Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Kills California Anti-Pretexting Bill
IAmTheDave writes "A California anti-pretexting bill that got unanimous support in the state senate with a vote of 30-0 was struck down after heavy last-minute lobbying by the MPAA. The bill aimed to make deceptive 'pretexting' (lying) to gain personal information on another person illegal. The MPAA told legislators 'We need to pose as someone other than who we are to stop illegal downloading,' and thus killed the bill when it came up for a final vote. California passed a much narrower bill that 'bans the use of deceit to obtain telephone calling records, and nothing else.' In a final 'think of the children' bid, the Califonia Association of Licensed Investigators also opposed the bill, saying it needed to be able to use pretexting to help find missing children, among other things."
To paraphrase Ed Harris in the movie, History of Violence, "...how come the MPAA is so good at killing bills?"
The answer is that succesful politicians are not developed, they're bought.
I never realized the MPAA was a law enforcement organization.
I wonder what else they need in order to enforce laws. Prisons? Armed agents? The power to arrest and seize property?
It's the only way to make sure the Legislators even PRETEND TO TRY to give a shit about us.
We're fucked.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Seems odd when a committee (in this case, an entire senate) deems a law pragmatic enough it goes up for vote with a unanimous (30-0) sendoff and subsequently because of special interest (MPAA allegedly) the final vote skews not only away from unanimous but actually flips the sentiment (bill loses 27-33).
Consider the gist of the bill (from the article):
This means the MPAA and others argued for the right to make "false, fictitious or fraudulent" statements...! Amazing!
There are legitimate ways for the entertainment industry to obtain data when prosecuting alleged piracy activity. This isn't one of them. So, the practice (pretexting) remains legal and the MPAA prevails in yet another seamy side of big business buying milquetoast government.
I've lost the ability to record FM on my Creative Zen with my last firmware update... ostensibly, though I can't confirm it because of industry pressure on Creative -- it was one of the features I bought it for.
The threat continues to loom for providers of excellent technology like TiVo to rein in their features, also ostensibly under pressure.
The better the technology gets, the less they want us to use it.
But now companies and PIs can too? Can the average guy 'pretext' as well, or will he get punished? I can't really tell from the article.
Makes me want to break more laws....let's see...what can I do that has a low chance of getting caught...
Blar.
I don't see a problem with pretending to be someone else, as long as you have the appropriate licenses/credentials.
i.e.:
Pretending to be a everyday/normal person - fine
Pretending to be a Police Officer without being in the employ of a police agency, or a CPA without the actual degrees and licenses: bad
I do not agree with falsifying data either:
"I downloaded these files from the user's hard drive"
if you did this and have absolute proof - fine
if you didn't do this and/or "fudged" the numbers, you need jail time.
what parts of these, with respect to other laws, are impacted by this bill and the changes made?
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Evidence that is obtained by any party that does not follow this rule should be inadmissible!
If you need to stop something illegal, it shouldn't be necessary to lie and impersonate someone to prevent the activity. Why is it necessary to impersonate another to "think of the children" or to stop illegal downloads? If you have proof of a wrong doing, you take it to a judge, get a warrant, and put an end to it. If you don't have proof, then lets end all the witch hunts.
Isn't it already a crime to pass yourself off as someone else? I thought it was fraud.
I could never figure out which was worse:
-Someone lying to a third party and social engineering their way into position of trust.
-Or that third parties seem to be more than willing to believe someone on the other side of the phone is whoever they claim to be.
I guess they can make laws to outlaw pretexting (so only criminals do it), or they can let civil lawsuits award large damages to corps that readily believe anyone on the other side of the phone.
sadly I can imaging who's side the lawmakers are on.
...they are state's Orwellian "Mincopy". This is just wrong.
Anyone else curious about what Kevin Mitnick has to say concerning this?
Living With a Nerd
As we've seen, it's been proven to be not broad enough for our needs.
How about this:
Amendment $NEXT_AMMENDMENT_NUM
The right of The People to Personal Privacy and Security and Control of any information or data directly created by them, or by their indirect acts shall not be infringed by either any Governmental Body, Federal, State, or Local,, OR ANY ARTIFICIAL LEGAL ENTITY created by any act of any Governmental Body.
(That should take care of the damned Corporations. )
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
I'm not a lawyer, so please explain this stuff to me.
