Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > I can't imagine they would actually follow through with this though, all > it takes is one incident where they cause financial harm to someone with > an mp3 they misidentify and their highground is gone. Then again, I can't > imagine congress being so massively stupid either, so I suppose anything > is possible. One scenario I can imagine is the MPAA ddos'ing or h4x0ring a university hospital network because they found warez on some secretary's desktop PC. As a result, some databases get corrupted and patients die. Would this bill shield the MPAA from being liable for manslaughter? -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 02:37:15PM -0700, Rowland, Alan D wrote: > > I fully agree this is Not Good (TM), hence the BAD in my response. Having > said that, satellite providers periodically 'kill' hacked access cards on > equipment in the user's home with no legal ramifications. How would this be > significantly different? Waiving the fourth amendment flag is just FUD in > this case. Satellite access cards are technically the property of the individual companies and are not allowed to be sold, so if they want to send down some code which disables your access to their system they are allowed. Causing damage to someone's receiver on the other hand, would be bad mojo. However, someone's computer is NOT their property, nothing on it belongs to them (except maybe the copyrighted material of the clients they represent :P), not even a service you are getting from them. I can't imagine they would actually follow through with this though, all it takes is one incident where they cause financial harm to someone with an mp3 they misidentify and their highground is gone. Then again, I can't imagine congress being so massively stupid either, so I suppose anything is possible. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
> I had significant input in my life regarding the difference between "can" > and "may." IMHO significant numbers of net citizens have forgotten that > difference. therefore all of us need to give up our civil rights? the terrorists have won. randy
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
I'd get on my cell phone and call the police. That's their job. Of course there is that little fact of having a legal right to the property in question in the first place. :) I fully agree this is Not Good (TM), hence the BAD in my response. Having said that, satellite providers periodically 'kill' hacked access cards on equipment in the user's home with no legal ramifications. How would this be significantly different? Waiving the fourth amendment flag is just FUD in this case. There's more than sufficient current law out there that applies in this case. The entertainment industry just wants an even easier answer. They're lazy. What's new? WorldComm, Adelphia, AOL, (you and me next?), have made this industry and its practices an easy target. Historically, market segments either clean up their own act, or government steps in. I believe this business is at that point now. How we act in the near future will greatly affect the amount of government involvement we'll see. Arguing in support of haz0r/warez networks won't help the cause. To put a different spin on the DCMA/17USC512 takedown letter issue, does this mean you support opt-out lists for Spam as apposed to opt-in? That's how the entertainment industry views our current process. There's a lot of disucssion on this list (actually OT but we see it here anyway) about identifying questionable E-mail traffic (spam). Is it really that much harder to identify questionable P2P traffic? Or are we all too busy listening to our MP3s playlists and watching the latest Starwars rip? Just my 2¢ Best regards, _ Alan Rowland -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 1:57 PM To: Rowland, Alan D Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:11:00 PDT, "Rowland, Alan D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > IANAL but IMHO spewing cracked copies of say, Photoshop, or other > copyright violations might be considered probable cause with the > specific place/things being the share program and it's contents. If your house was broken into, and your TV stolen, and you were walking along and saw it in your neighbor's living room through the window, would that give you the right to go in and reclaim it? Would it exempt you from having to pay for a new door to replace the one that got broken down? You might want to ask yourself why the now-standard 17USC512 takedown letter isn't sufficient. I wonder how many 'Hax0rs-R-Us' record labels are about to incorporate. Bad JuJu.
