You can type here any text you want

Senator endorses destroying computers of illegal downloaders

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

TurboTer

Zap! Commander
Joined
May 24, 2001
Messages
1,578
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/06/18/downloading.music.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Tuesday he favors developing new technology to remotely destroy the computers of people who illegally download music from the Internet.

The surprise remarks by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, during a hearing on copyright abuses represent a dramatic escalation in the frustrating battle by industry executives and lawmakers in Washington against illegal music downloads.

During a discussion on methods to frustrate computer users who illegally exchange music and movie files over the Internet, Hatch asked technology executives about ways to damage computers involved in such file trading. Legal experts have said any such attack would violate federal anti-hacking laws.

"No one is interested in destroying anyone's computer," replied Randy Saaf of MediaDefender Inc., a secretive Los Angeles company that builds technology to disrupt music downloads. One technique deliberately downloads pirated material very slowly so other users can't.

"I'm interested," Hatch interrupted. He said damaging someone's computer "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights."

The senator acknowledged Congress would have to enact an exemption for copyright owners from liability for damaging computers. He endorsed technology that would twice warn a computer user about illegal online behavior, "then destroy their computer."

"If we can find some way to do this without destroying their machines, we'd be interested in hearing about that," Hatch said. "If that's the only way, then I'm all for destroying their machines. If you have a few hundred thousand of those, I think people would realize" the seriousness of their actions, he said.

"There's no excuse for anyone violating copyright laws," Hatch said.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, the committee's senior Democrat, later said the problem is serious but called Hatch's idea too drastic a remedy to be considered.

"The rights of copyright holders need to be protected, but some Draconian remedies that have been suggested would create more problems than they would solve," Leahy, D-Vermont, said in a statement. "We need to work together to find the right answers, and this is not one of them."

Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Virginia, who has been active in copyright debates in Washington, urged Hatch to reconsider. Boucher described Hatch's role as chairman of the Judiciary Committee as "a very important position, so when Senator Hatch indicates his views with regard to a particular subject, we all take those views very seriously."

Some legal experts suggested Hatch's provocative remarks were more likely intended to compel technology and music executives to work faster toward ways to protect copyrights online than to signal forthcoming legislation.

"It's just the frustration of those who are looking at enforcing laws that are proving very hard to enforce," said Orin Kerr, a former Justice Department cybercrimes prosecutor and associate professor at George Washington University law school.

The entertainment industry has gradually escalated its fight against Internet file-traders, targeting the most egregious pirates with civil lawsuits. The Recording Industry Association of America recently won a federal court decision making it significantly easier to identify and track consumers -- even those hiding behind aliases -- using popular Internet file-sharing software.

Kerr predicted it was "extremely unlikely" for Congress to approve a hacking exemption for copyright owners, partly because of risks of collateral damage when innocent users might be wrongly targeted.

"It wouldn't work," Kerr said. "There's no way of limiting the damage."

Last year, Rep. Howard Berman, D-California, ignited a firestorm across the Internet over a proposal to give the entertainment industry new powers to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies. It would have lifted civil and criminal penalties against entertainment companies for disabling, diverting or blocking the trading of pirated songs and movies on the Internet.

But Berman, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary panel on the Internet and intellectual property, always has maintained that his proposal wouldn't permit hacker-style attacks by the industry on Internet users.
 
OK liberals and pro-law enforcement neo-conservatives, is it time to worry now?
 
Hatch is wannabe musician and has a lot of "friends" in the industry. Old, poor musicians that used to get a royalty check every month and now get squat. Everybody has their own pet deal. As guys like Hatch get older they go goofy. The Democrats have their Robert Byrd.

If he was my senator, I'd give him two warnings, then I'd call for the ouster of Hatch for saying such dumb things. That's the difference between republican and democrat. You screw up a couple times, we'll take you out ourselves. The democrats seem to think screwing up is something to be celebrated (if a democrat is doing the screwing).
 
Originally posted by ttypewe4jim
if that happends im screwed i got over 20,000 songs on my pc :(

Put them on a removable hardrive after the first warning and you've become "Hatch Proof".
 
that would work:D but not worth the effort im gonna bulid a new computer soon anyway so if they wonna wipe this there only doing me a favor:D
 
Wouldn't destroying a computer be a crime also..

Example: You do a Crime & get caught does the judge sentance your home to be destroyed?
 