Also it is perfectly legal to have an alias that you are well known for. You can even sign documents under that alias... (At least in Canada... You don't need to officially change your name to go with your "married name" for example)
So perhaps pretexting law deserved to be killed based on the fact that there is little to no harm in it...
www.jmagar.com
-
And people say the European Commission is corrupt...
--- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
Wouldnt' any bill allow for exceptions like the use of pretexting for criminal investigations? Seems like a pretty flimsy excuse for downgrading the bill.
So it all just comes down to who has the biggest pockets.
Current breakdown of the California State Senate - 25 DNCers, 15 GOPers. But I thought only GOPers who bow to big business?
Wake up people, no party is free of Big Business.
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
Either fraud is illegal or it is not. I am sick of the government carving out exceptions for things for itself and its cronies.
IANAL, but I can read and it's not fraud to lie about your name.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
It's not a bill, but a party. The Libertarian Party is all about the government leaving us alone as much as possible. If that's what you believe, then you should vote Libertarian.
after heavy last-minute lobbying by the MPAA
How did state senators know that they were really MPAA lobbyists?
[Insert pithy quote here]
You can also leverage the information you got illegally to find a legal path for how you knew it. A private investigator may illegally tap your phone, which is inadmissible. When he hears where your illicit rendezvous is, he'll take perfectly admissible pictures of you there.
It's not legal, but unless you catch them at it, you can't do much about it. And they've still got the pictures, which are still admissible evidence.
"At least there, they've managed to retain some semblence of socialism"
You complain about the rulers having too much power, and then you express desire for socialism (which is all about empowering the rulers). That is not consistent.
Where were you when the voynix came?
The only problem with that is that it will never happen for the same reasons that this bill was killed: it requires politicians to do what is in the best interests of the citizens, instead of what is in the best interests of their reelection campaign (read getting money).
"Need a "Right to be Left The Fuck Alone" Amendment"
.....
We have those rights. Only that most people are against one or more of them on the grounds of "Protecting the children" or "Minorities" or "Public Safety" or
Next time the government says you can't have This or That kind of gun, nor carry one without permission of the government, stand up and say "LEAVE ME ALONE" along with the few remaining gun toting wackos. See where your "rights" are.
Live Free or Die!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
That's true of most laws. Stuff like the Patriot act, the "assault weapons" ban and the DMCA are all examples of laws that don't trouble a large number of people but under some circumstances and bad interpretation of these laws they could easily turn into monsters. Hell, the assault weapons ban was so open ended that they could have made BB guns illegal with little or no legal resistance.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
After reading this article, I am less inclined to trust a stranger or someone I don't know well. I will assume they are lying to me and I will not help them for fear of being taken advantage of.
Shit like this degrades society...smells like 'ends justify the means' to me and I don't like it.
Blar.
In a final 'think of the children' bid, the California Association of Licensed Investigators also opposed the bill, saying it needed to be able to use pretexting to help find missing children, among other things."
Riiiight. Because a carve-out for protecting kids would just have been impossible to write in.
It couldn't be that the real money in PI work might be in divorce/adultery, paparazzi-ing, or industrial disputes.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
On the one hand we have the RIAA trying entrap media pirates under false pretenses. On the other, we have Universal trying to extort royalties for mp3 player manufacturers because they are "repositories for stolen music": http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/29/ 2328222. So I'm supposed to pay a tax on my mp3 player to keep the RIAA at bay, and then go home and not download free music? Sounds like a pretty sweet deal.
Last I checked, this was called the fruit of a poisoned tree/vine (or something along those lines). Anything legally gained from an illegal event is not admissable in the courts. Proving that they started off illegally will be the problem though.
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
*SIGH* Back to Intro Poli Sci 101. The Constitution and its Ammendments apply ONLY to the regulation of the behavior of the US Federal Government and the actions of the States. Individuals (including corporations) are held to a much looser set of rules. And with the actions of the SOCTUS relating to so-called "poison fruit" testamony and evidence, the 4th Ammendment is on its way out too.
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
Last I checked, this was called the fruit of a poisoned tree/vine (or something along those lines). Anything legally gained from an illegal event is not admissable in the courts. Proving that they started off illegally will be the problem though.
The fruit of poisoned tree and rules of evidence generally only apply to law enforcement or people acting on their behalf (i.e: informants). If I break into your house to rob you and in the course of doing so discover evidence that implicates you in a murder then turn myself into the authorities, odds are that they will be able to use the evidence that I discovered at trial, whereas if they had broken into the house themselves it would generally not be admissible.
