets.
<SARCASM>
So people who drive too fast obviously have terrorist connections. They should be punished as terrorists.
</SARCASM>
Haven't you heard? Terrorism is the new communism now.
Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
I thought that the main sources of Hezbollah funding were Iran ($100M/yr) and Blood Diamonds... silly me.
For prior art see The War on Drugs. Those ads after 9/11 linking buying a dimebag to supporting terrorists were another great example. It is sad to see this posted here where we all "get it" and aren't suckered into the same old FUD. Most however, politicians included, will take these statements at face value and begin to think accordingly.
And just like The War on Drugs it is a farce that ignores the realities of the world we live in in favor of making money on an outdated status quo.
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
I think this is directed to the people who sell pirated DVDs on the street, not P2P users.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
Now, if only we could catch Al Qaeda's Osama Bin Laden in violation of copyright laws! Then he'd have to deal with the RIAA and the MPAA.... heaven help him!
I take issue with the word "terrorist", or at least its modern application in the US., but that is besides the point. I do take issue with law enforcement being more concerned about copyright violations than deadly explosions and attacks....... this seems to be what is going on. Am I missing something?
The Crimson Dragon
Fucking socialist bastards.
This has nothing to do with socialism. Socialism includes state housing, healthcare, and welfare. What you are thinking of is right wing authoritarianism, also known as facism. Please use proper terminology when trying to state a flame war over political ideology.
-------
Support Indy Music. Buy
Ever heard the Cheeky Girls? Point proven.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
With thunderous applause and nice little back-hands to the Trade Federation, i mean, RIAA/MPAA. How absolutely marvellous. So I guess there's no chance that Mickey Mouse will become public domain at any point in the next couple of centuries. I wonder how much more junk legislation can get passed due to "terrorism". We've already seen the patriot act, which everyone knows and loves. Now all the big business concerns are getting their little pet hates resolved as well. The ext time some "terrorist" event occurs, I wonder if the Senate will vote to give the Chancellor, (cough) I mean err President some 'emergency' powers. They do say that fact is often stranger than fiction. My concern is that maybe fact will become even 'darker' than fiction.
The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
Yup. Except it's not just the left wing. BOTH parties are authoritarian.
I'm old enough to remember when the Republicans wanted to "get government out of our lives."
i.e. before they had all the power in government.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Well, okay.. it doesn't come as a big surprise that an organization that engages in a variety of criminal acts doesn't care about copyright laws either. Maybe they steal candy too. There's no point in making already illegal activities even more illegal. If they cared, they wouldn't do it anyway.
The article itself points out that they benefit from a range of different criminal activities. Further limiting domestic rights to fight foreign troublemakers doesn't seem to work.
see a Text Widget
My guess is that in two years (or less?), your right to think freely will also be considered a danger as it might be linked to terrorism in some way (as of yet to be discovered)...
You might call this a troll post, but seriously guys (and gals), doesn't anyone in the US Government think rationally anymore? Or is that also somehow an act of terrorism? Sheesh.
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to patent and copyright violations."
with apologies to
Thomas De Quincey
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Congress approves another 50 billion to enforce copyright in the name of "War on Terror".
Ya ya, I'm joking. But WHAT THE FUCK!!?? ?The War on Terror" is supposed to be just that; Fighting Islamic extremist who wish to do America harm. But noooo, those inside the beltway of Washington DC are using this as an excuse to fleece the population with some notion of security in order to hold on to power.
Yes, I voted for Bush because I trust the Republican party with national security more then the "other" party. But fact is, all those maggots in washington do nothing but fight among eachother in senate in order to maintain power at the expensive of those to voted them to such positions in the first place.
Arrrghhhhhh. I sware. Fuck em, my face it going to explode I'm so pissed!!!
Life is not for the lazy.
...We finally figured out how we can take back our land that was given to Israel. It's quite simple actually, we just pirate Episode III, and the U.S. government will become so wrapped up in finding out who did it, they'll completely forget the Middle East actually exists.
