Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

CCIA Calls Copyright Wiretaps 'Hollywood's PATRIOT Act'

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the otherwise-the-terrists-win dept.

The Courts 150

An anonymous reader writes "Ars is reporting that the CCIA, a trade group representing companies like AMD, Facebook, Oracle, Yahoo, Google and Microsoft, is calling the copyright wiretaps requested by the IP Czar 'Hollywood's PATRIOT Act.' For those who don't remember, IP Czar Victoria Espinel recently wrote a report calling for more charges of felony copyright infringement under the NET Act, as well as felony charges for illegal web streaming, authorization for the use of wiretaps in going after copyright infringement cases, and several other measures. In short, this means that the copyright cops are coming online."

cancel ×

150 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wow (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532470)

What a c*nt.

Wise move? (2)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532512)

The PATRIOT act allegedly protects the US against religious terrorists. Hollywood's PATRIOT act allegedly protects the US against economic terrorists aka pirates. I'm not so sure claiming that is a valid comparison is a good strategy....

Allegedly (1)

cishuman (2020456) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532590)

Very allegedly.

Re:Wise move? (5, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532616)

Most people realize the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) act sucks, due to how it's used to spy on innocent americans. Likewise this wiretapping to catch people downloading songs, sucks.

Re:Wise move? (3, Informative)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533102)

Most people here on Slashdot, far removed from the ignorant masses realize.... There fixed that for you

Who'd a thunk it? (2)

Gription (1006467) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534390)

I just keep having trouble with the realization that I have lived through the largest destruction of personal liberty (and personal dignity) in US history. I have listened to well read, college educated people who wholeheartedly support suppression of very clearly 1st amendment supported freedom of speech because the message bothers them.

This entwined with the juggernaut of corporate rights steamrolling over personal rights just because lobbyists write the laws, lobby money pays for the law makers, and people make decisions based on fear leaves me with a country that is just disappointing.
(Saddest part is you don't see anyone doing it any better...)

Re:Who'd a thunk it? (1)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534748)

You're not alone. Question is, what are you going to do about it? Bend over and take it or fight it tooth and nail? Now is the time to choose, while you still can.

"I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

Re:Who'd a thunk it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535060)

At this point, the only thing that is going to make things better is a radical change in the mindset of the average person, which of course is not going to happen, because people hate change and would rather stick with the inferior system as long as they are not pressed too hard.

Even if you tried to change something, the masses will likely see you as an enemy. If you try to educate them, they won't listen because American Idol is far more interesting to them than what you have to say. And using force is completely out of the question in this day and age.

Re:Who'd a thunk it? (1)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535594)

If you believe the cause is right and just, that shouldn't stop you from trying.

Re:Who'd a thunk it? (1)

pwizard2 (920421) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535600)

And using force is completely out of the question in this day and age.

No, it's because things simply haven't gotten that bad yet. If unemployment gets much worse (the official stats are wrong since they only count those currently receiving benefits. I would estimate the real number being ~15-20% unemployment if you take into account the people who have exhausted their 99 weeks) To make matters worse, many perceive the government as being insulated from real-life problems and it does not help that Obama seems to spend more time golfing and taking vacations than he does actually working. If food and fuel prices keep going up like they have been, then all it would take is a singular triggering event to spark a revolution. For instance, remember how one guy setting himself on fire to protest his standard of living in Tunisia sparked a revolt that toppled the government not only in that country but caused uprisings in several others as well?

People may care about American Idol, but they still care more about having a job, house, and being able to eat.

Re:Who'd a thunk it? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534782)

Or you can just face how it was a (self-marvel kind of) myth all along.

Re:Masses (2)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534742)

I think that's just about to change.

The "heartland" of America gets its news ... wait for it ... from the plot stories of their TV shows. So when entire episodes are starting to feature the Homeland Security doings, Mr. & Ms Viewer are just about to say "wait, they're doing that?"

Re:Wise move? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534334)

Really? [usnews.com]

35-57% support it, they don't list a total figure or the proportion of the three but over 40% is likely. And that is now, if you ask "Was passing the PATRIOT act after 9/11 the right thing to do?" I think you'd find that the general public don't exactly consider it a mistake.

