Slashback: DRM, MPAA, ADSL

Slashback tonight with a response from Sony that removes the DRM 'rootkit' that has caused so much commotion, more hijinks from the MPAA, continued battery advancement, a followup to the UK broadband plan that had so many American's drooling, a catch in the recent Netflix settlement, and continued financial trouble for Silicon Graphics. Details on these stories and more, below.

It's not evil, but just in case... gmr2048 writes "Sony seems to have heard the commotion. They have offered a "Service Pack" to uninstall the DRM Rootkit. From the announcement: 'This Service Pack removes the cloaking technology component that has been recently discussed in a number of articles published regarding the XCP Technology used on SONY BMG content protected CDs. This component is not malicious and does not compromise security. However to alleviate any concerns that users may have about the program posing potential security vulnerabilities, this update has been released to enable users to remove this component from their computers.'"

Obviously they have never heard the adage about deep pockets. Dieppe writes "The MPAA is at it again. This time they're suing a grandfather who didn't cave into the $4,000 blackmail offer for movie downloads his grandson downloaded from iMesh. Four movies in total, and they already owned 3 out of 4 with the grandson deleting them soon after download. This time the MPAA wants "as much as $600,000" in damages. The article also claims that "illegal downloading" costs the industry $5.4 billion per year. Not sure where the MPAA comes up with these figures."

Longer life and no charge time. It doesn't come easy writes "A press release from A123Systems announces another new lithium-ion battery technology that promises to deliver unprecedented performance (according to them). The technology is suppose to deliver 10 times the cycle life and 5 times the power over conventional lithium technology, and only require 5 minutes to recharge to 90% capacity. This is certainly not the first breakthrough for lithium based batteries that has been promised. I wonder if there is a patent lawsuit in the making?"

Fast net connection, but only if you live nearby. conJunk writes "The BBC is running an article about the ADSL2+ that touted a 24MB/s net connection. It seems that this number in fact only holds up if you live across the street from the service provider."

Always read the fine print. JeremyWall writes "The recent Netflix class action settlement has a catch. While it is nice that the average subscriber will be upgraded for one month for free, if you read the fine print in section 4.2 of the long form [PDF Warning] of the settlement you find that you will be automatically charged for the higher subscription going forward. If you don't opt back out when you get their email, you are gonna get charged from then on. If you opt in for the settlement - check your email box regularly!"

Know when to hold and know when to fold. psykocrime writes "According to a recent press release SGI stock has been delisted by the New York Stock Exchange, as a result of falling below the NYSE's minimum share price." SGI, the former darling of the high-tech world, has been in trouble for a while, perhaps this is really the end.

Comments

Extortion by any other name.

[Trigun]

Leave it up to the MPAA to go after a grandfather. Where is the accountability for this group? Who do we direct our hatred at?

Let's give the fuckers a name, and a face. No more of this MPAA, let people know who is behind it, which artists are in cahoots with this. Then we'll see how much we can really cost the industry.

Not Sued For Downloading!

[QuantumG]

According to TechDirt the grandfather was sued for offering movies for download. Claiming that he isn't liable because his grandson was the one doing it, not him, is about as rediculous as saying that he's not liable if someone cracks their head open on faulty steps in his house because his grandson lives there not him. He owns the line, he's liable for any copyright infringement performed from that line. And no, it doesn't matter if it wasn't his son but some hackers who broke into his computer; if a burglar breaks into your house and puts his back out trying to lug away your safe, you're still liable. Much like copyright law in general, personal liability is insane and should be abolished.

Re:Not Sued For Downloading!

[cpt kangarooski]

Actually, parents are rarely ever responsible for the torts of their children. If MPAA can't prove that the grandparent did it, in light of his claim that it was his grandchild who did it, then he will indeed get off the hook.

There are indirect forms of copyright infringement, but they would still require that the grandchild be shown to be the direct infringer, and would require more of the grandfather than merely owning the telephone line. I'm afraid that your grasp of the law remains, as ever, poor.

Additionally, while I would like to see significant reform of copyright law, I don't think that we're at a point where it makes sense to abolish it.

Sony's Rootkit!? How about Boycot Sony!