Yup. Except it's not just the left wing. BOTH parties are authoritarian.
Too true. How many bills had Bush vetoed?
I'm old enough to remember when the Republicans wanted to "get government out of our lives."
Yeah, they certainly enjoyed the Libertarian line until it came to their term in power.
Do you remember Reagan's acceptance speech?
"...Government *is* the problem"
How soon they forget.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
only outlaws will participate in piracy. So naturally the organised crime groups got involved. It's the same reason crime gangs run the drug trade, it's the same reason the Mafia controlled alcohol distribution in the Prohibition, and abortions before they became legal. Whenever legitimate businesses can't do something that's very much profitable, the illegitimate ones will. Piracy funds terrorism because it is illegal, not the other way around.
I am trolling
Well lets see, do they attack 3rd party providers and technology infrastructure that has nothing to do with copyright violations. Well .... Yes.
.... yes
... yes.
... yes.
Do they use strong arm bullying tactics, and threats to get their way. Well
Do they hate people who love freedom. Well
Do they they try to controll society by fear instead of facts. Well
They must be talking about themselves.
PS: Lets not use "their" terms. Piracy is where you board a ship and murder people, I think the appropiate term is information liberators.
In related news I think there might be some possibility that one or more associates of the 535 members of Congress may be sort of involved in child molestation... or something.
Even though my evidence is circumstantial, nay... entirely nonexistant, my testimony comes as Congress is not expected to consider new congressional ethics legislation this year. An invocation of child abuse, the trump card of modern American politics, could ease the passage of the next major restriction of congressional powers.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Stalin was a communist
Hitler was a fascist
Geez those those failed history are doomed to relive it. Stalin centralized everything, and kept it for himself. Socialists don't limit it to one person. Tony blair can be kicked out of office.
Hitler wanted everybody but blond haired, blue eyed people dragged out into the street and shot. he considered the USA's treatment of native indians a good move, just without enough force.
I am driving to Canada see you at the end of the world Bash. Why Canada nobody every thinks to invade Canada.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Bill: "We should really ban open source."
Random manager: "I know how to sway Congress, just tell them terrorists are using open source software, and they'll outlaw it in no time."
Bill: "Do they? Use open source, that is??"
Random manager: "I haven't met any terrorists, so I wouldn't know. The point is, they could."
Bill: "Good point."
Stalin was a socialist
Hitler was a socialist
Therefore, Stalin was Hitler
Those are of course both extreme examples. Hitler was also a fascist.
Whatever you think about socialism, in this case (and the cases of Hitler and Stalin) the problem isn't so much socialism as it is extremism.
Moderation in all things.
Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
...in all the blather about this and other idiocy infringing on our rights and privacies... there's been studious willful ignorance of the left wing's similar tendencies. Except, they are even bigger abusers of the "for the children" FUD card.
I just wanted to point that out before a lot of anti-Bush crud started up yet again. Just remember Clinton and his cronies were no different, really. Political correctness, their own version of terrorists in the form of "right-wing hate groups", more political correctness...
I'll say it again, whoever wins, we lose. Next elections, we need to be looking to wipe out both Republicans and Democrats at the polls. Trouble is, the third parties out there are either left of Stalin, loopy wingnuts like Perot, or worse altogether than that. Sadly, the common public doesn't seem to have much interest in a party with a rights, privacy, and constitutionalist bent. In short, the only people truly belonging in government are those who really don't want to serve in their heart of hearts and the people are prone to electing whoever grubs and scrounges for it the hardest.
So I don't expect these copyright issues to change, I don't expect the undue influence of major corporations or noisy political groups to lessen. I really don't. Sadly... So now we have another reason to infringe on the civil rights of our people. Did we really need another reason? Did they need one? Do they ever?
