Slashdot Mirror
Feds Arrest GeneSimmons.Com Attacker
gManZboy writes "Federal authorities have arrested an alleged member of Anonymous in connection with an "Operation Payback" attack against the website of Kiss bassist Gene Simmons. The charges stem from a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack against Simmons' website over a five-day period in 2010. Simmons apparently drew the ire of the Anonymous set after he lambasted their peer-to-peer (P2P) downloading proclivities during a 2010 MIPCOM entertainment content media conference panel discussion, where he lamented the failure of the music industry 'to sue every fresh-faced, freckle-faced college kid who downloaded material.'"
Not a lot of people really visit these sites anyway. If you want to lambaste the guy do it on twitter or facebook.
Advice to Gene Simmons - don't make China angry.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I cannot think of a better use of taxpayer money.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
is a has been ass who thinks the world owes him money.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You name it and he has s KISS logo slapped on it, everything from coffins to condoms...
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
So, are you saying an internet mob still behaves like a mob? Interesting :)
Thats an interesting analogy. If the event were being held a public place, say, a county owned park, I would imagine that no, it is not illegal for the protesters to boo down the Nazis.
However, if the event were being held in a private venue, and the protesters prevented the Nazi's and the people who paid money to hear them speak conduct their event without interruption, then I would have to say yes, it is in fact illegal.
In this case, Mr Simmons was paying to host his website, and his fans and customers were paying to access his website, which makes denying Mr Simmons the ability to broadcast his website, and his fans the ability to receive that broadcast, an illegal activity.
15 years sounds like an extremely harsh punishment given the circumstances. In fact, since its just some stupid rock bands website, I wouldn't expect justice to include any jail time at all.
... not at all. Do I think people should be given free rein to to interfere with the internet and other peoples computer systems just because they have a script programmed for the task ? Again, not at all.
The draconian measures that have been written into law concerning "computer crimes" versus any other type of crime, seem to me to be a knee jerk reaction to a problem that is/was beyond the means of the legislators ability to deal with it. As a result, they passed a special law concerning computer crime, that could have been framed within the context of any other number of already existing laws.
A fair and reasonable society and justice system would meter punishment proportionate to the offense, such that, no side of the equation is imbalanced.
Do I agree with the current state of legislation concerning "computer crimes?"
Unless of course you do something dickish as part of anonymous, which is quite common. They're just a roving mob of thugs. Sometimes they attack someone who deserves it. Sometimes they attack someone who they thought deserves it, but is actually innocent. Sometimes they attack someone who did do something wrong, but their attacks are all out of proportion with the deserved punishment. Sometimes they just hurt random strangers for laughs.
They're basically a sterling example of why anarchist mob justice doesn't work.