Re:Wise move? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535508)

I got a great idea! What IF, whaaat iiiiF, they made a WALLSTREET act. Imagine (yes, just imagine like the American dream...) spying of banks and the entire financial market organizations for actual loss of real life millions and billions of dollars! Top that song pirates!

Think big people! Little fish are just for the peasents bread and circuses.

Re:Wise move? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532938)

Sounds like a valid comparison to me; both fuck over the citizenry while doing nothing about the real problem.

Re:Wise move? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533300)

Indeed. Who wants to be embarrassed on a job application.

Have you ever committed a felony: |X| Yes | | No
If you answered Yes, what was the crime:
I downloaded a Brittany Spears song I did not pay for in middle school.

-----------------
The shame will last a lifetime.

Re:Wise move? (2)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534546)

"The real problem"? I'm sorry, but you will need to clarify. I am still uncertain there is even a problem at all outside of the crap that the **AA's are pulling. They make a LOT of money. They have always made a LOT of money. Their business have never NOT made a LOT of money. They simply have nothing to be worried about. It's all pure greed and malice.

Re:Wise move? (1)

alienzed (732782) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533664)

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, so it's exactly the same.

Re:Wise move? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534142)

Lets say that Bin Ladin is considered by 90 % of people to be a terrorist, and a filesharer is considered by 5 % to be a terrorist. Is that exactly the same?

Re:Wise move? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533674)

economic terrorists

I'd say this places the RIAA and MPAA in line with Muammar Qaddafi.

Re:Wise move? (1)

ddd0004 (1984672) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534280)

I was hoping it was written to protect us from the Mel Gibson movie, The Patriot.

WTF? Just "religious terrorists"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534438)

Please stand up and allow me to confirm that your "ass" and "elbow" signs are in the correct locations.

Good luck with that... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532522)

See, what you don't understand is that an open internet has allowed businesses to succeed and generate revenue in new ways. These businesses have a vested interest in keeping the internet open. It just so happens that an open internet also serves piracy as well.

So you have a choice: go back to 1990, and kill the web... killing piracy, but also killing all the businesses that now are based on web technologies (to include MSFT, GOOG, AAPL, etc)... OR... evolve.

'understand' ? (5, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532754)

they understand. they understand very well that they dont want anyone other than themselves to succeed, no businesses competing them, customers feeding off their hand, on the terms they want them to.

and your explanation of the fundamentals of internet's success does not mean shit to them, neither they care - they want to have it, and you under their control.

explanations and talk will not do any good. you need to act, if you want to defend your interests.

Re:'understand' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533110)

That's sort of my point... My interest is to have an open internet. It is the same interest that MSFT, AAPL, GOOG, et al have.

No amount of acting on my part will change anything. I don't have time/energy to start a grass roots "crusade" or anything like that, nor do I have a vast amount of money to pay for one.

What I'm saying is that the typical slashdot response to news like this is to stoke the fear of how the interweb is under attack, and soon everything will be a 1984 big brother system of "trusted" computing, etc, etc (see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html ).

This fear is ridiculous. Which is what my point is. The only way the "bad guy" can win is by killing the web completely. And they can't do that. So we are witnessing them flail in the wind, and getting all worked up over it... I think a better response is to simply laugh at them flailing in the wind, as technology obliterates their outdated business models.

Re:'understand' ? (1)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534930)

And while you're laughing, they're bringing their considerable lobbying power to bear to push Congress to create whatever laws they want, no matter how destructive they may be. Make no mistake, they WILL throw the baby out with the bathwater if they think they can make a buck on it.

Stop laughing and grab a pitchfork.

Re:'understand' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535096)

Because protesting scares politicians and lobbying firms to straighten up and fly right! Lol, get real.