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
Last time I mentioned that the MPAA/RIAA were trying to equate copyright violations with terrorism this guy "Big Al B" kept pooh-poohing it saying I was overreacting. At least here's some more concrete evidence. Since we are now in the never-ending "War On Terror," the easiest way for corporate America to get the government to stop activities it finds unprofitable is to equate them with terrorism. Expect more of this as we slide down the slope.
And remember the old truism - just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
rooooar
JXTWDBJ
But you're right, that's a fucking joke
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
... is getting in my nerves. Why should the big corporations here have the right to meddle into our copyright laws, and then slap the name "terrorism" in the justification of doing so? The problem with these copyright laws that the MPAA/RIAA have been pushing is that they are forgetting our (the citizen's) end of the stick. They have been increasing the duration of copyrights and patents to the point that most of us would be dead before we see Mickey Mouse in the public domain (since they keep extending it). They have been increasing the punishments for people who have already been illegally copyright infringing (since when does uploading a movie to the Internet warrant a 3-year prison sentence?), and illegalizing things that should be under fair-use (e.g., the DMCA; why should the government tell me what to do with my DVDs in my own private use?). The politicians are ignorant about technical issues, the voters are ignorant about the politicians, and they're letting the corporations run amok. But where is our public domain? Where is our "fair use"? Where is our freedom?
It's like our government is being run by the Socialist Party and the Fascist Party. Both of them don't care about liberty and both don't want a small government. All they want to do is to continue manipulating the public until they reach their logical goals: a huge, authoritarian government. The only difference is that the socialists would justify it in the name of "helping the poor" and the fascists would justify it in the name of "moral values." Both would justify it in the names of "protecting the children" and "defending this country against terrorism."
Come on Libertarians and Greens. They will have to win the 2008 election if we ever hope for this country to be saved by this rampant corporatism and the move toward totalitarianism.
Before the Soviet Union collapsed, everything evil was blamed on communists, and any response, no matter how stupid, was deemed acceptible in order to fight communism. And it "worked". The Soviet Union's collapse occured after the US did all sorts of stupid things in the name of fighting communism, therefore the fall of communism *must* have been brought about by America's direct intervention!
Fighting terrorism is no different. And I quote:
Homeland Security is a bigger threat to the American way of life than anything Osama bin Forgotten can come up w/. Feel free to do something about it...
[o]_O
you're fighting terrorism! Don't take the chance that you're legitimately purchased DVDs are in fact funding terrorists. Get out there and seed one for Uncle Sam!
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And, as we all know, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a fully democratic state - oh, wait, it's not? Guess you can call something by a name that isn't truthful.
And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
Joe Stalin was dictator and he got his education in Tiflis Theological Seminary. Stalin used communist party to get into power and then killed all hard line commie competitors like Leon Trotsky during Great Purge. After that the proper name of his rule was Stalinism
Dyslexics have more fnu.
"Socialism," by which you mean some sort of statism, and capitalism are inseparable. The origin of the modern state is indistinguishable from the formation of modern capitalism. Capitalism requires a labor force that can be moved around, made abstract, is not too tied to one way of living or another, has a certain basic education. Capitalism in its modern form requires considerable state infrastructure to create currency, manage trade policy, control monetary policy, provide infrastructure for transportation, to prop the system up when it is about to break (see the airline bail-outs) and the like. The creation of the modern citizenry that owes primary loyalty to a nation-state is completely in line with the creation of a consumer/producer who sells his work in the market place. There is no capitalism without socialism.
You are all socialists in that regard. The question is a matter of a degree, and who gets "serviced" by these government institutions. The government is really a whole network of institutions, and just who those institutions work for is often up for grabs. Many conservatives are quite happy to evoke the idea of "laissez-faire" after they hide or ignore the ways in which the interests of the powerful are being buttressed by the state. When the state provides any services to the not-powerful, though, it gets tarnished as "socialism."
If the **AA spends wipes out common piracy, people won't be getting their free movies through BT, Kazaa or whatever. By the laws of human desire, the next cheapest way to get this content would be the knockoff DVDs right? Won't kicking people off of common piracy just make professional piracy more profitable?
