Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RIAA & MPAA Seek Authority To Pretext

Posted by kdawson on from the lie-if-we-want-to dept.

msblack writes "The RIAA and MPAA are lobbying California legislators for an exemption to proposed legislation that would outlaw pretexting. Pretexting is the practice of pretending to be someone else in order to obtain personal information on a person, such as telephone or banking records. According to an article in the LA Times, the RIAA and MPAA sometimes need to lie in their pursuit of bootleggers. They would like the legislation to exempt anyone who owns a copyright, patent, trademark, or trade secret from restrictions against pretexting. An interesting line from the article is, '[RIAA's Brad] Buckles said the recording industry had never, nor would it ever, assume someone's identity to access that person's phone or bank records.' Fortunately, Senator Corbert, the bill's author, is unlikely to accept these hostile changes."

5 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Anyone who owns a copyright? by nietsch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Copyright is by default AFAIK, so anyone who has ever written some original text is exempt from this proposed law? So actually they wish to neuter this law?

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
  2. Let us call it what it IS by zoomshorts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FRAUD.

  3. Does anyone else get the feeling.... by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That they're asking for permission to do it... because they've already done it?

    I do.

    TLF

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Re:Pretexting? by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All of which are LEGAL activities.

    And so is me transfering money to another person. It might however become a legal issue still depending on why I transfered that money, whom I transfered it to, and what they are going to use it for.

    And lying is a perfectly legal activity when it is not done to further a crime.

    Try that one when giving a testimony under oath. Even if what you lied about has no relevance to the case at hand, does not further any crimes or anything, it is still punishable. There are many more cases where lying has been made explicitly illegal.

    The fact that lying in general isn't illegal is because usually it is too small an issue to deal with it by law, and most cases of lying are better dealt with by parents or employers or such.

    Arguing that lying in itself is not illegal is fine from a technical point of view, but you may want to think about the consequences of allowing lying EXPLICITLY by law.