Originally posted by ttypewe4jim
if that happends im screwed i got over 20,000 songs on my pc :(

Wow, and I thought I had a lot with a mere 5,000! But without getting too off topic, what's next? Remotely checking your computer for porn to make sure no one is under 18? Automatically blowing up your car when you do more than 75? Blowing up the liver of anyone under 21 who takes a drink?

To the "I don't have anything to hide" crowd. It's affecting you now, isn't it? I don't feel sorry for any of you, as YOU caused this. Now, you guys have nowhere to run to!
 
Originally posted by littlesixsteve
Wouldn't destroying a computer be a crime also..

Example: You do a Crime & get caught does the judge sentance your home to be destroyed?

Yes, but the government doesn't care about crime as long as it is causing the crime.
 
Hatch is a jerk, don't like him, don't know why all the dumbasses in this state keep voting for him...

but then, I don't like ANY politicians :D
 
I thought we buried this hatchet..

Originally posted by TurboTer
Wow, and I thought I had a lot with a mere 5,000! But without getting too off topic, what's next? Remotely checking your computer for porn to make sure no one is under 18? Automatically blowing up your car when you do more than 75? Blowing up the liver of anyone under 21 who takes a drink?

To the "I don't have anything to hide" crowd. It's affecting you now, isn't it? I don't feel sorry for any of you, as YOU caused this. Now, you guys have nowhere to run to!

You wanna hear OTHER views, but you're more interested in blasting away at people who don't agree with you. (Which is not uncommon on here) Funny thing is, after reading this article I don't agree with the article or this senator at all. Not because of the "I have nothing to hide" or big brother theory. It's because I don't think that the government should be giving out a 'license to kill' for these copyright companys. They are not the judge and jury and as someone said in that article:

Kerr predicted it was "extremely unlikely" for Congress to approve a hacking exemption for copyright owners, partly because of risks of collateral damage when innocent users might be wrongly targeted.

I don't want some sort of virus damaging my computer because someone feels I'm doing something illegal. I would have NO way of knowing WHO did this or WHY, nor would I be able to recover damages even if I managed to get this in front of a court. I believe in due process, and what this is proposing just jumps straight over that. It sounds wreckless and not very well thought out.

I see other faults in this as well... The fact that there is ALWAYS going to be someone who finds a way around this. In the end, the company who makes this program for the 'artists' to destroy our computers will make a program for us to protect our computers. That company will get money on both ends. Kinda like the people who make radar guns and radar detectors. :)

In closing, I understand what they are trying to combat. This IS NOT THE WAY!! Putting this music on CDs was very wreckless in itself because it made it possible for traders to simply rip them to mp3s and trade away. It would be the same as leaving your car unlocked and the keys in the ignition.
 
tt makes another strong argument toward his theory that the government is getting more and more oppressive
 
LP's and 33's will make a comeback! Can you imagine vinal records again? That would cure the problem. Drew
 
Originally posted by Drew L
LP's and 33's will make a comeback! Can you imagine vinal records again? That would cure the problem. Drew

I still love my 33s and 45s! Old school. LOL
 
Destroy computers over this?

...but keep the drugs, cars and property from busts and guns from the murderers? When did downloading, (hitting someone in the pocketbook) become worse than these other crimes? Of course, they can auction off confiscated cars etc and make a few bucks. :rolleyes:
What happened to Due Process? Destroy my computer because I let someone else used it? Maybe I run an Internet Cafe and someone got passed my precautions? Or a college library's computers? I deserve to be heard.
Didn't cable companies have something like this for illegal cable users? Called a bullet or something that would screw up your TV? What happened with that?
 
Re: I thought we buried this hatchet..

Originally posted by gn85
You wanna hear OTHER views, but you're more interested in blasting away at people who don't agree with you. (Which is not uncommon on here) Funny thing is, after reading this article I don't agree with the article or this senator at all. Not because of the "I have nothing to hide" or big brother theory. It's because I don't think that the government should be giving out a 'license to kill' for these copyright companys. They are not the judge and jury and as someone said in that article:

Well, it seems there really isn't anyone to blast here, since everyone opposes what Hatch is proposing. My point by posting this article is that people who say "Search me, I've got nothing to hide" are wrong. We all have something to hide. I have 5,000 songs on my computer, and have downloaded tons of games. You think all of them are freeware? In closing, I sure don't want the government knowing what's on my computer.
 
Originally posted by Drew L
LP's and 33's will make a comeback! Can you imagine vinal records again? That would cure the problem. Drew

Hehehe, that would be funny, but even then I'm sure vinal burners would come out to rip songs to LP's. :)
 
Back
Top