Therefore fighting piracy funds terrorism.
Of course, this is a simplification, but offers a starting point. Next:
Stalin was a socialist. Hitler was a socialist.
Do you have any idea what you're talking about? The fact that "nazi" comes from "national-socialism" or that Lenin and Stalin claimed to have "embraced and extended" Marx's theories is circumstantial for the end result - everything must start somewhere. You might as well say that Napoleon was a republican, since he begun by serving the French Republic.
Now look up those definitions on your own if you don't trust these, but to spell it out for you: Hitler was the head of a fascist regime in its purest form ('extreme right wing' some would call it). Stalin was the head of an authoritarian regime whose ideology is usually known as Marxism-Leninism (or 'extreme left wing') - some people would say it was not communism, but a perverted form, while others will argue that it was indeed communism - and the logical conclusion of any attempt to follow the theoretical sequence capitalism -> socialism -> communism to its end.
To go back to the original point, in practice there is not a whole lot of difference in form between the two extremes, but you have to bear in mind that socialism means state ownership and in the extreme (communist) case no private property, while fascism means state control, which is a little less. Also, in theory socialism does not advocate an authoritarian government, but it can easily fall into one when pushed. Now, what we have here is neither
True, but you could simply say it in order to gain favor. And nationalizing industry right before you enter a war is a pretty good idea anyway, since you need to optimize for high production rates.
wanted for bombing a civilian airliner by the Venezuelan authorities, in which case the USA is happy to protect you.
Jolyon
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
These days the industry seems to make no distinction at all between the two groups, at least when it comes to talking to congress and the media.
I mean think: If they were really concerned about loss of money, their major campaign would be against the vendors that sell counterfit goods, not the end users. There hasn't been much research done on P2P, but the one empirical study that has been done by Harvard and UNC showed that P2P has no stasticaly significant affect on music sales. So one would think they'd be after the counterfitters with a vengence, while doing some research on the P2P phenomena to see if it is really harmful, and how they can turn it to their advantage.
Instead we see massive campaigns against online traders, we see commercials, we see them giving night vision systems to projectionists to look for DV cams (really), we see them filing lawusits left and right without checking their facts first and so on. It's pretty clear from their actions that they see P2P as bad or worse than counterfitting, and they are willing to spend as much or more to shut it down.
Thus I have no doubt P2P will be included in this. Not because there's any actual link to terrorism, but because playing the terrorism card is a great method for getting your way with government these days.
"Socialist" is not the word you are looking for.
:)
There was another political philosophy, developed by Bennito Mussolini, that fits what you are trying to describe much better.
Bennito Mussolini, when asked to describe his philosophy, described it as follows:
"Fascism could better be referred to as Corporatism, because it is a system whereby the Corporations and the State share power."
Fascism is a system whereby the state directs the overall direction of the economy, but leaves the ownership of industry in a select few private hands. Those who own factories that prefer to work in a strategic direction other than that mandated by the State, will be arrested, and their property siezed and given to private owners who will get with the program. While such a system may bear superficial resemblance to a "free market" system because of private ownership, it is not a free market system because of the cooertion placed upon the putative "owners" by the State.
In addition (see parrent poster's comments on "Socialism" below), many people become confused by the fact that another well-known Fascist government, that of 1930s-1940s Germany, was run by a political party known by the accronym "NSDAP", which stood for National Socialist German Worker's Party. Despite the name, the NSDAP (Nazis) were not Socialists, but modeled their political party very closely after Mussolini's Fascist Party.
The primary reason for the Nazi Party having the word "Socialist" in it's name, was that it's Leader and the person most closely affiliated with the Nazi party in modern memory, Adolf Hitler, was not a founding member of that party.
He was originally a veteran of the first world war, who was sent by the German Army to spy on the small bavarian group that was calling itself the "National Socialist German Worker's Party", because socialist groups had been fomenting rebellion in the post world war one chaos in Germany. Hitler reported back that the group was no threat, and that the name they had chosen was a misnomer.... and then proceded to use his gift of oratory to seize control of the small group and expand it.
