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.
I'm glad my tax dollar are so hard at work protecting the poor corporations. I was worried there for a second.
United States Magistrate Judge Carla Woehrle: After pleading guilty, you are hereby sentenced to confinement at your house ... ... and to serve up to 6 months jail time ... ... and to install government monitoring software on your computer ... ... that only runs on Windows.
Marc Hoaglin: No change in lifestyle there.
Judge Carla Woehrle:
Marc Hoaglin: Sure, why not? I'll get a chance to lift some weights.
Judge Carla Woehrle:
Marc Hoaglin: I guess that's only fair.
Judge Carla Woehrle:
Marc Hoaglin: DO NOT WANT!!!
My work here is dung.
This is clearly a Ninja plot.
Take it in context...
They probably offered him a deal to spend home time versus all jail time if he agreed to certain terms. They are not FORCING him to use windows, they are saying that if he wants the easy path of punishment, he has to abide by certain rules.
Also the requirement would only be for if he uses a computer at all. He's perfectly welcome to simply not use one at all.
All in all, he got off easy and just has to fullow the very simple rules in order to get the easy version of punishment.
Why? Because he's a convict still serving his sentence (that's why he's under home confinement). If he doesn't like the terms of home confinement, he can always go back in the slammer and have even more restricted access.
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.
The problem is He's an Ubuntu Linux user
And here I was hoping God used Mac OS X (yes, I'm sure there's a "daemon" joke in there, but I'll leave it at one bad joke per post).
You will install MS Vista and install tracking software; you will also pay $300.00 licence fee to MS. You will also install MSOffice2007 _and_ also pay the licence fee. Once this is done, you will ALWAYS vote yes for ooxml.
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.
Sounds like the latest "Catch a Hacker" episode of Dateline NBC. Ace investigative reporter Michelle Madigan uncovers a new operating system used by hackers, pirates and cybercriminals to go on an internet crime spree. What is Ubuntu and why is the government helpless to stop it?
"Linux: The only operating system the NSA doesn't 0wn."
--
Toro
This looks like a job for a rootkit!
Quick, someone call Sony, maybe they can help!
In jail for 5 months and he thinks changing Operating System needs more of a life restructuring.
Perhaps, this sentence will give him the perfect opportunity to finally find a life outside of his linux box.
>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...
No, the taxpayers cant be bothered to pay for more coding software. Hell, considering his crimes it just be better to not allow him computer use during probabtion, if he doesnt like that he cant spend those 5 months in prison. I know what I'd pick. Incredible how we coddle our criminals. Whats next a personal butler and compensation for jail time spent? Hot chocolate?
Or are they going to buy a legit copy for him?
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.
I really don't care about the monitoring software. To me, the big wrong is that he is being compelled to purchase a software license from a third party in order to use the equipment he already owns. Not only that, but the money must go to a specific corporation: Microsoft. While it may not be unconstitutional, it certainly should be illegal for the government to require citizens to purchase commercial software.
If the punishment was truly cruel and unusual the judge would have sentenced him to use Gentoo.
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
Yeah, damn dirty rapist murdering prick...oh wait...he uploaded the new Star Wars. Well, I guess this is the joy of treating copyright infringement as a criminal offense. Unless of course the infringement wasn't the offense, and that subjecting that many people to the latest Star Wars is considered a crime against humanity.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Actually he has not completed his sentence. His sentence was 5 months jail time and 5 months probation...
These terms are hardly arbitrary... He committed a crime with his computer and now he is going to have his computer activities monitored. This is the same as having ignition interlocks on automobiles in response to a DUI. When you are a "ward of the state" which you are while you are under probation, you do not have freedom, at that point you have actually had your freedom revoked. Probation is a tool for measuring your ability to fit back into society...
By the way, they did not "mandate" he use Windows, they simply said that his internet access must be monitored... Currently they only have the monitoring software for Windows, so therefore if he wants internet access he must suck it up and buy windows if he does not already have it... He has a choice, buy Windows or wait 5 months and use whatever he wants.
No pity here.
$diff terrorists hippies
$
$rm -rf *terrorists *hippies
Watch Redmond stop the presses and do a nationwide ad campaign on this one...
I can see it now "Reformed Cyber-criminal chooses Vista over Linux - claims he has 'seen the light' (on his shiny new ankle bracelet)".
Hope is the currency of fools
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.
