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!

RIAA Wants Right To Hack

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the for-me-but-not-for-thee dept.

Privacy 651

An Anonymous Coward writes: "According to Wired, the recording industry wants the right to hack into your computer and delete your stolen MP3s." From the article: "It's no joke. Lobbyists for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) tried to glue this hacking-authorization amendment onto a mammoth anti-terrorism bill that Congress approved last week. A copy of an RIAA-drafted amendment obtained by Wired News would immunize all copyright holders -- including the movie and e-book industry -- for any data losses caused by their hacking efforts or other computer intrusions 'that are reasonably intended to impede or prevent' electronic piracy." Does this give you the right to crack RIAA systems to make sure no one there is selling copies of your term paper?

cancel ×

651 comments

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

Suck it Trebek (-1)

Sunken Kursk (518450) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430348)

Suck it long, suck it hard.

Re:Suck it Trebek (-1)

Dead Fart Warrior (525970) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430474)

What's the difference between you, Trebek, and a cow?

I can't remember the punchline, but your mother is a whore!

THIS IS GREAT!!! (4, Interesting)

TheMMaster (527904) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430352)

If this won't help bringing linux to the desktop, what will?? you can give them every right you want... For them to enforce it, you'll HAVE to be running windows! ;-)

Re:THIS IS GREAT!!! (1)

viking099 (70446) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430417)

Assuming everyone stores their mp3's on their local machine.
Personally, if I considered this a threat, I would continue to use Windows at the desktop, and use Linux as my server storage solution (using Samba to map drives).
I haven't kept but about 5% to 10% of my total number of mp3's on my local machine since '98 or so, when hard drives started getting nice and cheap (especially the slower ones... who needs 10K RPM when you're pulling mp3's over a network connection?)

Re:THIS IS GREAT!!! (4, Funny)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430521)

They would have a hell of a time deleting my MP3's of of the 20 or so CD-Roms I keep them on....

Jaysyn

Re:THIS IS GREAT!!! (1)

DrDeaf (108321) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430436)

And the way you'll "HAVE to be running..." is that they'll just make it illegal to run any OS they can't crack.

THIS IS GREAT!!! - The solution (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430469)

Solution!!! Here's a good suggestion to solve terrorism. Hope this reaches the proper authority. Here is a simplistic solution to the Bin Laden problem. It should be so easy... An Israeli friend recently informed me that the UK fought the Islamic terrorist attacks by burying the criminals with a pig. Apparently theIslamic belief is that if ones body is buried with a pig (because they are considered unclean) their soul will go to hell. I did a little research into this subject matter and found it to be true. This got me thinking. If we put a baby pig on every airline flight then all suicide terrorists would abort their missions as they would not want their souls to go to hell. Additionally, if we drop shipped, oh say, 100,000 pigs into Afghanistan I think our re-con and assault efforts may be more successful. Apparently Muslims dislike the very sight of pigs - A LOT! They are also adamantly opposed to alcohol, thus we spike their water supply with a few thousand gallons of moonshine, get them shit-faced and turn the pigs loose. The war would be over in a weekend. Just a thought!

Farenheit 451 is here early. (4, Insightful)

dave-fu (86011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430356)

If this story is true (and I doubt it is, as seen with The Register's recent retraction) then it's the scariest freaking thing I've heard of in a long time. Don't want people surreptitiously going behind my back and torching my legitimate (some of us rip our own CDs, thankyouverymuch) music collection on my hard drive.
Running with the possibility that this is true, hopefully the folks who would hack into peoples' computers will be tried as terrorists under the US's spankin' fresh new bills.

Re:Farenheit 451 is here early. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430368)

hopefully the folks who would hack into peoples' computers will be tried as terrorists under the US's spankin' fresh new bills.

And if they aren't, maybe we can send some white powder to the RIAA head offices... Would server them well!

Re:Farenheit 451 is here early. (5, Informative)

Drizzten (459420) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430422)

From the Wired article:

The RIAA's interest in the USA Act, an anti-terrorism bill that the Senate and the House approved last week, grew out of an obscure part of it called section 815. Called the "Deterrence and Prevention of Cyberterrorism" section, it says that anyone who breaks into computers and causes damage "aggregating at least $5,000 in value" in a one-year period would be committing a crime.

If the current version of the USA Act becomes law, the RIAA believes, it could outlaw attempts by copyright holders to break into and disable pirate FTP or websites or peer-to-peer networks. Because the bill covers aggregate damage, it could bar anti-piracy efforts that cause little harm to individual users, but meet the $5,000 threshold when combined.


I'd call this "circumventing" wouldn't you? Those intrusive bastards want carte blanche to do whatever they want, while ordinary people get screwed.