The group, despite it's name, was avowedly anti-Socialist and anti-Communist... they also later became involved in some unpleasantness involving mass genocide and the almost complete destruction of large parts of Europe.
So, to correct your statement in the post above mine, please say "Fucking Fascist Bastards!" when refering to the RIAA and MPAA, as "Fascist" is the word that applies, not Socialist.
Thanks
I prove my case. Among The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party were:
- 11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
- 13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.
- 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.
- 15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.
- 18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.
When Hitler had his power he abolished unemployment in half year. Is that socialist enough.Dyslexics have more fnu.
There's a two-pronged attack against freedom going on in the US. The government is attacking the right to privacy, and the copyright cartel is attacking the right to free exchange of information. Is it really any surprise that they'd eventually figure out how to work together?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You made the common error of backing up your claim with facts. Please re-read the posting FAQ. Well-supported arguments are not allowed here.
If true, all that does is demonstrate further that everybody does it, and harsher laws will in the end only provoke a harsher backlash when the law finally catches up to reality.
When everybody violates a law through natural action, that just means the law is out of step with reality. The law either reflects an extreme ideology or serves a special interest out of proportion to concern for general welfare.
Being in U.S. Army, one of the interesting briefings we were given recently was that of protecting civil liberties. It spoke about several times in the recent past in which a supposed threat appeared to our nation, and our freedom of speech, due process, etc. were damaged from the nation's fear of the enemy, and how we should not just let it happen again.
It's something I had never thought about before, and I think it is amazing to see it happening in front of me, and not on some slides about what happened during the Cold War, or Vietnam, or World War II. When governments are given power outside of their proper jurisdictions to combat real threats, those powers will inevitably be used for unintended and improper purposes.
Attn: Mr. Sheik Osama Bin Laden
Dear Sir,
Your IP address 259.0.0.1 has been detected sharing on the 'Pear To Pear' program by the name of 'e-Jihad', the following files which have been determined by our trained human staff to be copyrighted works or material by music and motion picture artists:
ROT13 email encryptor_decryptor.com
Reparations of $1000 per song and $2000 per movie file hitherto listed are hereby requested before the 30th of next month, or our lawyers shall begin precedings.
Copyright infringement is a crime.
Flying cars, AI, Cybernetics
(Blade Runner, RoboCop, Total recall)
Instead of that what we have?
The classic case where the government became the lapdog of massive corporations and industries and the case where the government calls a terrorist anybody who don't agree with their corrupted attitude.
(Blade Runner, RoboCop, Total recall)
What a bummer!
What's next? Ill learn that coffee is people?
Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
Write your congressperson.
Write them a letter. With an envelope. And a stamp. It carries a tremendous amount of weight (it really does). Don't use a form letter. Don't type it. Don't call them. Write a legible, clean and concise letter expressing your viewpoint. Tell them that you do not agree with the upcoming changes to copyright laws. While you're at it, tell them you don't appreciate parts of the PATRIOT act becoming legitimate law either. Tell them that the erosion of your rights in the name of fighting "terrorists" isn't something that you're willing to tolerate anymore.
Instead of whining and bitching to people who--by and large--agree with you, write to someone who can make a difference.
When you're finished with that, write your senator as well.
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
Fascistic socialism is just communism.
Have you even read Marx? Communism is an economic system in which the people themselves collectively own the means of production; communism is *NOT* the strict authoritarian regimes you've come to know and hate. Fascistic socialism is Fascism. Communal ownership of factories and fields is Communism. I have no-the-fuck idea where you pulled *your* definition of communism from, but it sure wasn't from Marx, nor any valid political scientist.
Did anyone RTFA? Oh wait... this is Slashdot, nevermind. The "copyright violations" in question involve the fashion industry, ya know... making counterfeit watches, purses, etc. They aren't referring to P2P, filesharing, warez or anything of that sort.