Of course if the cops put me up to breaking into your house to begin with then it's also not admissible -- I was acting as an agent of law enforcement and they presumably know better.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
We all need to give up a little of our privacy so that we can secure the interests of our economy. And by our economy, I mean the few people who continue to control our lives for profit while the middle class declines into poverty and debt.
I can still pretend to be your bank to get your information, what a relief, I don't need a real job yet.
I say that "pretexting" should be ILLEGAL. They can work through the legal system to "protect" their "property".
If your car was stolen, the cops would take a very unfavourable view of you impersonating a cop in order to retrieve it.
Deceit in these cases is practiced to obtain information disclosures. It is an imposition of the deciever's wishes over those of the deceived. The question should, then be this: does the deciever have a fundamental right to the information he is seeking?
So, outlaw pretexting except where it is used to obtain information that, if it were in the posession of an officer of the law, that officer would have a duty to disclose.
For example, you are a police officer who finds out Mr. X, who is in a custody dispute with Mrs. X, has kidnapped the children. You would have a duty to disclose to Mrs. X the whereabout of those children.
However suppose you know Mr. X is having an affair with Ms. Y. You have no duty to tell Mrs. X this, and depending on how you found out you may have a duty not to tell.
In the case of the MPAA, if they are seeking evidence that people are illegally sharing materials whose copyright they hold, this is information to which they have a well established legal right. However, they have no right to other kinds of information they could gain by pretexting, such as who your friends are.
By creating exceptions to a law against preteting, we are in a sense deputizing private parties to conduct searches by force. This entails some invasion of privacy. An officer of the law may obtain sensitive private information while executing a warrant, but if the information is not relevant to some sort of crime he may not disclose it. Neither should a private party acting under an exception to the law against pretexting be allowed to go on a fishing expedition.
Therefore groups using pretexting should be forbidden to use any information they gain as a result unless it is relevant to an exempted purpose.
So, if a record company looks for copyright infringement for its copyrights and finds infringement on another company's copyright, that is disclosable. They can't, however, create a database of music preferences for marketing purposes.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Like in the movie "Enemy of the Sate", someone should pretext as the lawmakers and get their phone records. Maybe this will make them understand the gravity of the situation.
Any ideas ?
And shouldn't the wealthy be fairly powerless to affect many people beneath them with an inverse proportion of wealth vs. control over others?
Oh, you mean like... investing in industries and institutions that employ millions of people? I suspect that the high quality nerds that work at, say, Google or Pixar or Red Hat are quite pleased that people who've earned a lot of money have turned around and pumped it into those great projects/enterprises. And all of the people that benefit from doing business with, or providing services to all of those people are probably glad that those investments continue to be made.
I'd head off to the U.K
What's stopping you, really? That you don't do anything that enough people consider valuable enough to command a paycheck that will support your standard of living while also paying the much, much higher taxes? Or, unlike the untold thousands of actually poor people that immigrate to the UK and other western European nations from all over the world, you're actually noble enough to recognize that unless you do do something particularly valuable or are willing to work two or three jobs, you're just going to be living off of the more industrious work of the smaller minority that actually breath some life into the economy and subsidize the socialized niceties you're lusting after?
You say "If I could only make enough money..." without even a hint of what makes you think that, once transplanted in the UK, you'd make more money there (to pay the higher taxes, and more still, to get over how unhappy you are that you're not making enough now). So, really, you just want to go somewhere that will give you more of someone else's money than you're getting here. I do love, though, that you're not apologetic about it: that's the real cure for it - the first step is admitting that you want me to feed you. That you're proud of that is a little baffling, but at least you're saying it out loud.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
We're fucked.
Look on the bright side. They just made sure social engineering to obtain personal information on politicians perfectly legal. I think it's time to show them what legal advantages they have given their people. Anyone care to open a public database online in California with government officials personal information? Start with judges, city councel, and the like. Think of the children. Listing all the children's DOB, SSN, school, home address, IM username, ISP, IP address, and such should be a good wake up call to the error they just enabled.
The truth shall set you free!
Somehow I don't think it can be easily or casually justified to collect evidence of a crime and/or infringement through deceptive or inappropriate measures. Somehow HP and the parties involved are in serious hot water over their use of pretexting (and by that I mean lying to acquire information to which they are not legally entitled) among other things. I think that if the MPAA were to use the same tactics, it should be equally illegal. So at the very least, if they were to present evidence in court or even as part of a plea or settlement, they should have to disclose the techniques they used to gather the information as proof that they did so legally, ethically and morally.
