Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Banned From Using Linux
dsinc writes "A guy who uploaded the latest Star Wars movie got arrested, pleaded guilty to 'conspiracy to commit copyright infringement' and 'criminal copyright infringement' and got jail and home confinement. As part of his home confinement, he agreed to install some tracking software on his computer. The problem is He's an Ubuntu Linux user and the gov't doesn't have any tracking software for Linux. So he's been told that he must use Windows for the term of his confinement. Looks like a case of cruel and unusual punishment to me"
And have Linux boxes behind it?
You could've hired me.
are they even allowed to do this? "Oh, well, we can't be bothered to make a system for your operating system, so we'll just force you to use something else!" Duh...
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
I read comments on here about video cameras in the UK and why don't we stick up for our rights. Here is a case of someone being sent to to jail for pirating a movie. This is not an offence worthy of jail time at tax payers' expense. When are you guys going to say enough of this bullshit?
In this world nothing is certain but death, taxes and flawed car analogies.
People have made this comment on every single thread on this topic everywhere (Slashdot is the third site I've seen this story on), and it's still wrong and (frankly) nonsensical.
The requirement is that they run software that can monitor his computer activities. The complication is that the software is Windows-only so it won't run on his Linux system. Your suggestion accomplishes neither party's goal: It wouldn't let them monitor his computer activity, and it wouldn't let him run Linux as the OS on his machine (he'd have to run Windows, and then screw around, and then maybe run some Linux apps in a VM while still paying for a Windows license and dealing with Windows crap).
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
See, if I was the judge, I'd say he wasn't allowed to use a computer, period, for the duration of whatever sentence is being carried out.
Sure, but he's done the jail time, and he's not complaining about the probation term at all.
Just because someone has committed a crime does not mean that the government gets to impose arbitrary terms on them without an explicit court ruling. It especially doesn't mean that the government should be mandating specific non-optimal technical choices that interfere the livelyhood of an expert in a technical field.
Mandating Windows to a computer expert so they can be tracked for piracy is like mandating a Chrysler mini-van to a farmer because he beat his wife. Sure, you can carry produce to market in a mini-van, but making the farmer buy a new Chrysler mini-van to replace his perfectly functional Toyota pickup truck is absurd.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
By `indirect' I mean things like not being able to get a good job, being shunned/tormented/killed by people merely because you're a registered sex offender, etc.
By `direct' I mean going to jail, paying fines, probation, even having to register as a sex offender.
pwned.
Not that the NSA really cares about some movie pirate who got busted, and just because they wrote something useful for Linux and had it included in the kernel, that doesn't mean they're going to go write monitoring software for you too.
Forcing somebody to pay money to a third party (ie somebody completely unaffiliated with the victim of the crime) sure seems like an unusual punishment to me. It also seems unjustified (unless you count "government laziness" as adequate justification).
I think (and I expect most libertarians would agree) that the government should never have the power to force a citizen to do business with any corporation, especially when that corporation is an unregulated abusive monopoly.
By `indirect' I mean things like not being able to get a good job, being shunned/tormented/killed by people merely because you're a registered sex offender, etc.
By `direct' I mean going to jail, paying fines, probation, even having to register as a sex offender.
yeah i agree with that. sex offender is vague, but because of the big issues with this, it means a minor offence is treated as if it's the worst possible.Why UNIX?
I mean, I understand it's really up to the FBI how they want to do this -- after all, a convict has no rights.
I also understand that automotive analogies are lame.
However, supposing he was allowed to leave the house, would they restrict him to one brand of car?
I think what this shows, more than anything, is how stupidly incompatible software is. Java had the right idea (but a poor implementation). Software should be platform-agnostic -- perhaps enough so that the FBI could force him to run their own OS, and he'd still have all his favorite software.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Brilliant. Your advice to this guy is turn a lightly supervised probation into a spanking-new charge of parole violation - playing against the two felony convictions already on his record?
Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.
This seems ludicrous to me, not that he has to use Windows, but that they are depending on a program under his complete control to monitor him. What's to stop him from subverting the monitoring...sending back 'all clear' messages to the government and doing whatever the hell he wants? If they really want to monitor him, they should install some kind of locked packet-trapping box on the line coming in to his house...anything less than that is simply untrustworthy, especially considering the person has already shown an ability to do stuff with computers that they'd rather he didn't.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Which whatever. There's many things said person might do. All of them will leave traces. All of them are likely to be poorly received by by whoever is going to assess compliance. Any sign of fiddling is probably going to be deemed as wilful violation of conditions and maybe result in a Mitnick style prohibition. The goal is not to prevent the behaviour.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
subject. ..use another computer on the same network ..if they implement tracking routerwise, use the friendly neighbourhood wireless spiderweb.