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:11:00 PDT, "Rowland, Alan D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > IANAL but IMHO spewing cracked copies of say, Photoshop, or other copyright > violations might be considered probable cause with the specific place/things > being the share program and it's contents. If your house was broken into, and your TV stolen, and you were walking along and saw it in your neighbor's living room through the window, would that give you the right to go in and reclaim it? Would it exempt you from having to pay for a new door to replace the one that got broken down? You might want to ask yourself why the now-standard 17USC512 takedown letter isn't sufficient. I wonder how many 'Hax0rs-R-Us' record labels are about to incorporate. Bad JuJu. msg04035/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
First I agree that this is BAD on general principle but... IANAL but IMHO spewing cracked copies of say, Photoshop, or other copyright violations might be considered probable cause with the specific place/things being the share program and it's contents. Sharing the content of your favorite program/CD/DVD with the world has never met "fair use." I had significant input in my life regarding the difference between "can" and "may." IMHO significant numbers of net citizens have forgotten that difference. Just my 2¢. Best regards, _ Alan Rowland -Original Message- From: Joseph T. Klein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 12:16 PM To: Marshall Eubanks; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking I would argue that my home computer is the repository of my papers and effects. No place in the below law does it limit the restriction to the government only. Indeed any law passed giving sanction to any party having the right IMHO is in direct violation of both the spiret and the letter of the Bill of Rights. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The dogs of stupidy have been unleashed. --On Wednesday, 24 July 2002 12:40 -0400 Marshall Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have to > clean up the resulting messes... > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks -- Joseph T. Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... preserve, protect and defend the constitution ..." -- Presidential Oath of Office
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
I would argue that my home computer is the repository of my papers and effects. No place in the below law does it limit the restriction to the government only. Indeed any law passed giving sanction to any party having the right IMHO is in direct violation of both the spiret and the letter of the Bill of Rights. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The dogs of stupidy have been unleashed. --On Wednesday, 24 July 2002 12:40 -0400 Marshall Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > to clean up the resulting messes... > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks -- Joseph T. Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... preserve, protect and defend the constitution ..." -- Presidential Oath of Office
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:48:36 EDT, Petr Swedock said: > The courts. There is no possible way that this bill (as I > read it) could, in any way, be conceived as even remotely > constitutional. This is pure vigilante: the entertainment The fact that a law is unconstitutional on the face of it has rarely stopped it in the past - that's why the courts have the authority to throw out bad laws. Unfortunately, we better be ready for several years of pain while a test case makes it way up the judicial pecking order... msg04030/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
Marshall Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > to clean up the resulting messes... The courts. There is no possible way that this bill (as I read it) could, in any way, be conceived as even remotely constitutional. This is pure vigilante: the entertainment thugs aren't the police and don't have the rights or authority to do anything other than report abuses to the *proper* authorities. Peace, Petr
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
> The Business Software Alliance appears to be using this technique to flush > out people distributing their Members' software via Gnutella and others. I > have received the obligatory nasty-gram advising me as the "owner" of an IP > (not taking into account the IP has been allocated and then assigned to > consecutive downstream providers) that I could be held liable for the > actions of this particular user. The BSA is definately scanning P2P networks for alleged copyright infringements. I received several of a similar notice for my netblocks. This earned the BSA a null-route (not that they would care). Although this complaint was not for a system of our own, I do own both of the software programs cited in the complaint. After receiving legal threats, I wonder if I will give my $150 to Intuit next year, or a local accountant. --- snip --- Where the infringing content was located: -- First Found: [Time First Seen] Last Found: [Time Last Seen] Network: Gnucleus Repeat Offenses: [Number of Tiems Seen] IP Address: [X.X.X.X] Protocol: Gnutella What was located as infringing content: -- Filename: turbotax premier 2001.zip (33,006kb) Filename: quickbooks pro 2002 + key(1).zip (147,505kb) John R. Wolfe Manager of Investigations Business Software Alliance 1150 18th St NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036 URL: http://www.bsa.org E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1-888-667-4722 --- snip --- Regards, James Thomason > > Mike >
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
The upside to this is that if you are a hacker, you can now legitimize your activities and legally protect yourself by spending $30 to incorporate as a record company. On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:40:51 -0400 > From: Marshall Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > to clean up the resulting messes... > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > > - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 > X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech > > Could Hollywood hack your PC? > By Declan McCullagh > July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT > > WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment > industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to disable > PCs used for illicit file trading. > > A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort > to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer > networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their bottom > line. > > Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., > the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked > electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe that > piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the 10-page > bill this week. > > The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture > Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of > America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or > otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." > > Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the > permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a > suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than > $250. > > According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete > details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder intends > to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer network. > Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the > public. > > The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, > worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would be > permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete > files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to > sue if files are accidentally erased. > > [...] > > > > - > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > - > Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ > - > > > - End forwarded message - > >
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
The BSA is even flexing it's muscles here in the GWN. http://www.istop.com/BSALetter.txt Although they seem to have lots of money for scanning services and lawyers, they expect ISPs to provide services (assisting them enforce their copyrights) for free. Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