... IF the judges in cases involving the MPAA remember that, in order to get this proposed law defeated in California, the MPAA essentially admitted that it lies and falsifies information in the course of a piracy investigation >:)
I can see the court transcript now: Judge: And how, exactly, were you able to obtain this evidence? **AA: Your honor, we lied and falsified information, but everything we tell you is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...honest. Judge: Riiiiiiiiight.....
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
This will only hurt the poor. The rich will have the money necessary to setup "blinds" so that they can say, "I got this information from informant X, who I can only contact via e-mail. I'm legally entitled to have it, although I don't know how X got it or where in the world X is."
The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
In NYC BB guns ARE illegal. So are airsoft guns. And what's even funnier, is that there is actually no license under which you CAN own a BB gun or an airsoft gun in NYC. You can get a license for a real firearm, but not a replica.
Yet another case where a corporation has illegally (IMHO) lobbied against a bill that would had been good for the citizens. A bill like this should clear committees then if it fails in house/senate go a voter ballot item. The bill was written for the good of the citizens - it should be voted on by the citizens if it passes legal checks (such as that it does not violate state/federal constitutions).
"Corporations have been enthroned...an era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people...until wealth is aggregated in a few hands...and the Republic is destroyed" - Abraham Lincoln
1. I think businesses do far more evil than good
2. I think that anyone who is in a lesser situation than I am deserves my help and support if they ask me for it
3. I think that anyone in a better situation than mine should help me if asked
It's just the polite thing to do. Sadly most people are greedy and selfish and will take more than they deserve. This cuts through from the wealthiest to the poorest people on the entire planet. Therefore it's not something that people can self-regulate. They need control. Prefereably by a system that doesn't benefit from giving preferential treatment to the rich and powerful. So let's see... that knocks out both business and government.
Regarding the reasons I can't currently afford to leave the U.S. I like how you assume that I can't do it because I'm somehow unskilled or stupid. That's the implication in your words. However, you are wrong. I can't because I prefer to work for something I consider to be a civic responsibility. I work in IT at a major metropolitan library system. We are non-profit. This means I make less than I would in the private sector for the same work. But I also know that the level of IT support I provide and the systems I work on (server end mostly) give less priveleged people access to tons of resources they wouldn't otherwise have access to. We have bearly 30 branches in the inner city that serve poor black communities. This is the RIGHT thing to do. I don't care that I'm making less than I would in the corporate world because at least I know I'm doing good for people in lesser positions than mine. I couldn't live with myself working for a big business that I know is doing things to hurt the poor. That is what most businesses do. Any clearer now?
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
"was struck down"--I thought that phrase was generally used when a court invalidates or rules against passage of some particular legislation.
It sounds like what happened here was that a draft version of the legislation was initially agreed upon was pared down to make it more limited.
MPAA influence or not, the version that went forward was more prudent and less likely to be actually struck down, indicative of how the legislative process is actually SUPPOSED to work.
Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
"You misspelled "some state". Hope this helps, corn boy."
I'd better get back to husking the ears, then, my erstwhile foe.
Where were you when the voynix came?
If you gather information like this on a politician or government employee, just the act of doing so is considered a threat. The rest of us subjects are fair game, apparently.
Property law should use #'EQ, not #'EQUAL.
The MPAA told legislators 'We need to pose as someone other than who we are to stop illegal downloading,' and thus killed the bill when it came up for a final vote.
To be more accurate, one would say:
"The MPAA told legislators that it needed this bill killed, presumeably either threatening to pull their financial contributions to said legislators, or offering contributions if the legislator agreed to vote the way they wanted. The MPAA approached sufficient legislators to find enough of them that a sufficient percentage were willing to sell their vote to kill the bill. Like well-paid prostitutes, they did exactly what was asked and thereby prevented the bill from passing."
The MPAA can't kill any bills. It takes whores in the legislature to do that.
-Styopa
Clearly, we don't want people calling up our phone or credit card companies, pretending to be us, and getting private information. That's bad.
But, we also don't want to prevent law enforcement from pretending to be a drug dealer in order to bust drug dealers, or pretending to be a kiddie porn trader in order to bust kiddie porn producers. On a more germaine front, we probably don't want it to be illegal for you to register at the hotel as John Smith when your real name is Ed Johnson.