Here's what will happen, whether we protest or not: The big firms with a vested interest in an open internet will lobby for it, using their deep pockets. Hollywood will lobby with their deep pockets. A deal will emerge where those in power will be able to stay in power, and everyone will nod their head in agreement. Meanwhile, we will continue to go to work every day, and pretty much just take whatever they agree on. If those in power jack things up too much, we will start to route around their idiocy as best we can, with slight inconvenience.

And while you're off protesting, pretending that you're making a difference, we will create a decentralized encrypted file sharing system (oh wait, it already exists). And we'll share files no matter what the law says (oh wait, we're already doing that). And a few of us will get in trouble, but the vast vast vast majority of us will live peacefully with TBs of entertainment as the CEO/Congress idiots try their hardest to legislate the impossible.

Re:'understand' ? (2)

Haffner (1349071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533516)

But what can one legally do? I wish there was a career path or something that I could do to stop this and similar abuses of power by the government, but short of spending 30 years entrenching myself in the system (at which point I'm sure the economic benefits of prolonging corruption will outweigh any lasting moral compulsions not to) to right some minor wrongs, what can a citizen do? Sadly, I think nothing. Most people I speak to about their rights either don't understand what the rights are, or why we need them, and some think that less privacy means more safety. I don't think the masses can comprehend what is occurring, and the educated few don't have the manpower or public outrage to take a stand. It's depressing, really...

Re:'understand' ? (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533768)

"But what can one legally do?"

The time for legality is over, unfortunately public ignorance, lack of intelligence and apathy is the issue.

Re:'understand' ? (1)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535172)

"...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..." - Declaration of Independence

The career path you're looking for is "revolutionary."

For or Against? (0)

metalgamer84 (1916754) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532574)

Should I be happy or outraged?

Re:For or Against? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533562)

You should not have to ask others for your opinion.

Re:For or Against? (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534936)

You do when you don't know what the other person meant by what was said, i.e. whether the comparison was intended to be negative or positive. Otherwise you're in a state of, "I agree with my interpretation of what you said without knowing what you meant when you said it," and may end up regretting throwing support to someone with whom you actually disagree.

Someone who says, "There's a problem with the amount of child porn on the Internet," should be made to clarify whether they think there's too much or not enough; "I stand by my previous statement," is not an acceptable response.

Change (0)

The Shootist (324679) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532752)

They told me if I voted for McCain, Corporations would try usurp the role of Government. They were right.

Re:Change (2)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532824)

Yeah, cause McCain is totally against things like the DMCA and these draconian copyright laws... Oh wait...

Re:Change (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533132)

That was true. "They" just conveniently forgot to say the same thing happens if you vote the other way!

Re:Change (2)

FatSean (18753) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534246)

Who told you that?

The plane-crashing baby killer and his pet bimbo lost. Get over it. Obama is no prize...but he was the closest to a Liberal that had a shot and he's done OK by me WRT mortgage ReFi, drawing down Iraq, not persecuting gay people, etc...

The internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532760)

It was fun while it lasted...

Meanwhile in hell... (2)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532820)

Joseph McCarthy is doing a happy jig.

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533310)

McCarthy was just a small piece of the puzzle. The House Un-american Activities Committee was the main power, and it was run by Democrats from 1945 to 1959. The Demo-run HUAC was also the source of the infamous Hollywood blacklist.

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (2)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533662)

I love how everything can be turned into a Dems vs. Repubs arguments. No wait, that other thing. Loathe.

Doesn't anyone else get that the Red vs. Blue thing is just a distraction from what's actually happening in government?

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (3, Insightful)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535258)

Are you implying both sides have the same agenda and are using infighting and childish bickering to cover their atrocities from the public view? The hell you say.

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534116)

McCarthy was just a small piece of the puzzle. The House Un-american Activities Committee was the main power, and it was run by Democrats from 1945 to 1959. The Demo-run HUAC was also the source of the infamous Hollywood blacklist.

in 1964 the Republicans and Democrats "switched", just wanted to throw that in so people don't get confused

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534272)

Small piece you say? Bi-partisan committee I say. And I see you left out the membership ratios of similar committed from 1918-1944 :)

Say, you must be one of commodore64_love's sockpuppets. Hope you've got a friend in Afghanistan!