.-.
A party name doesn't mean a lot. There wasn't much in common between the USSR Communist Party and the Italian Communist Party for example. And remember that Vicente Fox's party in Mexico is the Partido Revolucionario Institucional, the Institutional Revolutionary Party, proving that a party can live with about any name, even such a fantastic one.
Sometimes I wonder if the words "socialist, communist, liberal", derived and some others shouldn't be prohibited in the USA. Most people haven't any idea of their meaning.
Socialism is a form of economic production and distribution of wealth. It is not a form of government. Hitler was a totalitarian ruler. His economic policy may have had socialist retoric but what it accomplished was the aggrigation of wealth by the select few, hardly socialist in practice.
Also, don't be an idiot and say Nazi's were socialist because they called themselves socialist. Do you beleive everything the Nazi's tell you?
Kind Regards
"A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us w
not sure whether it's firefox or the html, but here's the actual link to the archived video of the testimony
a m
http://hsgac.senate.gov/audio_video/052505video.r
I have no-the-fuck idea where you pulled *your* definition of communism from
Oooh, ooh, ooh! I think I know! I think his definition of Communisim is based on every single instance of communist government that exist or ever existed. Yeah, that's probably were he got that. Not based on a book that was written by some quack who didn't understand human nature, and who wouldn't have been able to live under his own system anyway, if he weren't the one in control.
No no no, thats not the way it works..
Its more like:
" People who drive too fast use more oil, and terrorists get money from oil. So if you drive fast you are helping terrorist"
Did you say sarcasm?
I think you just made a real howler of a mistake there. I don't know whether you noticed or not, but you're using a party manifesto - rather than the actions of that party once in power - to determine their leanings. I don't like to bandy around terms like "hopelessly gullible" or "ridiculously naive" but you're kinda asking for it.
the layman's guide to computer science
Oh, so you mean that if an application turns out differently in practice than in theory, we can change definition of the name of the theory to match the product of the application?
By that strand of logic, democracy is mob rule (see France, c. 1790), anarchism is ideal communism (see current countryside Argentinian industry), and Catholicism is a form of execution (Spain, 1481).
Communism has never been instituted as designed in practice. There have been attempts at communism, but every attempt to establish a communist nation has been foiled by power-hungry buzzards like the leadership of the Bolshevik party, who lost their communist nature before 1920.
No communist state has existed; there has been failed attempts and the hangovers of failed attempts, but no communism.
Stalin's regime was totalitarian with a planned economy; not communist. Fidel Castro runs a friendly socialist dictatorship; not communist. Mao garnered rural support and instituted a bastardized communal economy with rampant corruption and a nefarious overbearing government; still not communist.
Instead of trying to redefine 'communism' as you see fit, why don't you describe regimes according to their true nature?
Before you go off on the people that 'have it wrong', keep in mind many were actually taught this way.
I have noticed this in several cases, where depending on where you grow up, and when, primary education teaches different versions of 'facts'.
Sad really, how the education system pushes their twisted agenda, quietly, over generations...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Let's read the Sheriff testimony shall we ? Here the link to the PDF
..I guess 20 years of War on Drugs have amply shown
..you would have seen criminal policing of terrorist activities.
.....Oh well, so as long as I'm not affected who cares about neighbours *waves little national flag*
I'll take some quotes that I find interesting, you're advise to read all the testimony for better comprehension
Victims of these organized criminal groups include the tobacco industry, luxury goods manufacturers, clothing companies, and the music and motion picture industries.
Indeed all those industry have something in common : a big difference between final sale price and production cost...meaning they have high profits for each unit they sell. Not surprisingly criminals can still produce something and sell the counterfeit good at a price
that is lower then the original good price..that's possible only if the real production cost is significantly lower then expected sale
price. Of course criminals can also use second quality raw materials for their production, but that's true of industries as well (that's why legitimate industries could use minimal open-2-review standards..but that's another problem)...most of the times consumers don't notice any significant difference, either because the difference is not significant to them or because it's factually minimal
Information in open sources indicates that across the globe anything that has a decent profit margin is being counterfeited.