Re:Farenheit 451 is here early. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430432)

Some version of this story is true. Check out the articel in the LA Times:

Music Firms Fail to Get Anti-Piracy Proposal on Bill [latimes.com]

Re:Farenheit 451 is here early. (5, Informative)

Misch (158807) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430466)

Actually, according to the article, this is already legitimate. The article cites US Code, Title 18, Section 1030 [cornell.edu]

The real news in this is that the USA Anti-Terrorism bill includes language to prevent this, whereas RIAA is trying to open this loophole back up.

Re:Farenheit 451 is here early. (5, Funny)

WalterSobchak (193686) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430472)

Excuse me, I must be halluzinating...

A dark cellar, somewhere in the world. One man - 1 - is examining goods in the cellar. A second man - 2 - enters...
2: FREEZE, thief! What mischief are you up to?
1: No mischief, Sir. My biclycle was stolen yesterday, and I am just looking to see if it is in your cellar.
2: You smashed a window to do this!
1: I had reasonable cause. I saw bicycles in your cellar, and you, Sir, look pretty thieverish yourself ...

Coming to think of it, I want this law to be passed. The nights would be exiting again!

Alex

Question for the RIAA + Justice dept. (5, Insightful)

Rob.Mathers (527086) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430359)

Under the proposed anti-terrorism laws, wouldn't this make the RIAA a terrorist organisation?

Re:Question for the RIAA + Justice dept. (1, Interesting)

robvasquez (411139) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430366)

The government would be Nazis if they allowed this. These people come up with crazier shit each new day.

Re:Question for the RIAA + Justice dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430374)

Nah kidder. They're reported as specifically wanting an exemption. Cart; horse.

Encrypt access to your system (5, Funny)

ZenJabba1 (472792) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430360)

and when they try to break into it, sue them via DCMA and tell them to take a fly f*ck and leave my personal property alone!

I don't have pirated stuff on there, and I don't want them snooping around my system

Re:Encrypt access to your system (3, Interesting)

drnomad (99183) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430509)

Doesn't this "right" to hack, imply "the right to violate the DMCA"??

Making your own MP3s for hacking (5, Insightful)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430362)

If this got through then in theory a hacker could create their own 'tune', copyright it and let it wander the net. Then after a couple of months claim that the reason they were breaking into the FBI computer was to check that they didn't have any illegal copies of your MP3.

Not only that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430447)

claim that the reason they were breaking into the FBI computer was to check that they didn't have any illegal copies of your MP3

Not only that - write a virus/torjan/worm that does the eqivalent of "find / -name *.mp3 -exec rm {} ;" and you're completely free from prosecution.

They can have my MP3's (3, Funny)

hAkron (448427) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430363)

As long as they don't delete any of my porno they can have my MP3's

Re:They can have my MP3's (2, Insightful)

Tim Doran (910) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430406)

Well, the RIAA may not care about your pr0n, but the owners of those copyright images and movies may. Imagine waking up every few weeks to find that another sex site operator has broken into your computer, conducted a search and deleted some images it (summarily) decided infringed on its rights.

Imagine every few months waking up to find one of these sites screwed up and wiped your harddisk... and there's nothing you can do about it...

Re:They can have my MP3's (2, Funny)

tcc (140386) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430519)

> As long as they don't delete any of my porno they can have my MP3's

Yeah let the MPAA take care of the porn... but they won't use that law, they will need to rewrite the proposition so they can have the right to download "to be sure it's porn" before deleting it off :)

Are we really surprised? (4, Insightful)

spacefem (443435) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430365)

We all saw this coming, but that's beside the point, you know what my main thought is today?

Who are these people?

They have that much time on their hands that they're willing to hack into individual people's computers to look for their files?

At dinner parties, do they go off about mp3's and how every college kid is going to kill the record industry?

Movements like this say "passion" to me, they're passionate about their copywrites, it's what they eat, sleep, and breath. Do they have nothing better to do? Are there this many idiots in the world?

Maybe I just haven't seen enough corporate America yet, but I can't believe people make their lives out of something this petty.

Re:Are we really surprised? (3, Interesting)

Green Aardvark House (523269) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430413)

I discussed these types of issues ad infitum on The Napster Forum [slashdot.org] .

I wish my post was still there, but I came across some evidence that the economy was mostly to blame. I found statistics on income and record sales and found that incomes fell, so did record sales. This makes sense, since music is a "luxury item" and is one of the first things to go off personal budgets in an economic slowdown.

They have a convenient scapegoat in "piracy", even though the economy is in the crapper, and the quality of the product is such that it should just follow the economy.

Re:Are we really surprised? (-1)

motherfuckin_spork (446610) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430495)

Who are these people?

crack smokers...

need I say more?

Re:Are we really surprised? (5, Interesting)

cavemanf16 (303184) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430499)

Wrong. They're not passionate about their copyrights. They could care less if a million people copied the tunes, as long as they all paid their $2.00/mp3 for doing so. This whole copyright business with the DMCA is specifically about making the heads of recording studios richer, not about making the actual creators of the music rich, or even given credit for their works.