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. Defendant isn't being FORCED to PERFORM any activity. If defendant wishes to purchase a product, that is voluntary. As a condition of parole defendant is barred from ENGAGING in CERTAIN activity--the use of Linux software. Where did parent get the idea I said anything about unusual? My post asked for an explanation as to how this punishment meets the 8th Amendment definition of cruel.
signature pending slashdot approval
If you, him, or anybody else is THAT bothered by it, why don't you just go ahead and start up your own project and work it to government standards, so that in the future, this wouldn't have to happen to anybody.
Honestly, this guy committed a crime. Nevermind all the complaining everybody does about whether it should or should not be a crime. The item under discussion is the punishment. I'm with a lot of posters above: his sentence could be a LOT worse. Bite the bullet.
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?
Surely, somewhere within the bowels of redmond, there remains a copy of "Microsoft Bob" . . .
hawk
The man committed a crime for which there are punishments. It's called THE LAW. In doing so he essentially forked over some of his rights to the government, things like the ability to and do whatever he wants. The government in this case was kind enough to say "Normally this is a jailable offence, however we don't think you really need to go to the pen. Instead we're going to confine you to your house and monitor you computer to ensure that you're not pirating stuff from home. Since we don't have anything compatible with your OS, you'll have to switch to Windows."
It's no different than them saying "We'll let you out of jail early on certain conditions, such as not committing a crim for the next 3 years."
On a personal note, I was hoping that the story was about a real pirate...that would've been infinitely more interesting. =)
"Life's short and hard, like a body building elf." -- The Bloodhound Gang
It's still unfair. I mean, he got jail for distributing that star wars fluff, while the pirates of the vastly superior space 1999 still can use linux whenever they please!
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
No he's not allowed to use his OS of choice for 5 months until his confinement ends because his OS is supported for the tracking software. That's it. He broke a law, agreed to the conditions of his home confinement and doesn't like the result of it. Its like complaining that he can't go out to eat at night like he'd prefer, instead he'll have to go out to eat during the day.
Send him to a supermax so he can see what is truly cruel and unusual punishment. No human contact, in the cell 23 hours a day, no tv, no computer. There are significantly more important issues when it comes to our corrections system than this.
run the government software on WINE?
installing software is the wrong way to go about this anyway. The gvt. should have an appliance that they stick between his router and the ISP connection. Have that box run whatever it is they want for monitoring and reporting. It'd be easy to make sure it isn't tampered with, and is always running that way too.
Hmm...I wonder how lucrative starting such a business to provide these things to authorities would be, seems like a fun project.
I'm replying to this one, but i mean to reply to all the idiots here. I know you actually read a summary for once, but the punishment is not using windows. That was a clever, incredibly biased remark by the submitter/editor.
He can only use windows because part of his probation is to be monitored. If he doesn't personally purchase/install his own windows, then he simply cannot use the internet/computer. As for "I'll do this once they leave" ideas... are you guys really that dumb? I'm sorry, but you don't think that they would monitor his usage? If nothing is being monitored, you've got two options:
1. he's not using the internet.
2. he's subverted the monitoring.
A pirate uploading material is probably damn well used to the internet, and will probably use it because it's hard not to use it once you have.
MAYBE if he used windows for some time, and then used Linux... maybe he could get away with it by showing legitimate monitored windows usage. But then he's still using windows which is apparently like pulling teeth.
Lastly, if it was you, would you risk going back to prison for 5 months just to use Linux over windows? Or maybe i should ask that question here...
They aren't forcing him to do anything, they are telling him if he wants to do something, he has to do it a certain way.
So he decides to break down and install Windows. After he's finished, he calls up the FBI and says "OK, I've installed Windows. How do I install the monitoring software?" and the operators says "OK. Here's what you've got to do..." and gives a loooong list of instructions. So the guy says "Holy crap! I've got to do all that?!" and the FBI operator says, "I'm just kidding. It came with the OS. Have a nice day."
NT phone home...
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
All of which would probably be considered a violation of his parole.
Ie: You are not allowed to use a computer if we cant see what you are doing with it.
The point is not that he cannot do it. The point is he is not allowed to do it. He is probably not allowed to get a linux shell somewhere else either.
When the parole officer inspect his computer and see his VMware installation with a linux VM, they would probably put him back in jail.
But hey it could be worse, they could forbid him to use any computer. He probably should anyway, and try something else.
You could also argue that it's completely overboard punishment. What's your point?
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
The Windows cracking community often creates thin shims that convincingly emulate the Windows runtime environment and change its behaviour. For example, a relatively little-known framework called 'VXmon'. This is the basis of a lot of the 'loader' style cracks, that mess with API calls and responses, to fool a shareware program into thinking the trial period lasts forever, or disabling nag screens and other trialware behaviour.