[GecKo213]

I'm just a bit curious... Does the patch keep the rootkit permanently disabled and removed? It seems to me that if we put a deviant Sony CD back into our computer that the rootkit would just be reinstalled. Then do we have to run the patch again? This is rediculous. I've do not intend on purchasing any music that has the SONY lable on it. This to me is just plain stupid. What gives Sony the right to install deviant software on "MY" pc and then make it stealth so that I don't know it's there. As far as I'm concerned I think that's the lowest a company can go. That's stooping to the level of those bastard red headed step children Spammers/Spyware installer/Virus/worm pushing assholes.

I'm to the point now watching this rediculous attempt from Sony to attach it's controls on something that I purchase the rights to use/listen/backup and trying to enforce through deviant means. What is this rootkit supposed to do!? They just wanted to install it for the Hell Of It? Nope, it's supposed to reinforce their stupid DRM bullshit and keep me from listening to the music that I paid for. I'm to the end of my rope. I think that there needs to be a group or mutiple groups put together that should purposefully break what Sony is trying to do. I've been years out of the programming/Computer industry and thus lack the skills to do it, but I think that we should form Anti-DRM, anti-Sony groups to demolish the protection that they put on their stupid CD's. I will not from this day forward purchase anymore music from Sony until they drop their Bullshit practices. I call for a Boycot of Sony's Music. I'm not sure what one man can start, but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand around any longer and watch Sony impose itself on me! They want me to buy their shit, then they want to enforce by deviance their policy, and after all that they hijack my PC for WHo knows what! Ahhh! Time for a Revolution. I love my PS2, but am refusing to play it again until SONY stops all this Bullshit! No more video games purchased either. Damn you Sony! Leave me the Hell alone! Stay off of my Computer and my CD's! Damn you!

With that said, I feel somewhat better, but am still disturbed deep inside that they would have to stoop to that level to try and enforce their protection. Maybe they don't realize that as the sound comes out of the speakers it can be recorded with a MIC and pirated that way, or through LINE OUT. Damn them. Rant Over.

WHAT???

[Brain_Recall]

This component is not malicious and does not compromise security.

Say WHAT? ... I ... This.... WOW.

I cannot belive that they can say this. They released a rootkit, bloody damn general purpose rootkit, and it doesn't comprimise security? IT HIDES AN ENTIRE SUBSET OF FILE NAMES! With this rootkit installed, ANY file or folder starting with $sys$ is immmedately hidden from the Windows API. People are already using it to hide hacks for WoW. What happens if someone distributes a trojan, tells them to run Sony's rootkit to make sure they don't get caught by Warden, and the thing disappears and the user never knows the better.

Sony screwed up beyond reproach with this, and that comment just makes me scream.

How to really hurt them

[TheLoneDanger]

As has been noted by many others before on the MPAA and RIAA, they don't necessarily want just money (although of course, they want that too), they want CONTROL. By controlling distribution channels, they guarantee profitability in perpetuity. So, the real way to hurt them is to use their attempts at control as fuel for the very revolution they are trying to quash.

Spend more money on "independent" filmmakers and musicians. Listen to more live music. Tell people why they should do the same (they've given us tons of ammo). Spread the music and films via P2P when the creators allow it. If you are a musician or filmmaker, see if you can do it without the studio and use the net to find your audience.

Thinking about profits and money is short term thinking, which many Slashdotters accuse the MPAA and RIAA of. I don't think they are actually that stupid.

Goodbye SGI

[stox]

A very bad sign in SGI's response to delisting on the NYSE. Unless a company is in deep trouble, they would normally do a reverse split to bring the stock price back over $1. In this case, chances are that SGI will be filing bankruptcy in the near future and cancelling all existing equity. Then create new shares in a debt for equity swap. No need to bother with a reverse split, since they would be delisted when they went bankrupt anyway.

Pretty sad, SGI pioneered some wonderful technology in its time. Too bad they never figured out business rule #1, ideas don't mean squat unless they make money.

Re:"Service Pack"

[Ruprecht the Monkeyb]

So, we're mostly techies here. We know what it costs to do tech support, and I bet most of us have gotten good at blowing through the first tier by pretending to do the stupid stuff we'd already done before we called them. So, everyone make 10 calls to Sony, spend a half-hour drinking coffee and jerking around their tech people.