It sounds like this is a case of a law with a very popular goal that was written in way, way, way too broad a manner, and caught up a lot of things that shouldn't have been included. This shouldn't be a concept that's so hard to understand for Slashdotters, who are quick to point out when laws proposed by groups we don't like have broad, nasty consequences.
Just because the MPAA was the most organized party pushing for the law to be changed doesn't mean that (necessarily) the law didn't need to be changed.
paintball
Really, I would presume if you said "I'm George W Bush," and you're not, that would be fraud. Pretexting is a very specific case of fraud (using a fraudulent or "stolen" identity, in nowspeak, to obtain information which is not otherise available to you). Pretexting is fraud, but not all fraud is pretexting.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
So if a private investigator uses pretexting to get my medical records, can I sue both the PI and the MPAA?
Think the other way..
Pretend to be a specialist physician and ask for the head of the MPAA's, city councel members, Govener's, etc., medical records because you need them to evaluate his condition. Post results online. They made it legal for the first part. Posting online might not be legal, but it makes a great protest move. Pass the information of the protest to the local press.
The truth shall set you free!
Well, I'm so glad you are here to save us, with rambling 1000-word rants without a point or a press of the enter key.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
Really, I would presume if you said "I'm George W Bush," and you're not, that would be fraud.
I'm sure that somewhere in the nation, there is someone who is named George W Bush who is not the president. What would be wrong with using that name?
Pretexting is fraud, but not all fraud is pretexting.
Some pretexting is fraud.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
That last minute heavy lobbying is the worst kind. I was over in Ottawa and the lobbyists were doing their heavy lobbying. It's almost like watching a plague of locusts consume a corn field except in this case it's a huge swarm of businessmen cramming money wherever it fits. About 30 people were killed due to what doctors described as 'obtuse consumption'. I tell you, there's something really off putting about seeing a dead homeless man with hundred dollar bills crammed down his throat.
I don't own a snook, and if I did I wouldn't leave it cocked.
"As a businessman..."
Ah, according to other postings under this news item, you are one of those who controls the legislature and gets government to do your every bidding. So, how does it feel to control the country?
Where were you when the voynix came?
If you're named George W Bush, there's nothing wrong with that. If you tell them that your address is 1600 Penn. Ave in D.C, and you're not the president, then you're providing fraudulent information.
When is using a fradulent information to get something you're not normally entitled to have not fraud?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
"If you're named George W Bush, there's nothing wrong with that. If you tell them that your address is 1600 Penn. Ave in D.C, and and you're not the president, then you're providing fraudulent information."
According to some, you are being completely honest if you do that.
Where were you when the voynix came?
big business that I know is doing things to hurt the poor
If you think that big businesses (such as the ones that manufacture the equipment and provide that technology that you're deploying at the library) wake up each morning and decide how they will go about "hurting the poor" that day, then you really, really need to get to know some actual working human beings who make up those large companies. The standard of living in this country is higher than it ever has been. Ever. The poorest people in his country have more opportunity than they've ever had. The "middle class" of 100 years ago lived very poorly by today's standards.
Businesses do more evil than good? Great! Be sure to stop using antibiotics, refridgeration, high-tech transportation engines, fiber optic data lines, etc. Those computers that you put out in front of "less priviledged" people? Let me guess... you make sure that the components are only made by small mom-and-pop integrated circuit craftspeople that live in rustic villages with socialized witch doctoring for quality health care?
I'm not wealthy, but I'm not poor, either. I didn't get anyone to pay my way through higher education (but neither did I make taxpayers do it through handouts). I went to middle-of-the-road public schools where plenty of my classmates were drug-using idiots or thought that actually learning anything was un-cool. The only thing that separates successful people from unsuccessful ones (though you seem to equate being a success with being 'privileged,' as if someone just hands that sort of thing out as a door prize) is the culture in which they're raised. Meaning, it's not some movie-villain characiture of a mean ol' Big Business that keeps someone from deciding that being articulate, thoughtful, and hard-working will help them earn their keep - it's socializing with people that tell you that being articulate, thoughtful, and hard-working is somehow un-cool. Do you really help some poor schmoe sit down in front of a computer in the library and think to yourself, "the only reason this person can't earn another $10 more per hour is that employers are trying to hurt him"? Or do you ever say to yourself, "the only thing in between this person and double his income, great health insurance, and more opportunities is a shift away from a sense of entitlement and towards the same sense of opportunity that makes successes out of immigrant families that work three jobs for a few years so that they can be the people the locals hate for being a success?"