And yes, once you've been in corporate America, you'll see that this shitty money grabbing politics happens all the time. Enjoy college while you can.

And besides, the only computers they'll end up cracking into to delete files from will be the Britney Spears and NSYNC teenie bopper fans of the world, which just means that they'll be pissing off little teenage girls and boys, who will in turn cry to their parents, who will then go ballistic on the RIAA. Just another wonderful way to alienate their user base even more than they already have.

Re:Are we really surprised? (1)

Kalabajoui (232671) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430512)

While they're at it, why don't they just ask for the right to break into people's cars and homes physically. Then they can search for and destroy 'pirated' copyrighted materials all day. The massive and unrelenting assualts on the freedoms us Americans have come to take for granted make me sick and disillusioned with our government and society in general. I suppose that is what happens when most of us have already lost our fundamental freedoms. Following this link- http://come.to/foundation , should prove very interesting and enlightening on the subject of Americans and our relationship with our government. Though such beacons of hope offer me encouragement, I'm increasingly discouraged and dismayed by most of my fellow American's ignorance and hostility to true notions of freedom. Politics seem like a surmountable barrier, where as the ignorance and apathy of the people seems equally insurmountable in the cause of effecting positive change.

ROFL! oh wait...its not april fool's day. (4, Insightful)

fjordboy (169716) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430372)

Ok, something like this begs several questions: First of all, how would they determined that the mp3s and whatnot on my computer aren't legal? I happen to own cds for almost every single mp3 on my computer.

Second of all, how would they go about hacking into our computers? If these guys are stupid enough to come up with such an idiotic proposal, how can we expect them to be able to hack a 386 running windows 3.1 on a network running win NT with no patches applied?

To get to the point, this is the stupidest idea I think i've ever heard in my life.

Re:ROFL! oh wait...its not april fool's day. (1)

GreenJeepMan (398443) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430398)

If microsoft has their way with WindowsXP and Passport, it won't be very difficult.

Hacking? (1)

Green Aardvark House (523269) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430376)

What about the people who didn't download MP3's off Napster? How would the know the difference between "pirated" MP3's and MP3's you ripped yourself?

This is a heavy-handed "guilty until proven innocent" approach. There are a lot of privacy rights issues at stake here.

Firewall sales will go through the roof if this comes to pass.

Time to get active (1)

the_rev_matt (239420) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430377)

The time for action is now. Call your congressweasel and let them know what a severe violation of civil rights this is. More important, let them know that this will affect EVERYONE, including huge businesses that may lose hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars from lost data when the RIAA's "experts" trash a hard drive (their technical experts have, from what I've seen of them in action, fewer technical skills than my cat). Sure, some will go for the rights issues, but if you also point out how many of their corporate sponsors stand to lose craploads of money, it's a nice added incentive.

Furthermore, STOP SUPPORTING THE RIAA!!! Don't buy albums from RIAA members. There's a lot of great music that isn't issued on major labels, go out and find it! Support indie artists and labels, and show the RIAA that if they want to create an entertainment police state, you will not be participating.

Re:Time to get active (1)

egriebel (177065) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430433)

Don't buy albums from RIAA members. There's a lot of great music that isn't issued on major labels, go out and find it!

Easy to say, difficult to do. The RIAA has become such a monopoly because the represent (indirectly through their labels) all major artists and most "minor" ones. I doubt that this form of protest would amount to much.

We are living in some fucked times. (NT) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430378)

(NT)

Take a leave ? (1)

XPulga (1242) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430380)

Isn't it about time to move to Humorixia [i-want-a-website.com] ?

Ah, now I understand! (4, Funny)

RedOregon (161027) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430383)

I get it now... according to the RIAA, I'm guilty until proven innocent. They want to be able to crack my system in order to prove me innocent. Oh, and if they fry my system, sorry, but I can't do anything about it.

Re:Ah, now I understand! (1)

ronmon (95471) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430484)

Heh, as the saying goes:

Justice if for those who can afford it.

So let me see (5, Insightful)

haplo21112 (184264) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430384)

Hacking is terrorism, but Hacking to defend copyrights is legal if you have enough Cash to by a Congressman, and get him to make legislation that says so? Have I got that right?

Re:So let me see (5, Insightful)

imadork (226897) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430493)

Hacking is terrorism, but Hacking to defend copyrights is legal if you have enough Cash to by a Congressman, and get him to make legislation that says so? Have I got that right?

Remember, one man's Terrorist is another man's Freedom Fighter.

This feature is built into the WIN XP license (5, Informative)

weave (48069) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430388)

Read the license to Win XP carefully. It has a part in it that says that Microsoft may disable your access to copyrighted content at any time without notice upon request by content owners.