Re:24mbit/sec?!?!?!

[InvalidError]

For 200', wouldn't it be simpler to simply run ~$30 worth of Cat5E to the customer and not have to use a DSLAM + Modem? 100Mbps full-duplex, only need a managed switch to fix per-port bandwidth limits and port isolation policies.

Do not blame lawyers

[caitsith01]

IAAL working in IP and media law and I take strong exception to your attitude. Lawyers are not the cause of this problem. Lawyers are paid money to argue for their clients interests (or perceived interests). If the MPAA pays money to a good lawyer and gives them instructions, that lawyer goes and researches the law, determines what tactics will be effective, and ASKS THE CLIENT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS. It is the client who decides to go ahead and sue a grandfather for $400K, and the client who decides to lobby Washington.

If you want to obliquely suggest killing any group of people because you think this will solve the problem I suggest you review and include (in reverse order):

4. Artists who continue to participate in the corrupt entertainment industry

3. The MPAA for ruthlessly trying to protect its own profits and interests

2. Politicians for being so pathetically weak that they can be bought and sold like prostitutes

1. Yourself and everyone else who does not fall into 4, 3 or 2 but who (a) funds the MPAA and the artists by buying their crap, (b) funds the politicians with their taxes, and (c) allows the politicians to get away with it by being politically disengaged and reelecting them all the time.

Do not blame lawyers. In my experience most lawyers tend to be more sympathetic to the views of people like us who are unhappy with these stupid laws and stupid lawsuits than they are to the views of organisations like the MPAA. Most lawyers I know think that the DMCA and its international equivalents are idiotic and outrageously biased, for example. But lawyers are part of an adversarial system, and their duty is to represent the interests of those who retain them to the best of their abilities. So instead of attacking lawyers, why not pony up some cash for your beliefs and help the EFF or someone like that get their own kick ass legal team.

I am so sick of people who bitch about the corporations owning everything but ignore the fact that the corporations only have as much power as you, the consumer, gives them. And I am SO SICK of people bashing lawyers, who tend to be progressive, intelligent, and politically and socially engaged individuals (real lawyers, not ambulance chasers).

Re:Do not blame lawyers

[masdog]

That's bull. You might be paid to represent a client, but its not like they're putting a gun to your head and forcing you to work for them. If lawyers are sick of the stupid lawsuits and laws that keep people down, then why do they keep working for these organizations?

You have other choices. You can quit. You can find a new firm to work for. You can start your own firm.

Re:Do not blame lawyers

[lordofthechia]

" its not like they're putting a gun to your head and forcing you to work for them." Thank you! I can understand there are some cases where someone *has* to represent an individual (criminal cases, simple disputes, etc). But c'mon, if someome tells you they want to hire you for X/hr to utterly devastate someone and take all their savings, kids college funds, their house, etc, for as stupid of a reason as this, would the GP *have* to take the job? I'm sure as hell wouldn't. I think this is silly that folks dont' think that they should be held accountable for their employers/clients actions.

If you do it, regardless of wether you get paid or not to do it you are morally responsible. And I personally have quit jobs (twice) because I found my employer actions/buisness objectionable and or morally aprehensible. In both cases I ended up with a job that was lower paying but in the end more satisfying. I didn't have to go home knowing that I spent the whole day working for someone who lives to take complete advantage of their customers.

I think the best argument I've heard for employee accountability has to be from Clerks:

DANTE: My friend is trying to convince me that any contractors working on the uncompleted Death Star were innocent victims when the space station was destroyed by the rebels.

WORKER: Well, I'm a contractor myself. I'm a roofer... Dunn and Reddy Home Improvements. And speaking as a roofer, I can say that a roofer's personal politics come heavily into play when choosing jobs.

RANDAL: Like when?

WORKER: Three months ago I was offered a job up in the hills. A beautiful house with tons of property. It was a simple reshingling job, but I was told that if it was finished within a day, my price would be doubled. Then I realized whose house it was.

DANTE: Whose house was it?

WORKER: Dominick Bambino's.

RANDAL: "Babyface" Bambino? The gangster?