Re:Meanwhile in hell... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534432)

To be fair to them, the government was infiltrated by Stalin-loving commies.

This is Good! (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#35532852)

Here is what a friend told me (note he voted for Obama, and says he'd happily do it again). Not a direct quote.

The link is hysteria and not much detail. The Napster already establish free sharing of copyright material is a violation of copyright law. It's inconvenient if we want free stuff, but I don't see any legal basis that we should get free stuff."

Re:This is Good! (2)

infalliable (1239578) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533978)

One of the big issues is that is (currently, in the vast majority of cases) a civil matter. The two parties involved pay for it.

If it's criminal, your tax dollars are going to be increasingly used to pay for copyright enforcement that the copyright owner doesn't want to pay for. If they don't want to pay for it, why should I? Why should you?

Outrageous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532888)

So, they're illegally trespassing your personal property to apply illegal wiretaps.

Wait, it's all in the name of fighting terrorism? Oh, well, go right ahead then!

USA Exports (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35532970)

The US is just trying to protect it's last remaining export.
The US no longer manufacturers anything with the exception of intellectual property (what ever that is!).

Re:USA Exports (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533160)

soldiers, bombs and uavs

Re:USA Exports (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534160)

intellectual property (what ever that is!).

Definition: An attempt to create artificial restrictions on the exchange of ideas. See flimflam.

felony charges = trail by jury and all the other (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533022)

felony charges = trail by jury and all the other stuff that comes with it.

Re:felony charges = trail by jury and all the othe (1)

click2005 (921437) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534220)

Wouldn't that increase the burden of proof? That old 'beyond reasonable doubt' thing that we see in so many films & tv shows.

Send em away (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533096)

Yes, let's send a bunch of people downloading their favorite album to prison, that'll show em! Better yet, let's set up a guillotine on Hollywood Boulevard and have some beheadings.

Personally speaking... (5, Insightful)

UPZ (947916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533114)

Prison terms should be for people who cause severe direct harm to another person. For economic damage, there are always civil suits. Just because a trade group has lobbying money, shouldn't mean that they get to play with society's rules.

Re:Personally speaking... (1)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533544)

Just because a trade group has lobbying money, shouldn't mean that they get to play with society's rules.

While I agree with you, the sad fact is that lobbying money is pretty much the only thing that allows one to play with society's rules.

Re:Personally speaking... (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534430)

I completely agree with that should be how the legal system should work. It would mean that other laws are struck down though like environmental damage because it wouldn't cause direct harm. It is tricky where to draw the line. What benefits society to the greatest extent would definitely be the best, but again is hard to define. Who has the most money just simply does not work. I would say the best treatment would be to stop supporting these organizations with your money and your interest. Look for free music that people release and support them in what they do by listening to it and passing it around. It is like Microsoft where they would prefer you to pirate their product instead of using a competitors if that is what it comes to.

Re:Personally speaking... (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534466)

...draw the line on what is harm. Should have read what I wrote before posting.

Re:Personally speaking... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534718)

US prisons are now private companies. It's in their interest to have their buddy corporatocracies put as many people behind bars as possible. It only costs something like $200k/year to keep a black kid locked up, who's done nothing more than caught smoking pot. Tax dollars from us to our corporate overlords.

Obama was put in power by the media, they're merely calling in all the favors.

Millions of children become felons? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533140)

So your kid is listening to some music, or watching a TV show online... that's a felony! There are no exceptions for age, or for just not understanding the internet. And there are millions of little kids on the internet, just clicking whatever they see. And now they will all be going to prison, because they are felons. What a great use of taxpayer dollars.

Re:Millions of children become felons? (4, Insightful)

nj_peeps (1780942) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533538)

I think that is the craziest part! I love how we (the tax payers) are going to have to pay for the wiretaps, personal to comb though the wiretapped info, and cost of court cases that are brought. All so that the corporations can continue to make money by having us buy their products, and not have to pay to gather the evedince against those they deem pirates.

Re:Millions of children become felons? (1)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535330)

And then all those found guilty will never be able to vote again. Coincidence?