Re:This feature is built into the WIN XP license (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430453)

A click-through license hasn't been tested in court yet, and I have read that these types of contracts will not hold up in court due to the fact that the consumer has no bargaining power in the "agreement" of contract and that it is considered a type of entrapment.

I forget the exact legal terms, but consumer law protects citizens in the non-digital world in terms of bargaining power, seeking recourse, and being forced into something without really agreeeing to it (opening the celophane wrapper, etc.)

Not really (3, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430389)

The RIAA just wants to be exempt from the new cyberterrorism regulations in the anti-terrorism bills.

They are afraid what they do all the time will be classified as cyberterrorism.

So really, even the RIAA is afraid of these new cyberterrorism regulations, and is trying to get their own loopholes put in.

Of course (5, Funny)

CaptainZapp (182233) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430395)

Of course they want the right to hack into your computer. Same as our friends from the BSA.

What is most disturbing however, is that those folks are not responsible for consequential damage, according to the article.

Uuups, sorry we trashed your hard disk. Here's a 3$ off voucher for the new Britney Spears CD.

If a web site defacer could wind up in jail for life, then the same measures should apply to corporate entities.

BSA? The Boy Scouts of America? (4, Funny)

Root Down (208740) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430438)

I knew there was something insidious about an organization that trains brownshirts in survival skills.

Re:BSA? The Boy Scouts of America? (1)

Lordrashmi (167121) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430482)

I believe he was referring to the "Business Software Association" rather then the Boy Scouts of America... Though I do agree that there is something disturbing about the boyscouts. Men taking young boys out into the middle of the woods doesn't sound right to me.

how do they detemine? (2, Insightful)

4444444 (444444) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430399)

how do they determin the eleagal mp3's from the ones you ripped from your cd's

Riiiight (1)

nanodroid (116613) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430400)

This is logistically feasable because:



Everyone the RIAA wants to exploit runs Windows.
It wouldn't suprise me if MICROS~1 will leave the key in the door for the RIAA, so to speak.



I guess I don't have anything to worry about; unless the RIAA sends some mad irc juariors that can root my OpenBSD 'wall.

Couldn't this lead to even WORSE things? (3, Interesting)

jued0001 (95852) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430402)

Couldn't this potentially lead to something even more nasty (if it ever comes to fruition), like M$ coming in and wiping out pirated copies of their OS? XP is already a step in the nasty direction, but that would just be completely insane...

Re:Couldn't this lead to even WORSE things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430446)

Or wiping out legal copies of their OS, forcing you to pay more to upgrade to their current OS.

The Simple Solution. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430404)

Let the RIAA hack the shit out of whatever they want and then when it is all said and done, sue them under DMCA for violating and circumnavigating your boxe's security.

problem solved.

Black Ice (1)

tomknight (190939) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430405)

Doesn't this sort of thing make you wish that black ice [everything2.com] exists?

Tom.

Dear Gaia . . . (3, Interesting)

cjpez (148000) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430407)

Okay, yeah, obviously they were eventually going to try something this moronic. They might even be lucky enough to get it passed for awhile until the supreme court manages to knock it down.

But are they REALLY so insensitive as to tack it on to the end of an anti-terrorism bill? This has nothing to do with keeping terrorists at bay (some could argue that half of the stuff that is still in the bill doesn't do that either, but at least those bits have rationalized themselves). This is just some greedy organization that tried to use a "get this through quick" bill to slip in some really nasty stuff.

The other day, I was trying to force myself to reconsider my opinions on the evilness organizations like the RIAA. Or at least take a closer look at the actual humans involved in the decisions they make. But this is just insane . . .

evil (0, Troll)

Tom (822) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430409)

taking a global tragedy and abusing it as a means to further unrelated and greedy personal agendas.

and I thought the music mafia had already reached MAXEVIL. today, just thinking of them makes me feel as if someone puked all over me. I don't think I'll buy music from a RIAA member again. ever.

Re:evil (1)

tomknight (190939) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430444)

If I was moderating today, I'd be annoyed that there wasn't a "-1, Stupid - Obviously Didn't Read Article" category - as this comment clearly falls into it.


Tom.

eggplants (1, Offtopic)

ender-iii (161623) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430412)

eggplants!! [eggforge.net]

Retaliation (2, Interesting)

Jason Straight (58248) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430414)

Any attempt by those bastards on my machine will constitute me to enter a "self defense mode", in which I will return the attacks to them 10 fold. This is just bullshit. I'll file charges in michigan (my home state) against them where any hacking is considered a felony.

will the last geek... (5, Funny)

Jodrell (191685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430415)

Will the last geek to leave America, please turn Slashdot off? Thanks.

Re:will the last geek... (4, Interesting)

ClubStew (113954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430452)

I hear ya! With each passing week, I want to move to Germany more and more. Heck, their government funds open source projects and is practically begging for computer engineers and scientists.