WORKER: The same. The money was right, but the risk was too big. I knew who he was, and based on that, I passed the job on to a friend of mine.

DANTE: Based on personal politics.

WORKER: Right. And that week, the Foresci family put a hit on Babyface's house. My friend was shot and killed. He wasn't even finished shingling.

RANDAL: No way!

WORKER: I'm alive because I knew there were risks involved taking on that particular client. My friend wasn't so lucky... You know, any contractor willing to work on that Death Star knew the risks. If they were killed, it was their own fault. A roofer listens to this...[taps his heart] not his wallet.

Re:Do not blame lawyers

[jafiwam]

Any and all lawyers that work for the RIAA or MPAA are free to take other employment by choice any time they like. No chains are on their ankles, there is no Saddam to burn their families alive if they try to leave. Remember, THEY cash in on this grandpa too.

Sayihg "lawyers suck" is simply a less articulate way of saying "if you work for an immoral company willingly, you are also immoral" akin to perhaps PETA's view of factory farm workers or labratory technicians. Or maybe even some of the christian 'right' folks who blow abortion workers and security workers to smithereens because of what THEY do for women's health.

It's a part of our culture to partially blame the workers for the things the corporations do. After all, the corporations exist as a sum of the workers in the first place.

So, going picking or possibly bankrupting grandpa and grandson for downloading stuff they already own..._downloading_ not distributing will get backlash from the public.

So I give you a resounding FUCK YOU. Lawyers are evil when they participate in this stuff. They can quit or change firms any time. Sooner or later a pack of geeks will gleefully do the same stuff to these lawyers what they do to spammers and there's not a damn thing your misplaced righteousness bullshit can do to stop it.

Re:Do not blame lawyers

[steelfood]

I think, as most siblings have pointed out already, the most common issue with lawyers are their morals, or the lack thereof. Decent people will not help others ruin the lives of senior citizens or 12 year olds willing, and if they do so unintentially, they will attempt to make amends. So any decent person in the position of the MPAA/RIAA's legal representative would immediately quit. Let's just assume for the sake of argument that these people are decent human beings. Then why haven't they done this? Obviously, the money's too good. And that is where the problem comes in. There's something very wrong about sacrificing morals for dough. I think it's called being immoral, but there might be a more appropriate word.

Maybe, you would argue that these are the bad apples--the ones that give the rest of the lawyers a bad name. Then for the love of all that is good, go and defend your occupation and your reputation, if you think it is worth your time and efforts defending. Fly yourself over there and give legal council to those people--for free. That's what decent people do. If they see something unjust happening to other people, and it is within their power to stop it, they do it. If someone intentionally releases a bad patch that introduces security holes into a popular open-source application, you'd better believe that there'd be a patch out to fix the problem and an immediate blacklisting of the person from the FOSS community the moment people find out about it. Yeah, you argue, but it doesn't cost much to release a software patch. To help these victims of corporate greed would require spending time and money, probably better spent putting food on the table and the kids through college. Besides, vacation time is limited. So I guess lawyers don't mind having their good name tarnished, so long as they still have work.

All in all, the behavior of your average, everyday lawyer is undefendable and any attempts to do so is just more excuses as to why it isn't pragmatic to be good, decent, humane, or noble--especially not to those who need the most help--on top of being intelligent.

I noticed you listed intelligent, progressive, and interesting as being a part of a lawyer's makeup. That's probably true, since it does take a certain amount of intelligence and education afterwards to get through law school. However, that says nothing about their morals. Hitler and Stalin were probably just as intelligent, interesting, and from their perspective, progressive, and perhaps even more so than the average lawyer. That doesn't mean they shouldn't've been opposed, violently or otherwise. And yes, lawyers haven't really doing anything attrocious as the two aforementioned personages. But to call draw the analogy between them and Nazi or Soviet Party members wouldn't be too far off. After all, what they did wasn't their fault; it's their superiors' (the clients in the case of the lawyers) orders and they're just following orders.

Oh, BTW, if you think that by my standards, a lot of people in this world are bad, then yes, I would agree. And there are people who are worse (the ones who are actually making the decisions to sue 12 year olds), but that still doesn't make the other people bad. I wouldn't necessarily agree with killing all of them, but I would do everything I can to not be like them.