Slashdot Mirror
UK MP Says ISPs Must Take Responsibility For Movie Leaks, Sony Eyes North Korea
An anonymous reader writes that the recent IP advisor to Prime Minister David Cameron has laid some of the blame for the recent Sony hack at the feet of ISPs. Meanwhile, it's reported that Sony is close to officially blaming North Korea. As the fallout from the Sony hack continues, who is to blame for the leak of movies including Fury, which has been downloaded a million times? According to the UK Prime Minister's former IP advisor, as 'facilitators' web-hosts and ISPs must step up and take some blame. Mike Weatherley MP, the recent IP advisor to Prime Minister David Cameron, has published several piracy reports including one earlier in the year examining the advertising revenue on pirate sites. He believes that companies with no direct connection to the hack or subsequent leaks should shoulder some blame. 'Piracy is a huge international problem. The recent cyber-attack on Sony and subsequent release of films to illegal websites is just one high-profile example of how criminals exploit others' Intellectual Property,' Weatherley writes in an email to TF. 'Unfortunately, the theft of these films – and their subsequent downloads – has been facilitated by web-hosting companies and, ultimately, ISPs who do have to step-up and take some responsibility.' Weatherley doesn't provide detail on precisely why web-hosts and ISPs should take responsibility for the work of malicious hackers (possibly state-sponsored) and all subsequent fall out from attacks. The theory is that 'something' should be done, but precisely what remains elusive."
I agree totally, we should also make sure to hold the government responsible for every road used to commit a crime, as without those roads it would have been difficult or impossible to commit some of these crimes. When are we going to have the government and road transport departments step up and take responsibility for issues that are clearly caused by their roads!
So, when a bank is robbed and the thieves use a getaway car then he should obviously be blaming the roads, or the car companies, maybe the gas station for allowing them to be transported to the bank and away from the scene of the crime.
Why is it that the method of transport is suddenly to blame here? If we always use the car analogy to describe technology concepts then should the roadways be inspecting the contents and destination of all travellers to prevent or detect crimes?
So in this analogy we have criminals who committed the crime and the bank (Sony) where the locks were found to be insufficient and the guards were not watching the right doors. Why does the blame need to extend beyond those parties?
Of course the governments would probably jump at the chance to inspect all traffic and the contents of all vehicles on the road if they thought they could get away with it. To protect the people of course, no other reason.
Who honestly cares who is responsible for a large company not having adequate security measures in place. They are externalising the underlying problem of them being slack. Don't want your movies leaked before release, don't put them on the Internet. Problem solved. I've very little sympathy for Sony here and simply do not trust the "officials" who are going to allocate blame to another country.
Sony could have easily avoided this -- send only physical media around and make sure everyone has a non-networked computer to use it on. Strongly enforce this policy by firing based on non-compliance and folks will learn. Sure it slows things down a little and costs a bit more but the chance of a leak is reduced significantly. I doubt the costs are actually significant compared to the revenue the movie will generate or even the lead actor's payments.
North Korea is the current target of the powers that be, so of course they are "responsible". Sure they aren't a nice government and I'd not want to live or even visit there, but still....
Next he'll be saying the Highways Agency need to takes some responsibilities for bank jobs.
I want the petrol station to be responsible for my speeding ticket!
If they find out that it is possible to grade fuel based on how much energy it provides,
They already do that. Higher-octane fuel runs in higher-compression engines that produce more HP per liter. My first car was a 1960 Dodge Dart which came with a 318ci big block with, no shit, 12:1 compression. I had to run octane booster on top of premium fuel to feed it in California. It would run OK on just premium if you kept your foot out of it, though. That bad boy made 240hp and 340lb-ft... in 1960. That was pretty great for 5.2 liters, back then. Today you'd only expect 400 and 400, or so, but the engine would have to be able to do it on 91 octane gasohol.
Of course, fuel taxes take a gigantic shit on the whole concept when unevenly applied...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"