RIAA: Come get my MP3's (2)

NineNine (235196) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430418)

I dare you.

The Silver Lineing... (2)

FatRatBastard (7583) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430420)

According to the article the reason that the RIAA was pushing this POS was because the new Anti-Terrorism bill (you know, the one that states that hacking=terrorism) would put the Kybosh on the RIAA trying to block people who trade MP3s and such.

I still think the hacking provisions of the anti-terrorist bill stink (and I hope they're sunsetted eventually) but it gives me a nice warm glow to know that they're also causing the RIAA lots of grief.

I can't wait for the first person to sue the RIAA for "terrorism" when they try to port-block someone. I'd even donate some $$$ for the cause.

Everyone wants to crack my computer! (3, Flamebait)

ClubStew (113954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430423)

Great! So now the government AND RIAA (is there any difference anymore?) want to hack my computer. What kind of country is this? Apparently freedom is only granted to those with the money. Matthew Lesko [lesko.com] should put that in his book.

We really need to start writing our congressmen and explaining the truth to them about technology. Has everyone written their congressmen yet? With so much bad legislation being proposed, one or two are bound to get passed.

There is another solution, though: transphasic torpedoes [startrek.com] . They took out the bork with one shot in the last episode of Star Trek Voyager; perhaps they can take out Uncle Bill's cube before he assimilates the entire government and media!

Re:Everyone wants to crack my computer! (2)

ClubStew (113954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430465)

Oops, so I don't get flaimed: "bork" was a mistype. I meant "borg".

Disrupting/Snooping on gnutella? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430424)

"If the current version of the USA Act becomes law, the RIAA believes, it could outlaw attempts by copyright holders to break into and disable pirate FTP or websites or peer-to-peer networks."

I can imagine the RIAA doing stuff like putting disruptive nodes on the gnutella network. However since no would be losing any money could they get away with it?

I had a suspection something was wrong last time I used bearshare, maybe my paranoia was justified :)

... (1)

jlemmerer (242376) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430427)

hmmm this sounds like they do not prevent terrorism but they actively commit a terrorist action. does anybody know if this applies only to the us or if the want to hack anywhere, anytime?

Although it seems like a joke... (2, Insightful)

Noofus (114264) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430428)

...It might not be all too soon. With the anti-terrorism legislation that has screwed with our rights more than necessary, it seems that congress is willing to do all sorts of scary things in the name of public safety. This seems to be the beginning of a big-brother society. Would the RIAA have rights to randomly hack into any machine they suspect of having illegal MP3s? What would happen in a situation like mine where the only MP3s on my computer are the ones I have ripped from my own CDs to transfer to my rio? Would the RIAA claim they have the right to crack my security measures because they know there are MP3s on the computer, legal or not?

This is insane....

Already Legal? (3, Interesting)

slashkitty (21637) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430429)

from wired:
The RIAA believes that this kind of technological "self-help" against online pirates, if done carefully, is legal under current federal law. But the RIAA is worried about the USA Act banning that practice -- and neither the Senate nor the House versions of that bill include the RIAA's suggested changes.
It would seem that they are only trying to prevent this bill from outlawing their hacking. Is there no law preventing their cracks right now? Are they already working on a system to break into everyone's computer? Have they already started it up?

He HOPES??? (2)

BadDoggie (145310) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430431)

Peter Swire, a former top privacy official under President Clinton and now a professor at Ohio State University, says he hopes there would be public debate on any such proposal.

He hopes for public debate? We already know [slashdot.org] there won't be [politechbot.com] .

woof.

Did n't you hear? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430487)

There is no debate in this environment, "You're either with us or with the terrorists". People are afraid of descent incase it makes them look like they are with the terrorists.

Why do you think everyone with the opertunatey of half an ulteriour motive is trying to get their amendment stuffed into a law being passed?

How to get free lawsuit money.. (3, Funny)

glowingspleen (180814) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430434)

Step 1: Download a few pirated mp3's

Step 2: Leave your PC connected to file sharing programs until the RIAA finds your IP address

Step 3: Allow RIAA MP3-Killer-Bot to delete your mp3's

Step 4: Sue the RIAA, pointing out the fact that you actually had a Step 1.5, in which you renamed some of your personal documents as mp3's, named after your favorite bands. It's their fault for not checking the data inside the files first.

Ta da.

Consequential Damages (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430492)

They protect themselves from this with their "Conseqential Damages" clause. Heck, they could destroy your computer, accidentially cause it to over heat, catch fire, burn down your house, entire block, and whole town and not be responsible because this would be considered "consiquential damage" from their actions.

Bring back current law (1)

Si (9816) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430435)

What on earth did Glazier mean by that? If a law is current, how can it need bringing back?