They know the system is coming down (5, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533184)

In only two states in the Union are you legally secure in pointing a loaded weapon at someone you catch in the act of robbing you. In most parts of the country, if a group of guys are loading the entire contents of your home into a moving truck, you become a felon if you even "shoot to wound" one of them. You can't even knee-cap them with a .22, but copyright owners can get $150k statutory damages on the spot for copying a single throwaway picture from a local rag.

I'm a conservative and most of the conservatives who know me used to think I was nuts on copyright law until I began to show them how utterly insane our system is. The closest parallel for the common man is a military legal code that won't allow a soldier to rough up a prisoner who he knows has useful intelligence, but that lets field commanders deploy low-yield tactical nukes on villages that remain neutral.

It's such an inversion of the natural order and justice that it's sickening. We don't allow a man being subjected to an armed robbery to confidently use lethal force on his assailant (note: I am advocating that victims of armed robbery should always be legally authorized to use lethal force to resolve an armed robbery situation), but we let big copyright utterly destroy families over sharing a dozen songs.

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533498)

Laws restricting deadly force stem from anti-escalation theories of jurisprudence, and from the notion that the state has a monopoly on the use of violence. As a practical matter, thieves would shoot their victims first if they knew they could be shot without consequence. Also, as a matter of justice, property crimes need lots of "ordering of the facts" before any decision can be reached (who has distributive rights to the property, for example). It's tricky.

Re:They know the system is coming down (2)

gknoy (899301) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533598)

It's far better to shoot the thieves with a video camera and then use the video evidence to apprehend them later. Physical possessions can (mostly) be replaced. Of course, if they threaten you with bodily harm for filming them ....

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

pem (1013437) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533668)

Uh huh. If they're stealing all your stuff at gunpoint, why are they going to let you keep the video camera?

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534256)

If they are stealing your stuff at gunpoint then why are they going to let you open your gun safe, remove the trigger lock, load your weapon, and fire it on them?

Re:They know the system is coming down (2)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533840)

Thieves can (mostly) be replaced as well.

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534248)

So why do our politicians remain in office for so long?

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534004)

No, then you'll get in trouble for breaking 'wiretap' laws.

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533634)

I'm a conservative and most of the conservatives who know me used to think I was nuts on copyright law until I began to show them how utterly insane our system is.

Seems to me you are proving your point to the wrong people, but then again, those people already know the points and don't care because it earns them money. I'm not a voter in USA, but I think no matter what party you vote for, Hollywood and RIAA needs to be stopped. And talking about it doesn't do anything. The public needs to force the government to stop being corrupt and stop these higher powers being able to ruin normal peoples lives for no good reason. Else it will keep happening.

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533660)

In only two states in the Union are you legally secure in pointing a loaded weapon at someone you catch in the act of robbing you.

For the record, which states are they? Texas must be one and the other?

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534008)

Probably New Hampshire. I believe they are making it legal to brandish a firearm at someone that is trespassing as well.

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

wardred (602136) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534302)

Nevada, I believe.

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

Nocturnal Deviant (974688) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534512)

Legal or not I would shoot the sonofabitch. take me to court and i plead self defense.

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534226)

If you are that keen to kill another human being, join the army, or become a merc. There's plenty to go around, and you don't have to rationalize it.

Re:They know the system is coming down (1)

Nocturnal Deviant (974688) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534494)

To be honest, within the next hundred years I'm expecting the USA will have another revolution, at least if this shit keeps up.

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534624)

Sorry, I think you're conflating a few different issues here. While it may be true that you can't just start shooting people stealing from your home, there's good reason for that. The law allows us to protect ourselves from imminent bodily harm. When we're talking about property loss, the idea is that we want the police to get involved so as to avoid escalation. Think about it. Do you want someone firing off a pistol in a crowded residential area?

You mention 'knee-cap[ing]" and "shoot[ing] to wound". Are you aware that the vast majority of bullets don't actually hit their intended targets? Even for well-trained police? The reason you can't just fire off a few rounds at thieves is that the potential collateral damage is much greater. This would be similar to an innocent child being hit by stray bullets fired between gang members (not in intention, but in result. I'm certainly not equating someone who's defending his home with a gang member.)