If it starts happening, just unplug whoever's doing it and treat them like a DDOSer...poof, you just lost your Internet connectivity. Something Sony or MCA would love to have happen...huh? Sorry, your'e causing malicious problems on the Internet, operational procedure requires us to disable your address block..click... What these slugs in Kongress don't realize, this will trigger a war, and one they can not win... Who are they going to give waivers to, to damage personal property next, the ACLU, the ADL, the eco-terrorists? the politically korrect? This is a war they can not hope to win, and all it will do is create chaos on the Internet, chaos that WE will bear the brunt of...like there isn't enough problems now? All this because the media leeches won't recognize they have been trumped by technology...pitu! At 14:15 7/24/02 -0400, you wrote: >I second that. If I see any of my clients having any sort of malicious >activity directed at them, then there is no chance of me allowing their >traffic through. I would be more than happy to send all their traffic to >packet hell. Large corporations do not get any special consideration if >it comes down to the stability of my network vs. receiving their >traffic. > >Derek >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of >James Thomason >Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:10 PM >To: Marshall Eubanks >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > > > >Would malicious actions on the part of copyright holders violate the >AUP of most networks? Or are service providers more willing to tolerate >denial of service attacks by large corporations than say, spam? > >If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on mine. > >Regards, >James Thomason > > >On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > > > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > > to clean up the resulting messes... > > > > Regards > > Marshall Eubanks > > > > - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > > > From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 > > X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ > > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > > > > > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech > > > > Could Hollywood hack your PC? > > By Declan McCullagh > > July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT > > > > WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment > > industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to >disable > > PCs used for illicit file trading. > > > > A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political >effort > > to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer > > networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their >bottom > > line. > > > > Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, >R-N.C., > > the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly >unchecked > > electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe >that > > piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the >10-page > > bill this week. > > > > The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture > > Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of > > America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or > > otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." > > > > Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the > > permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, >and a > > suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than > > $250. > > > > According to the draft, the attorney general must be given >complete > > details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder >intends > > to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer >network. > > Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the > > public. > > > > The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, > > worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would >be > > permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker s
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On 7/24/02 11:31 AM, "Adam Rothschild" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2002-07-24-14:10:00, James Thomason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on >> mine. > > Unless, of course, the RIAA, MPAA, and friends carry out their > cracking through throw-away dial and DSL accounts, like they > purportedly use now to troll for copyright offenders, and send > automated nasty-grams to their upstream providers. > > Carrying out their cracking from a uniform netblock or AS, which we > could all identify and filter, would be too easy. They're flagrant, > but they're not stupid. > The Business Software Alliance appears to be using this technique to flush out people distributing their Members' software via Gnutella and others. I have received the obligatory nasty-gram advising me as the "owner" of an IP (not taking into account the IP has been allocated and then assigned to consecutive downstream providers) that I could be held liable for the actions of this particular user. Mike
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
On 2002-07-24-14:10:00, James Thomason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on > mine. Unless, of course, the RIAA, MPAA, and friends carry out their cracking through throw-away dial and DSL accounts, like they purportedly use now to troll for copyright offenders, and send automated nasty-grams to their upstream providers. Carrying out their cracking from a uniform netblock or AS, which we could all identify and filter, would be too easy. They're flagrant, but they're not stupid. -a
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
Agreed here. Has this even got a bill number yet? On Wed, 2002-07-24 at 13:15, Derek Samford wrote: > > > I second that. If I see any of my clients having any sort of malicious > activity directed at them, then there is no chance of me allowing their > traffic through. I would be more than happy to send all their traffic to > packet hell. Large corporations do not get any special consideration if > it comes down to the stability of my network vs. receiving their > traffic. > > Derek > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > James Thomason > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:10 PM > To: Marshall Eubanks > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > > > > Would malicious actions on the part of copyright holders violate the > AUP of most networks? Or are service providers more willing to tolerate > denial of service attacks by large corporations than say, spam? > > If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on mine. > > Regards, > James Thomason > > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > > > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > > to clean up the resulting messes... > > > > Regards > > Marshall Eubanks > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > > > From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 > > X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ > > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > > > > > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech > > > > Could Hollywood hack your PC? > > By Declan McCullagh > > July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT > > > > WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment > > industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to > disable > > PCs used for illicit file trading. > > > > A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political > effort > > to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer > > networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their > bottom > > line. > > > > Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, > R-N.C., > > the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly > unchecked > > electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe > that > > piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the > 10-page > > bill this week. > > > > The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture > > Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of > > America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or > > otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." > > > > Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the > > permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, > and a > > suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than > > $250. > > > > According to the draft, the attorney general must be given > complete > > details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder > intends > > to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer > network. > > Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the > > public. > > > > The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, > > worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would > be > > permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete > > files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion > to > > sue if files are accidentally erased. > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > - > > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > > To subscribe to Politech: > http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccul
RE: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
I second that. If I see any of my clients having any sort of malicious activity directed at them, then there is no chance of me allowing their traffic through. I would be more than happy to send all their traffic to packet hell. Large corporations do not get any special consideration if it comes down to the stability of my network vs. receiving their traffic. Derek -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of James Thomason Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:10 PM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking Would malicious actions on the part of copyright holders violate the AUP of most networks? Or are service providers more willing to tolerate denial of service attacks by large corporations than say, spam? If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on mine. Regards, James Thomason On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > to clean up the resulting messes... > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > > - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 > X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech > > Could Hollywood hack your PC? > By Declan McCullagh > July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT > > WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment > industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to disable > PCs used for illicit file trading. > > A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort > to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer > networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their bottom > line. > > Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., > the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked > electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe that > piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the 10-page > bill this week. > > The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture > Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of > America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or > otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." > > Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the > permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a > suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than > $250. > > According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete > details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder intends > to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer network. > Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the > public. > > The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, > worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would be > permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete > files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to > sue if files are accidentally erased. > > [...] > > > > - > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > - > Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ > - > > > - End forwarded message - > > -- > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > > > > T.M. Eubanks > Multicast Technologies, Inc > 10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410 > Fairfax, Virginia 22030 > Phone : 703-293-9624 Fax : 703-293-9609 > e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.multicasttech.com > > Test your network for multicast : > http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/ > Status of Multicast on the Web : > http://www.multicasttech.com/status/index.html >
Re: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
Would malicious actions on the part of copyright holders violate the AUP of most networks? Or are service providers more willing to tolerate denial of service attacks by large corporations than say, spam? If this legislation is passed, they certainly will earn Null0 on mine. Regards, James Thomason On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have > to clean up the resulting messes... > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > > - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 > X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ > X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ > > > > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech > > Could Hollywood hack your PC? > By Declan McCullagh > July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT > > WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment > industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to disable > PCs used for illicit file trading. > > A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort > to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer > networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their bottom > line. > > Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., > the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked > electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe that > piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the 10-page > bill this week. > > The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture > Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of > America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or > otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." > > Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the > permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a > suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than > $250. > > According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete > details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder intends > to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer network. > Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the > public. > > The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, > worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would be > permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete > files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to > sue if files are accidentally erased. > > [...] > > > > - > POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list > You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. > To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ > - > Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ > - > > > - End forwarded message - > > -- > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > > > > T.M. Eubanks > Multicast Technologies, Inc > 10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410 > Fairfax, Virginia 22030 > Phone : 703-293-9624 Fax : 703-293-9609 > e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.multicasttech.com > > Test your network for multicast : > http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/ > Status of Multicast on the Web : > http://www.multicasttech.com/status/index.html >
Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking
Thought this would be considered on-topic as guess who would have to clean up the resulting messes... Regards Marshall Eubanks - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FC: Draft of Rep. Berman's bill authorizes anti-P2P hacking To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:29:35 -0400 X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=politech Could Hollywood hack your PC? By Declan McCullagh July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to disable PCs used for illicit file trading. A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their bottom line. Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe that piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the 10-page bill this week. The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than $250. According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder intends to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer network. Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the public. The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would be permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to sue if files are accidentally erased. [...] - POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ - Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ - - End forwarded message - -- Regards Marshall Eubanks T.M. Eubanks Multicast Technologies, Inc 10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Phone : 703-293-9624 Fax : 703-293-9609 e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.multicasttech.com Test your network for multicast : http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/ Status of Multicast on the Web : http://www.multicasttech.com/status/index.html