Isn't it about time the RIAA (MPAA, et al) just quietly went away? Can't they see they're not needed any more?

term paper analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430439)

crack RIAA systems to make sure no one there is selling copies of your term paper
So you can protect your revenue stream but they can't protect theirs, eh Timothy? :-p

Personal firewall (1)

CuriousGeorge113 (47122) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430440)

Wouldn't installing a personal firewall keep them out? Or, if you were behind a firewalled netowrk altogether. Kinda sucky for all those people just connected to cable/DSL modems without a clue in the world though.

~~~~~~

Let's get this passed! (3, Interesting)

egburr (141740) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430441)

For once, the RIAA may be doing something (unintentionally) good for us. Since the article didn't provide the actual proposal, I am assuming its description was farily accurate. To sum it up: anyone can hack into any system anywhere for any reason with complete immunitiy if they say they were doing so to check for suspected piracy of works for which they own the copyright. This sounds like a blank check for hackers.

Re:Let's get this passed! (2, Insightful)

daoine (123140) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430481)

The actual text is linked off of the Wired article, I've posted one of the two suggested texts for the amendment.:

No action may be brought under this subsection arising out of any impairment of the availability of data, a program, a system or information, resulting from measures taken by an owner of copyright in a work of authorship, or any person authorized by such owner to act on its behalf, that are intended to impede or prevent the infringement of copyright in such work by wire or electronic communication; provided that the use of the work that the owner is intending to impede or prevent is an infringing use.

Which means, if you own the copyright to something, and you believe that someone is poaching said thing, you have a blank check under this law. They can't prosecute you for whatever you do, provided you can prove the intent was to prevent/impede distribution.

But on the other hand, isn't intentionally breaking into someone's machine already illegal? How the hell would this amendment stand up as opposed to laws already in place?

OPEN BSD firewall...... (2, Funny)

bozo42 (68206) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430442)

.....let'm try me...

Red Herring (5, Insightful)

nyjx (523123) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430445)

The wired article says that ammendment ddin't get through. Interestingly (from the wired article): "We might try and block somebody," Glazier said. "If we know someone is operating a server, a pirated music facility, we could try to take measures to try and prevent them from uploading or transmitting pirated documents."

It seems unlikely that hacking the individual machines would be the best solution for this (even if the law were to allow it). The cost would be very high. Much cheaper to do what they are now doing:

  • Leaning on ISPs to cut off "abusing" users (without comeback - see previous slashdot stories)
  • Suing the larger sites (napster obviously)
  • Trying to stifle decryption technology.
In the long run these are likely to be 95% effective if the succeed. If their wording were to ever pass into law they would just be setting a dangerous precedent for anybody to go and explore somebody else's machine. I'm just off to RIAA's web site to "check" if they have a copy of my (copyrighted) memoires on the server...

What about Commercial Interests? (1)

AfterLord (464656) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430457)

I don't consider this very likely, say the computer they "suspected" had other intellectual property on such as commerical sourcecode, Business documents whatever. whats to stop these being deleted or viewed,of course it isn't very likely that the recording industry would manage to pull most computers with MP3's on are rarely sufficiently exploitable to allow file access (Save those windows user who share there C:\ to the world)

Not Unreasonable (0, Troll)

Bud Dwyer (527622) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430459)

Imagine someone broke into your house and stole your stereo. Later, through your neighbor's window, you see your stereo. You try to reason with your neighbor (just as the RIAA has tried reason with music-thieving public), but to no avail. Would you not then be justified to break into your neighbors house and reclaim your property?


I think this "Right to Hack" law is long overdue. In addition to copyright holders, I believe victims of libel and slander should also be able to legally use hacking to remedy their situations. The internet will be a lot more civilized when people realize they can no longer get away with anything.

Re:Not Unreasonable (2)

radja (58949) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430526)

> Imagine someone broke into your house and stole your stereo. Later, through your neighbor's window, you see your stereo. You try to reason with your neighbor (just as the RIAA has tried reason with music-thieving public), but to no avail. Would you not then be justified to break into your neighbors house and reclaim your property?

So you break in and take the stereo. The neighbours told you it was their stereo.
And when you get home, it turns out it wasn't your stereo, just the same model. However.. under this law it's legal...

//rdj

A good development (5, Funny)

pubjames (468013) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430479)


I think this is a great idea. People who copy music and distribute it on the internet are robbing artists of their rightful earnings. After all, the RIAA is really just a kind of charity that collects money for poor musicians.

I think they should go further. They should allow the RIAA to break into people's houses to check that they don't have any music copies on cassette. If they do, the RIAA should be allowed to smash up their music system. And crap on their carpet.

RIAA isnt losing money (2)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430480)