I like how you assume that I can't do it because I'm somehow unskilled or stupid. That's the implication in your words.
No, you're the one that said you can't make enough money to leave. Read your own comment. So, it's not that you can't, it's that despite what you're whining about, you don't want to. Why? Aren't there poor people in the UK that would also benefit from your selflessness? So, take all of your skills, spend a year making a real salary, save half of it in the bank (maybe even invest a little bit of it a small business that one of your poor patrons wants to start - ever think of how much that would help that person? no?), and then move to the place you say is better, and help people there so that you can stop complaining about how horrible it is here.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
It's called a paragraph jackass. If you can't read more than four or five sentences per paragraph you're an idiot. A decent paragraph contains no less than eight to ten sentences.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
If you gather information like this on a politician or government employee, just the act of doing so is considered a threat.
Just as long as they realise that it's perfectly legal now to threaten them that way due to their decision. Maybe they will change their mind which is the whole point.
The truth shall set you free!
"2. I think that anyone who is in a lesser situation than I am deserves my help and support if they ask me for it"
;)
[eyeing job description]
Excellent! You probably make 2-3 times what I do. Please hand over the difference.
.
.
.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
This is exactly the problem.
Outlawing pretexting and other fraudulent activity is a workaround.
The solution is as you propose; better information security.
Unfortunately, sometimes better information security will impede the customer, making life more difficult for them because inevitably some of them will lack one of the various necessary credentials for good information security. So, I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea to outlaw pretexting and implement better security practices with phone/bank/etc records.
:(){
You make the mistake of thinking of a business as the individuals who work throughout. I don't see it that way. I see the owners and captains of the business as VERY distinct from the employees. The employees are of a completely different order in that they have little to no control over the direction of the business. So even if they wanted to do something as ridiculous as you suggest (dream up new ways to screw people over) they couldn't. However, the people who run the businesses can. Witness Enron. The people at the top fucked up the lives of a LOT of people. Can't blame that on the lower rung employees. A business is VERY distinct from the less powerful employees when it comes to how the business affects others.
As much as you try to paint me as totally anti-business, you will fail. I'm not anti-business. I'm anti-screwing people over. I think business can and in some cases do do good things. It's just become more of a rarity these days than it was in the past. That's because the businesses are more concerned with ever increasing profits to the detriment of their lower rung employees and their customers. This is the imperative above all else. Business isn't inherently evil. It's simply become that way because of the endless push to profit instead of a reasonable expectation of breaking even.
As far as my own financial situation, I don't think of myself as poor and I'm certainly not rich. But, I'd say that I'm a lot closer to falling out of middle class than I was in the past. And that's through no fault of my own. I refuse to play into the mantra of supporting capitalism at all costs. I don't see capitalism as any more evil than communism. In my mind they're merely opposite sides of the same coin (even though one is political and the other economic). They both fail as soon as you have some pigs being more equal than others. Right now there are a powerful handful of equal capitalist pigs. Just as there were equal communist pigs in Soviet Russia.
I'll put it out on the line though because I'm that kind of person. I make about $65,000 a year which I think is a fair low-end middle class salary for someone living in a mid-sized metropolitan area (I hate the country). I'm fortunate in that the cost of living here allows me to live at the bottom of middle class. I pay for everything in cash. I have no credit cards. My only dept at the moment is my mortgage. I don't invest because I can't control the destiny of that money and I don't want my money supporting things I don't believe in. I do believe that everyone should be able to live on cash alone. There should be no need for credit or loans unless you're talking a house, a car or some other huge expense that is necessary to living a normal life. To some, my income would be considered paltry and I'm "poor". To others, I should be happy I'm making as much as I do (and believe me I am). But this amount of income is not enough to support me, my wife and my child while saving up for a move to another country with unsure employment prospects. I'm not an aggressive or competitive person, so I'm not the "world beater" type. Unless I can get to a point where I could move up to maybe $75,000 or $80,000 a year and my wife started working again (the kid's too young and we don't trust dayscare) I don't see much prospect of moving out of the U.S. Canada... maybe. But I'd have to find a good position in IT in a non-profit job to be able to live with myself. Again, does this make it any clearer for you?
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
NAMBLA also protested the bill, saying that they, too, needed pretexting to find both missing and non-missing children.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
So I can now legally hire a PI to investigate the executives/directors of the MPAA and their families and post online? Cool... I wonder how much she-male p0rn those MPAA executives look at... hmmm.....