It shouldn't be too hard to put together a 'loader' for this monitoring program to make it turn a blind eye to certain classes of network access. That is, if such a loader hasn't already been written. But if not, that'd be a good assignment for the various 1337 cR4ck1ng Cr3\/\/z out there.
Of course, the shim would need to heavily disguise its own existence. If the guy got caught using it, he'd better order a healthy supply of KY Gel ready for a holiday in Club Fed.
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
Some laws are grounded in reality while others are just on the books... If they are on the books they should be enforced.
This is where I lose you. You think that the Alabama police should be arresting people for sodomy or (until a few years ago) marrying someone of a different race?
There are many checks on dumb laws. The first is the intelligence of legislators. Since that often fails, we have other checks: the people can just not obey them, and if they don't, the police can choose to not enforce them, the judges can choose to not sentence for them... you might have heard of the Scopes trials?
This power, to selectively enforce the law, is used more often than you might think.
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.
You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons....brand new, all over again.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
1. It is still a stupid and overblown punishment and a waste of time and money to go after these kinds of things with such zealotry. Now, that isn't to say I think he shouldn't be punished in some fashion, but this is just insane.
2. It is not definitely less than what a murderer would serve. There have been TONS of cases where rapists, child molesters and murderers get out to do it all again, repeatedly, and frequently in less than a year. It has been shown over and over that crimes against citizens are not the same thing as crimes against big money moving entities.
When I don't have to worry about what part of town I am driving through at what time of night and what color my skin might be, THEN I will be interested in tracking down music/movie uploaders. He is going to serve more punishment than good ol Scooter. The system is so insanely unbalanced chasing down this kind of crap is insane. Hell they had that asshole talk about how they should quit going after murderers and bank robbers because music/movie stealing was SOOO much worse for the economy.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
A guy caught pirating is a FOSSie?
That's pretty hard to believe. I thought all FOSSies only wanted to crack DVDs to watch them on teh Lunix. That's what they've been saying all these years...
Next thing you know, the Feds will try getting me to buy the BS claim that people using console mod chips aren't only doing so to use homebrew.
I've got a theory that it's part of a more complicated matter, which I currently title "Punishments Get Harsher When People Don't Fucking Listen". Same mentality behind SarbOx, Three Strikes, draconian DUI penalties, all the pushups I did in boot camp, etc.
Jesus is coming -- look busy!
So annoying many people makes a crime worse? Better hope that Gilbert Gottfried, Fran Drescher, or Simon Cowell never get picked up for shoplifting, or they'll get the chair!
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
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!
But that would be "pirating" the CDs...aaaarrhh...and she could go to jail. Whereas, what was done to her was only theft of CDs, a far less serious crime (as it falls into the class of crimes with human--not corporate--victims) that the police would doubtless not even bother to record.
Umm...actually I meant to write something funny...uhh...nevermind
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
So where was Lucasfilm's choice as to whether or not their movie was going to be on this dumb kid's website? He distributed the copyrighted works of others, without their knowledge or consent, thereby initiating force (in the same sense that pickpocketing or embezzlement is an initiation of force). The government responded with force, in a concept known as "justice" (which is something we want governments to do, well, maybe not the anarchists), so he knows not to do it again and others can possibly learn from his example.
Jesus is coming -- look busy!
Maybe the parent was suggesting that it might be good to move towards a concept called equality before the law. If laws had to be enforced equally, the legislators would have to get rid of the plethora silly minor offences on the statute books that criminalise stuff that everyone does (including those same legislators). Then the police might have to spend their time going after real criminals as opposed to selectively enforcing such statutes against people they don't like the look of. I can see how that would be a terrifying dystopia..uhhh...wait
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
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.
Yes, take it in context, he pirated a bunch of movies - clearly not something that should be jailtime. At most maybe a steep fine, but jailtime is to keep the freakazoids out of society until we can get them (hopefully) rehabilitated to work properly in said society - it shouldn't really be looked at as punishment.
Frankly, I don't believe punishing a wrong works all that well -- you have to psychologically change the person to prevent them from doing it again. Of course, my opinion is my own, largely untrained, based upon a relatively quick judgement =P
in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
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.
And where would that be? International Copyright Laws don't apply where you live?
Or did you forget to post AC?
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson
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.
Run or run not. There is no try.
To boldly use to and too two times and get it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!