Student cant afford to pay the money for a CD BUT wants the music (and has NO intention of spending any money even if he did... beer is more important), they have one of three choices...

1) copy a friend's CD (unless friend doesnt have CD)
2) download songs off of internet
3) goes to the local store and steals it

cases one and two the RIAA doenst lose money because the student wasnt going to buy it anyway
case three, the store, the artist, the distributor, the Record Label and the RIAA lose money...

I think that it's time.... (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430485)

I think it's time for an open source "revenge" type security system. They hack your system, and the system they are using takes MUCH damage. I don't know how feasible this would be, but if every time the stuck a hand out, they drew back a nub, they would probably change thier tune. Or but more laws...

Jaysyn

What are we worried about? (1)

Rob.Mathers (527086) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430486)

Although i don't know how they would implement this, I imagine that even the most basic firewalls (ZoneAlarm for Windows, or firewalls in most Distros for *nix) would stop the RIAA. Unless, of course, dubya's cronies want to put backdoors into those as well...

Yikes!! (1)

ZeLonewolf (197271) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430490)

The RIAA, a private organization now wants to be judge, jury, and executioner...and this is not to mention guerilla warrior. This is a truly outrageous proposition, and it shows who is REALLY acting the part of a terrorist.

Stolen vs Legal MP3s? (2)

Root Down (208740) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430491)

It is legal to create MP3s of music you own. How is it possible to determine which are legal and which are illegal, given only a list of files on your computer? Do they have a catalogue of the CDs I own?

April fool or juridical bug bite ? (2)

mirko (198274) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430494)

  • I write all of my MP3 on CDRs so that I can listen too it on my Expanium while biking, guess it'll take them a long time to just realise my laptop is not the right place to search
  • broomstick, is temporarily under Linux (I am developping somethin else)...Hope they can just "see" it if they want to hack it
  • the MP3 I collect are the digital versions of songs I buy as second-hand LP's so they might find it even harder to prove that I infringed their shit
  • Last but not least: when I don't listen too these good'ole times songs, I listen to GNUArt [gnuart.org] GPL'ed music [gnuart.net] which makes it definitely a bad day for their "hackers".

It makes me sick! (1)

mir (106753) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430496)

Frankly, I oppose the recent anti-terrorism bills has caving in to terrorists, but in any case in understand their intent and I understand why people would want them. After a terrible disaster law-makers are trying to find a way to protect the American people against more attacks. I can argue with the means, but not with the end.
But that companies would take advantage of this effort to try to sneak in amendments that would help them "protect their revenue flow" just makes me sick! Don't this people have any decency? Or moral sense? Or anything that would prevent them from using the death of thousands of people to try to curb the laws in their favor?

How this could work. (3, Interesting)

squaretorus (459130) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430497)

This could work in a couple of easy ways, if assume the world runs Win.

Simply release a great free sound player that incorporates some drice and network sweeping functions "to make it easier to find the music you want to play".

If an M3 is found the software can do one of two things;
1 Delete it, but keeping a copy within some HUGE archive file so the user can still play it but not copy or share it
2 Resave the file with your name, address, etc embedded.

Now if you share the file your info is going along with it. If the software finds a file with someone elses details, it gets deleted from your PC.

Keep the files playable so people dont go back to the old copy of REAL on a cover CD somewhere to get their old files back (as if 90% of users would know how).

That'd do it, quietly, like the way copy protection on CDs just slipped onto the market. They dont have to hack you - they just give you free software a la MS-IE

So... what IS terrorism? (2)

eldurbarn (111734) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430498)

RIAA wants to be able to enforce the law. They want to be able to take the law into their own hands. They want to be able to strike against targets of their own choosing.


Terrorists have their own agenda, too, and want to strike against targets of their own choosing, taking the law into their own hands.


RIAA wants to be able to act like a terrorist, yet be protected from the anti-terrorist laws.


Egad!

did anyone actually read the proposed amendment? (5, Informative)

jerrytcow (66962) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430503)

it says nothing about hacking into comuters and deleting files. Wired no doubtedly knows this, but they also know this headline will get them several thousand hits today
Here's the full text (emphasis mine):

'No action may be brought under this subsection arising out of any impairment of the availability of data, a program, a system or information, resulting from measures taken by an owner of copyright in a work of authorship, or any person authorized by such owner to act on its behalf, that are reasonably intended to impede or prevent the unauthorized transmission of such work by wire or electronic communication of such transmission would infringe the rights of the copyright owner.''

It looks like they are trying to come up with a way to detect if mp3s are being transmitted, and block it.

Dangerous to respond/ (3, Insightful)

joshtimmons (241649) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430504)

I worry about this scenario:

1. RIAA starts portscanning my box, testing buffer overflow exploits, etc. in an attempt to get into my system.