And not surprisingly so..but I'd replace decent with "high"...decency is a rather vaporous measure.
During interviews, these suspects have admitted that IPR crime is attractive because of the high profit and minimal jail sentences. In the parlance of one suspect, "It's better than the dope business, no ones going to prison for DVDs."
So one would think "let's rise the bar, punish the crime and the crime will stop"
that this is not the case..drugs are still sold....while some argue that the total amount of drugs sold must have declined (because
of the seizures) they usually forget seizures make the business only marginally more expensive...and drugs are still sold.
There are mounting indicators of the involvement of terrorist groups and their supporters.
Criminal countefeit rings are those who benefit the most and they certainly don't want political/religious activists and extremists (therefore likely terrorists) among their ranks, because they're big noisy troublemakers attracting an hell of a lot of police AND government attention. One could argue that terrorism distract police from other duties, but assuming terrorist are profiting from the same rings of "ordinary" criminals
There must be the understanding that this crime affects all citizens through fraud, the diversion of tax revenue, and the empowerment of the criminal element.
I completely agree : let me remember Enron Corporation and other extremely dangerous criminal corporation who operate inside legitimate
markets..I wonder how many are hidden behind a curtain of weak or bought laws, complacent officials et al.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has, like most local agencies, suffered cutbacks in personnel over the past several years due to severe budget curtailments.
It did ? Amazing I would have tought boatloads of money were disbursed to police/firefighters after 9/11...mmhh one wonders were all the
money really went. Maybe at Homeland Security ? Maybe in Iraq ?
It all starts with the fact that it's legal for politicians to receive money. We'd call it corruption in the Netherlands.
Fix that fatal flaw in US government and you'll have fixed crap like this. In the long run.
It's really very simple, idiots. Most of you are programmers. You're supposed to see how decisions now influence events in the future but I dont' see anyone discussing the root cause of these things.
I don't think either democrats or republicans will do anything about finance reforms and While voting anything other than democrats will end up strengthening republicans (sherriffs of nottingham) in the PRESIDENTIAL elections.
There are still the votes for congress which are NOT winner take all. If you vote for guys like Ralph Nader for CONGRESS then your vote will put a couple of guys that are not corrupt in power. It's not the presidency but it's a start, a start on the way to finance reform. Only AFTER finance reform will you be able to get a non dem/rep president in office.
The goal is finance reform, the method is not dem/rep so vote something else for congressmen.
This is all my personal opinion, who agrees with me?
- -- Truth addict for life.
It's like saying the the crime rate would fall if everyone would just quit robbing, raping, and killing each other. Just because the statement is true, that doesn't make it useful. The "true communism has never been tried" argument is equally fatuous.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Enough.
Reading Boing Boing this morning, I was flabbergasted as I read the comments of Marybeth Peters, the United States Register of Copyrights. The circular logic and specious reasoning she employed made me question if she has the intelligence required to hold such a position. She raises the ugly specter of terrorism when she says, "although the information is sketchy at best, there have been a series of rumored ties between pirating operations and terrorist organizations." This supposed link is used to bolster the claim that we need more draconian Digital Restrictions Managament (DRM) to prevent casual copying. Yet, it is well known that any DRM can be circumvented given enough time, so piracy rings will still flourish; conversely, those exercising their fair-use rights or committing casual copyright infringement spend no money to do so and obviously do not provide any funds for terrorism. In light of this, perhaps Ms. Peters can explain how extending the reach of copyright would affect any rumored terrorism funding. Ms. Peters true feelings are perhaps best understood by this statement, "While it is not realistic to expect to eliminate all piracy, I do believe that we can continue to improve the global situation, to the benefit of authors and right-holders here in the United States and throughout the world." Evidently, she does not feel any need to protect the rights of consumers to watch or listen to their media. She further insinuates that attempts to make U.S. copyright laws more balanced are making it easier for criminal piracy rings to operate abroad.