Also, the reason we have rules against letting the military "rough up" prisoners is that in the real world, we have this concept of proving guilt BEFORE we punish people. Sure, on TV there are scenes where the military guy JUST KNOWS the terrorist knows where the bomb is. In the real world, there's much more ambiguity. There are many accounts of former interegators agreeing that cajoling and influencing detainees is the most reliable way of extracting information.

Your whole rant seems rather ill-informed and kind of paranoid. Sorry, someone had to say it.

Re:They know the system is coming down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535040)

While I understand your point, I think your analogy is a little flawed.

The laws are in place to prevent collateral damage. You can't advocate your citizens to engage in gunbattles in the street over property. Innocent bystanders might get shot and the entire incident will snowball beyond anyone's control. Not everyone is military-trained, even if they should be, (Note: I am advocating mandatory military service) so they can't be expected to handle a firearm properly. By not assuming the lowest common denominator, you're taking a lot of risks. Also, remember that for state laws, if you make something legal out in the bfe, it's also legal on main street in the capital.

The issue isn't necessarily with copyright per se, but with the current laws allowing companies to sue for that much in the first place. What the **AA is doing right now is suing for criminal reproduction. When that law was written, it was pre-digital age, and you essentially needed to mimic an entire manufacturing site to do what anyone can accomplish in one click, so asking for hundreds of thousands wasn't so extreme, given you have all that fancy equipment already.

What there needs to be is a definition of what constitutes a digital good, if it even exists.

Czar here, czar there, czars are effing everywhere (2)

broknstrngz (1616893) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533226)

I don't know who the dumbass who first came up with 'czar' is, but I'd sure like to kick his ass. Geeks are very prone to linguistic fetishes. There's nothing romantic about a person in charge of some organisation. And if, somehow, that person has complete and unquestionable authority over something, simply calling him/her a 'czar' won't help. Changing the laws will.

Excuse my digression.

Czar: Great title for a job ina democracy... (1)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533624)

I kind of like the term czar. Recall that a Czar was considered by the West (at the time) to be an out of touch, despotic ruler of a backward country. I think that description fits the roles that it is being applied to quite nicely.

Btw, isn't there a clause in the constitution somewhere that says, "no citizen of the US shall bear a title?"

Re:Czar: Great title for a job ina democracy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533838)

"Czar" is not an official title. The official title is "United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator for the Office of Management and Budget".

Re:Czar: Great title for a job ina democracy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534418)

Technically wouldn't she be a czarina since she is a woman?

How long until copyright prisons? (2)

AbrasiveCat (999190) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533242)

When the XXAA upgrade copyright infringement to a felony (to take the enforcement out of the civil court system and the cost out of the XXAA pocket and into ours.) we can be sorta like the old country. They had debtors prisons, we can have copyright prisons. (Maybe they will ship us off to Africa, I think Australia will have the same laws as us when the XXAA can arrange it.)

Re:How long until copyright prisons? (1)

cpghost (719344) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533990)

In many countries, thanks to intense US bullying of the last 10 years, copyright infringement is already a felony. What goes around, comes around.

Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolution (3, Insightful)

inshreds (1813596) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533364)

By RTFA and clicking through, it quotes, "Wiretap authority for these intellectual property crimes, subject to the existing legal protections that apply to wiretaps for other types of crimes, would assist US law enforcement agencies to effectively investigate those offenses, including targeting organized crime and the leaders and organizers of criminal enterprises," says the new whitepaper.

If violation of civil liberties extends to wiretapping for suspected IP violations, I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court. In the US at least, the (Constitutional 4th Amendment) guards against unreasonable search and seizure by requiring law enforcement to present "reasonable cause" to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. Wiretapping without a warrant is a clear violation of these 4th Amendment rights. I for one, would happy donate to the legal fight to protect these rights. Furthermore, legions of underground resistance will surely fight back as well. The foundations of democracy can only be threatened so far before the people decide enough is enough.