2. I notice the suspicious activity, but don't know who it is.
3. I decide to figure out what's going on by scanning the originator and applying other various security tools. This could be anything, but if someone is trying to get in and I don't know who it is, I'm going to be tempted to respond in some way to stop the attack.
4. I get convicted of a felony (in many states) or terrorism (hasn't passed yet) for trying to hack into the RIAA's system.
5. They don't even get a slap on the wrist because it's legal for them.

My point is that it puts knowledgable people in a very risky position because they don't know who is attacking their PC and would naturally try to respond.

They claim they already have the right... (5, Informative)

Masem (1171) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430505)

first, READ THE ARTICLE.

RIAA already claims that they have the right to hack your box if there is sufficient evidence (for them) that you are engaging in illegal distribution of their copyrighted material. Any 'incidental' damage to your computer outside of their copyrighted material was just side effects and not their fault, according to how their read the law.

The rub here is that in the recently passed USA bill, any act of hacking that incures more than $5k of damages could be concidered as a terrorist act, and thus, if RIAA were to accidently wipe your hard drive with their hacking attempts, that could be a terrorist act.

So RIAA was trying to get language added to the USA bill that would protect hacking done by copyright owners from being considered a terrorist threat, allowing them to continuing following the law as they believe they can already.

Apparently, if they've done this, no one has sued them, traced them, or otherwise indicated that their mp3's have suddenly disappeared. As it stands, I think it's a rather questionable application of the law and I wonder if further legal investigation of it should be done.

RIAA recieved NO money from me this weekend (2)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430510)

bought 12 CDs at a pawnshop for 3.00 each, pawnshop made 12.00 on the deal, RIAA recieved NOTHING!

oh and it was some good stuff to...

ACDC, thick upper lip
ACDC, Dirty Deads
Led Zepplin, Presence
Megadeth, Peace sells
Megadeth, Risk
Days Of The New, Yellow Album
and a bunch more...

Now on a more serious note... (1)

TheMMaster (527904) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430515)

I?ve just read this article and to my disgust this looks very real. I do get the feeling that there is something very wrong with these ant-terrorist bills. It seems to me that they are abusing the situation somewhat to ?sneak in? other little rules that some people wanted a long time.
I quote ?If the current version of the USA Act becomes law, the RIAA believes, it could outlaw attempts by copyright holders to break into and disable pirate FTP or websites or peer-to-peer networks.?
I am sorry but isn?t that outlawed already? I really think the RIAA is going to far this time, because IMHO they are abusing the situation to legalize something that?s illegal already!!
Plus what if they succeed? And they do actually delete all files on your hard drive (as pointed out in the article) where can you go and claim your money?? Who can you sue? You probably can?t prove that there was 10 years of work on your hard drive, as they can?t prove that you had those ?offending? MP3?s on your system? this has the potential of becoming a BIG mess

Some things they could do... (1)

scumio (528472) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430518)

They might be able to use this to get more music, too. Say some user had MP3's of music they wrote, sitting on their hard drive, as yet un-copyrighted. Instead of the RIAA going and deleting all mp3's on the machines, they go in and grab them to check and make sure they are 'legal'. They grab this guys' stuff and copyright it for one of their own artists. bam, the guy just lost a bunch of music he had written, and even if he RE-wrote it, he couldn't copyright it now. That's bunk.

RIAA, sociopathy, and lobotomies (4, Interesting)

Marasmus (63844) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430522)

There is no such thing as 'the right thing to do' when it comes to the RIAA.

the "we claim to denounse the 'vigilante' actions of music piraters, but we are trying to become legally-protected vigilantes" hypocricy is, well, baffling. I don't think that any sane body of people could come up with anything as fundamentally and legally wrong. The RIAA just makes itself out to be a body of mentally-imbalanced sociopaths.

How far does the RIAA plan to take this? The mention of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 is not only symbolically but literally relevant. Will the RIAA start burning books because we could translate the music into multiple sinusoidal equations and print it on paper? Are they going to get 'expert witnesses' to testify that the human brain never loses any data which it receives, and thus the human brain itself is a physical medium of piracy? Will they then lobotomize me to get their song back?

Of course this is an exaggeration... however, it is more possible today than it was yesterday.

Good luck (2)

dudle (93939) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430523)

$ ls -l ~/mp3
Permission denied

I don't own the directory. Good luck :P

WORM Media at its finest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2430524)

Just write to a CD-R.

Of course this brings up the problem of shuffling CDs, but just imagine the frustrations you would bring to such an evil affiliation.

they're on crack (1)

Velex (120469) | more than 12 years ago | (#2430525)

When it comes right down to it, my mp3s are on a 60 gB reiserfs drive that doesn't even have a partition table (mkreiserfs /dev/hdd). There's no way they're getting though my mad ipchains and iptables and whatnot. When it comes right down to it, this is just helping Micro$oft shoot themselves in the foot with XP's weirdness, and it's not affecting those of us who are smart enough to switch over to GNU. To make a long story short, they're on crack if they think they have any enforcement here.

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>