It is hard to understand how some of the recent extensions to copyright control could possibly benefit citizens. For example, retroactively extending the length of copyrights had no consumer benefit; it prevented thousands of copyrighted works from entering the public domain. While this artificial monopoly has helped the media companies profit, it has not led to the creation of any new 75-year old books, movies or music.
Meanwhile, the large media companies continue to funnel money to politicians through the RIAA and MPAA. This money buys influence. This influence has led to a continual increase in the control of copyright owners and a corresponding decrease in the rights of citizens to watch and listen to their media. When congress passes laws contrary to the publc interest, one must examine what leads to this action. It seems apparent that the corporate money congress receives from the MPAA and RIAA members has encouraged them to pass laws that benefit only those companies. To combat this, citizens that want fair copyright laws need to emulate their corporate rivals. While copyright reform is in the public interest and would probably be widely supported with more information, it is not an issue that most people care a great deal about. However, there is a community of several hundred thousand citizens that do care a great deal about these issues. If these Americans could be coordinated to raise money, several million dollars would be raised to use towards supporting congressmen who believe in copyright reform. So that is what we will do.
This is a call to arms. I pledge $100 annually for 10 years to a political action committee (PAC) that works solely to reform copyright regardless of political affiliation, provided they collect a minimum of $1,000,000 in pledges for the first year. This PAC will work solely to change laws through the legislative system, but helping to elect sympathetic lawmakers, and not through the courts. The leaders of this PAC should be respected and recognized within the copyright reform community; reformers like Mark Cuban or Cory Doctorow would immediately give the PAC credibility and visibility. If we feel that copyright reform is important, it's time to put our money where our mouth is. How much is it worth to you to keep your TiVo legal, or your iPod? Copyright is a legislative creation and requires a legislative solution, and the best way to do that is a PAC. We need a lot of people to make this work, but if it can't be done right it might not be worth doing at all. Please join us.
you can bet this is going to be just another excuse to justify more draconian "copyright" laws that will undoubtedly infringe on the rights of americans. to fight those who would destroy American freedom, we Americans must remain FREE ourselves, for to do otherwise would be to FURTHER the cause of our enemies. yet, those very politicians who claim to fight for our protection are doing so at the COST of OUR freedoms. with these politicians left unchecked, "live free or die" will soon no longer be our choices. soon, it will be just "live or die." it seems to me that our enemies are winning without lifting a finger; OUR government is doing it FOR them.
Is that a shock? Terrorism is the new buzz word, slap it onto anything you don't like and it's instantly evil.
True, but counterfeiting (money, CDs, DVDs, designer labels, etc.) is popular with terrorists, its a source of income. Don't let your knee jerk reaction cause you to miss that detail. THings are more complicated than you suggest.
"Nazi" stands for "Nationalsozialismus" in German: IE, "National Socialist".
Yeah. So? Do you think the Democrats and Republicans are arguing over whether we should have direct or representative government? National Socialism was a name not a description. Hitler wasn't a socialist by any reasonable definition.
Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
Though some dhave died in war [...] Point is, as over zelous that Christians are, they want to PRESERVE life.
Your logic is as good as your spelling.
You can't take the sky from me...
Intresting thing to deduce from what I said. The problem that west has with Hitles is that he has been canonized as ultimate evil. Yet it is considered politically incorrect to look out how this evil functioned and gained it's power.
<p>
It gained power by:
<ol>
<li>frightening majority of it's people by telling them that nation was constantly threathened from inside and outside,
<li>convincing that majority that they as a nation had special place and destiny in the world,
<li>ridiculing opposite viewpoints and making them look unpatriotic.
</ol>
Nowdays people look out and despise flags with svastika and naziuniforms. Modern version of evil may gain it's power looking wery different but using the same method.
Dyslexics have more fnu.