Re:Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolutio (3, Insightful)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#35533684)

If violation of civil liberties extends to wiretapping for suspected IP violations, I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court....The foundations of democracy can only be threatened so far before the people decide enough is enough.

Wanna bet? The average Joe isn't going to understand the ramifications of undermining the 4th Amendment (see what's going on in our airports right now, if you don't believe me). There will be no uprising because most Americans won't give a rip as long as they can still watch American Idol and eat at McDonalds while driving their 10 gallons/mile (no, that's not a typo) suburban assault^Wutility vehicle. You and I might get in a tizzy about this, but the rank-and-file won't care until/unless it affects them.

Re:Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolutio (1)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534314)

I hate to sound like a troll, but please, revolution? It's not going to happen. If you download a song, you will be painted as some evil criminal, vilified and justly hounded down in the public's eye. This bit about piracy is just a farce to implement their own draconian control measures. The Internet is too much freedom for the masses in their eyes. They need more control. You need controlled. It's for your own good. It's for the children.

Re:Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolutio (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534590)

I don't know, $100/barrel (or more) might make the amount of expendable income average families have suddenly dissappear. Then realisation of how much everything else costs should hit home. It'll take alot longer and alot more before anything happens in the U$A, but to quote a certain Smith: "It is inevitable". I'm not sure how printing more money can fix that.

Virus to fix the system (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535290)

I'm waiting for an anonymous style group to make a stuxnet style virus that uses a variety of 0 day exploits that forces everyone that uses a federal and state level computer to download a song and a movie. Forget breaking a few centrifuges, they could try to break the system.

Re:Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolutio (1)

ryants (310088) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534984)

I predict that many now docile citizens will rise up and wage revolution, both underground and in high court.

Oh wait, you were serious. Let me laugh even harder.

Re:Wiretapping for IP Crimes would spark revolutio (1)

dbet (1607261) | more than 3 years ago | (#35535610)

You don't need "revolution", only violence.

Two Steps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533500)

1. Get these fuckers out of power
2. Deactivate the DHS

That still leaves the banksters and plutonium.
Which begs the question, does anything even matter anymore?

I mean who cares if you win your trial by jury nullification when you (and the jurors forced to attend) only have two years to live from the radiation fallout?

good job (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35533702)

good job i realy like your post dude keep it up
http://liveforex4trading.blogspot.com

SLASHDOTTERS UNITE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534198)

Petition , stop their power mongering
elect those that are of a more altruistic nature to lead and vote them in
demand that anyone in congress and that is a state elected official must keep their fiscal records available
to show evidence they're not being bribed , and even make it where All elected officials are paid marginally above minimum wage - federal minimal wage , which isnt unrealistic considering they're not producing any goods , they get big tax breaks and free parking at meters .... why do they need more than minimum wage??

PETITION , ELECT , MAKE CHANGE - DONT B&&(^ ABOUT THE PROBLEM BE A PROBLEM SOLVER !!!

If a private entity (1)

Paracelcus (151056) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534340)

Like an industrial trade group, wants to wire tap me, I reserve the privilege to sue them in open court (the US) and (in some countries) to hire hit men to to assassinate their corporate members. And in the EU to get arrest warrants issued for them.

Just because you (MPAA, RIAA) are "safely" protected by the bought and paid for US government does not protect you anyplace else!

Re:If a private entity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534828)

If a private entity seeks to trespass in my home by wiretapping my line, I reserve the right to shoot the trespasser.

Revolution? Pshaw. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35534652)

Yeah, what do you think this is, Egypt or something?

'Hollywood's PATRIOT Act.' -- pretty pejorative! (1)

unil_1005 (1790334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35534762)

Really, it can't be all that bad...

...can it?

Recording Audio on Rhapsody (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35535312)

How are they going to stop us sneaky users who know how to use Wavepad (by NCH) to record audio as it's played from a 20 song / month free account by Rhapsody? I can play songs there for free and make MP3s all I want. I could come to school and setup there and do it with a completely new account and email address. No one can touch me.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>