Huh? You didn't read the part about the growing membership of Americans in the National Socialist Movement apparently. Once you do, and once you learn how to pay attention, get back to me.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
That sounds like the best approach to getting around the bought assembly.
I wonder how much she-male p0rn those MPAA executives look at... hmmm.....
Executives don't have time for that stuff. Following money is much more stimulating to them. They have relationships with lawyers and lobyists instead.
The truth shall set you free!
Fraud.
Already illegal and actionable in most places.
Despite what EULAs say, most software is sold, not licensed.
Fortunately, or unfortunately if your the MPAA or a PI, California does have the Initiative Process. An initiative for this ought to pass easily. The special interests opposing it are too narrow in scope for the average Californian -- i.e. the person screwed-over by pre-texting in its current form -- to identify and sympathize with.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Isn't "pretexting" the same as "identity theft" and therefore illegal?"
Why don't they just legalize phishing while they are at it?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
>Executives don't have time for that stuff. But they have the time to spy on disconsenting directors like at HP? Yeah right, sure they don't....
But they have the time to spy on disconsenting directors like at HP? Yeah right, sure they don't..
Thanks for validating my point. Following money, insider trading and lawyers.
The truth shall set you free!
think of the repo men
think of the bill collectors?
how will they reclaim what is theirs if they can't lie?
They're using their grammar skills there.
Although the bill could be written to avoid this loophole, well-thought out bills are not common within our government.
This reminds me of the lebrea tarpit application , which assumes unused IP addresses in a network and intentionally responds to an ACK request, but never responds to anything else, causing virus-infected systems and hacker tools such as nessus to tie up their open ports trying to communicate with systems that don't really exist. This software is illegal in the developer's home state of Illinois because state lawyers argue that viruses (or maybe just the underlying TCP/IP packets) are a "service" , and they have a similar law which prohibits spoofing for the purpose of disrupting network services.
Although the purpose of lebrea is to disrupt a malicious attack, and not to gether information, I can't help but feel that if Code Red is a service, then discovering one's IP address may be considered "information gathering".
Any thoughts?
Among those dancing in California's streets are radio DJs, the jerky boys, and Bart Simpson.
Let's all prank call MPAA, just to thank them for protecting our right to do so.
Evidence that is obtained by any party that does not follow this rule should be inadmissible!
The tricky thing about pretexting is it's not a "search and seizure" because the person being suckered has every right to refuse. They don't, because they take the pretexter at his word that he is who he claims to be. If a guy shows up at the door claiming to be doing a property survey or something and I let him in, he hasn't broken the law. If I deny him access and he forces his way in, he's broken the law and I'm well within my rights to call the police and/or beat the crap out of him. Unless the house in question is in Texas, where it seems to be state law that I'm required to shoot him instead...
Pretexting is dishonest, slimy, bordering on despicable, and I think should be illegal, but it doesn't actually violate the 4th Amendment.
...because if they used deceit to GET the information, then you've got a good case that they used deceit to CREATE the information in the first place. I mean, if they can pretend to be me to get my phone record then who is to say they didn't pretend to be me in order to plant dummy evidence of wrong doing?
And second, if it's ok to lie to obtain private records, why can;t one just lie and pretend to be a copyright holder as well?
Basically, once your enemies start using clearly immoral weapons, they don't have a chance when it comes to a jury.
Since we're talking about the MPAA, detectives from Rockford through Veronica Mars have routinely called people up, put on a false accent and claimed to be someone who might reasonably be expected to be entitled to certain information. It's a staple of the genre.
Well as usual I'm completely disgusted.
So i can pretend to be my girlfriend to obtain her phone records?
Or she can get mine?
Are you scared? You should be.!.
Lying, cheating and stealing are OK as long as it is the government, police, private investigators, . . or anyone with a plastic badge doing it.
Their theory, "the evil we do is less than the evil the perpetrators are doing" -- or -- "the end justifies the means".
If you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide -- right citizen?
The police state racks up another battle in the war against freedom and privacy. Another sad day when illegal and unethical acts are sanctioned by the government -- guess nothing new there though -- is there?
And imagine how many divorces would result if people told their spouses the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth...
...why do I even bother to argue with idiotic libertarian wankers like you? If you can't understand the basic principle behind taxes, you're not intelligent enough to live in civilized society.
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance