AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,884 Posts
I guess they are starting to realize they might be held liable for incidental damages caused by their copy protection efforts. And they should be.


- Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
Hahaha!


I'd like to see them try.


Too Funny,

ScAndal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Sounds like they've backed off on this a little. What's funny to me is that they now claim they just want to restore their rights to what they were before the new Anti-Terrorism Act. So let's see, first they push a bill to take away our hacking rights (the DMCA), and then they demand a special exemption to protect theirs. Talk about having your cake and eating it too!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
514 Posts
What I think was the most telling was the attempt to get their exemptions hacked on to the end of the anti-terrorism bill.


This bill, while it may have some provisions that could affect personal liberties, has basically been written to try and avoid another tragedy like last months and as such could be seen as a legacy left by those that died.


For the RIAA to even consider using this bill as a means to their own ends shows just how low they are willing to stoop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,660 Posts
Throughout history, it has been shown.. that any group that has surrendered freedoms and controls on their lives -that are in their own hands- have ultimately lost their freedom to empirical delusionals, or to fascism. Reductions in freedoms is NOT the way, and history has played this out with the same result, so many times that only a fool would consider it. Work with your government actively, not passively. Keep your freedoms, and move to action, not be stalled in your private world. it is your own indifference which allows the current situation to even begin to happen in the first place. Accept NO losses in freedoms,whatsoever. Get off your ass, and find answers, and they won't be easy ones.


The answers will never be easy, or simple to find, and most will turn away from difficulty to such a degree, that they are willing to blind themselves to the ultimate, and even the immediate costs. When you where a small child, you learned to use your newly found intellect to hide your monkey from the concept and fear of death. Once again, you apply this psychosis here. Childhood learning and programing sure does come in handy, doesn't it? Obviously, the issue I am addressing is greater than the MPAA.


This is the path of history: wise enough to see the possible dangers of loss of freedoms.. but too damned lazy and desirous of personal ease and comforts -- to make the effort to keep those freedoms.


Basically, you know better (and, in the future can say 'knew better'), but do nothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
How could what they propose not also fall under a terrorist act? Or possibly sabotage?


The line between spyware and a malicious virus has just narrowed.


Not every mp3 file out their is "illegal" or pirated, so how would they discern between the 2?


What next? If they have access to the contents of my hard drive, will other media organizations want access to my bookshelf and list of videos? :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
485 Posts
If this had gotten through, you just know every script kiddie for a thousand miles would have been lining up at the record studios' doors with resumes in hand.


"Your Honor, you can't convict me for hacking into that .mil site -- we thought it might contain a Beastie Boys clip."


The RIAA is, with its every action, slowly convincing me that the whole concept of intellectual property is doing our society more harm than good. (And I say this as someone who makes his living writing proprietary software and is generally anti-piracy.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,310 Posts
Hi All:


___This is getting to be so ridiculous as to be almost laughable … I wonder how the RIAA convinced those few in congress (w/out the most rudimentary knowledge of what the Internet is all about by all appearances) that a type of DoS attack is legal if done in this fashion? That is what it sounds like per the verbiage discussed so far and I wonder how the RIAA site would take thousands of non-hacker types with a zombie type script pinging their site endlessly with the permission of the hosts? DoS w/ permission, Hmmm. I wonder if this is legal as well? I truly despise these people.


___The internet will eventually be finished if all of these large corporations have their way IMO.


___Thanks to you all for the links and discussion …


___Wayne R. Gerdes

___Hunt Club Farms Landscaping Ltd.

___ [email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,586 Posts
The thing is that, on the face of it, even any existing rights that they might have claimed in that area amounts to what would be considered vigalantism in any other area of life. Its up to the person who thinks his IR have been broached to decide what and when and where to take action. That shouldn't be allowed any more than my being able to grab a gun and go to someone's house who I think stole my skateboard and start shooting. Its completely silly.


I'm beginning to think that we are going to need some sort of organization, connected to the internet, which is set up to mediate such complaints and, if its determined that IR have been violated, to first take internet specific means to shut them down, by giving them the right to force an ISP to remove access rights (at the point of the gun of the ISP's rights being removed if it does not comply.)


If that does not solve the problem, then that organization could forward it to law enforcement along some sort of greased path that will carry some weight and get some attention.


Over time, patterns will emerge in which known mechanisms for IR violation will be quickly obvious, so it shouldn't always turn into a Sherlock Holmes level investigation. Certain types of applications and/or certain uses of certain content can eventually be placed on a 'go directly to jail' list, so that 'prosecution' could be expedited. Otherwise, the overhead placed on such an organization would require it to be huge. But if the common IR violations reach a level of boilerplate retribution, that could leave the serious stuff for the bigger guns in the organization.


I'm not sure that's remotely feasable. But it seems like we need something like that. The FBI isn't going to do this kind of thing, until the crime becomes significant. Having a means to take care of our own on the internet as a first line of defense might be an intermediate step we could take.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
514 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Dean Roddey
... amounts to what would be considered vigalantism in any other area of life.... That shouldn't be allowed any more than my being able to grab a gun and go to someone's house who I think stole my skateboard and start shooting. Its completely silly.
I totally agree. A Slashdot poster posted excerpts of the US Constitution. It appears as though the RIAA's proposal would have broken no less than 4 amendments!

Quote:


I'm beginning to think that we are going to need some sort of organization, connected to the internet, which is set up to mediate such complaints and, if its determined that IR have been violated, to first take internet specific means to shut them down, by giving them the right to force an ISP to remove access rights (at the point of the gun of the ISP's rights being removed if it does not comply.)
Interesting suggestion. It looks like a good idea at first, but has some pitfalls.

Firstly, how does one go about removing the rights of an ISP? The strands of the web are so interwoven that breaking one strand can affect others. Not only that but (for instance) removing access rights from AOL could possibly send 2 tier one ISPs into Chapter 11, which would result in a lot of other people losing access too.

Secondly, who do you think would make up this organization? People who are net-savvy, so probably people drawn from within ISPs. Now AOL is part of AOL/Time-Warner. AT&T Broadband is part of AT&T, who have the largest cable TV rollout in the US (virtually a monopoly). So we end up with 2 media revenue generating companies playing at being the police. Not that much different than the RIAA doing it themslves.

Quote:
...Certain types of applications and/or certain uses of certain content can eventually be placed on a 'go directly to jail' list, so that 'prosecution' could be expedited.
Such as downloading and using deCSS to play legally-bought DVDs on linux?!? This is a real can of worms that just should not be opened. Maybe we should ban peer2peer programs (say goodbye to instant messaging), maybe we should ban encryption (say goodbye to secure banking), maybe we should ban .mp3 downloads (say hello to .mq3 downloads - same file, different extension)..just isn't feasible.
Quote:


I'm not sure that's remotely feasable. But it seems like we need something like that. The FBI isn't going to do this kind of thing, until the crime becomes significant. Having a means to take care of our own on the internet as a first line of defense might be an intermediate step we could take.
Yeah, it's an interesting conundrum to figure out. In the meantime, how about the RIAA figure out how to accept the fact that the vast majority of people are good people, and do not want to break laws. Then maybe they can figure out how to price their CDs so that those on low income can actually afford to buy music. Lets face it, the vast majority of Napster users were students with no income and mounting debts or kids.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Wayne,


I wonder if this all isn't a "legal cover" in case the investigative powers of internet anti-terrorism special teams get sidetracked onto other branch activities with more political or economic aims. After all, during their "day jobs", they were just looking for hacked MP3 files. ;)


Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,884 Posts
At a time when Congress may be looking into RIAA abuse of monopoly powers it would seem extremely foolish of the RIAA to go to that same Congress and ask for legal vigilante powers. ;)


Maybe they have already been mounting DoS attacks and just now realized how many laws that breaks and what liabilities they might have.


- Tom
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top