House bill would let music companies hack Napster-style networks....

[Dr Mordrid]

======
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Reuters) - Media companies would be allowed to sabotage Napster-style networks to prevent songs, movies and other copyrighted materials from being swapped over the Internet under a bill introduced in Congress on Thursday."
======

http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/ns/story.jsp?floc=FF-PLS-PLS&id=404355688&dt=20020725213200&w=RTR&coview=

I'm willing to bet the first time they do this the counter-strike will exceed anything they've ever imagined......

Dr. Mordrid

[Wombat]

No kidding. If they do get it passed, I hope to see lots of people hacking them looking for their copyrighted works on RIAA machines.

[Dogbert]

It seems to contradict all those anti-hacking bills being passed now.

Or maybe we're talking here about double standard:
a 16 years old will go to jail for hacking a porn site while the RIAA will be just fine looking for illegal MP3 files on the NSA computers...

[Marshmallowman]

I could just imagine them trying, then someone gets the IP if the offending corporate "vigilante" , publishes on the net for some community DDOS action.

[Jammrock]

Is it just me, or does this sound highly unconstitutional? If the POLICE and the law enforcement agencies of the country - the people we trust to keep us safe - can't search your premise without a search warrant from a judge, what the hell gives a bunch of money grubbing a--holes from the RIAA and the MPAA the right to piss on the constitution and hack into peoples computers? Isn't hacking just searching through someone elses private property? Isn't that the whole basis of the anti-hacking laws?

Hacking is hacking, and unless a LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY has a legal SEARCH WARRANT to investigate criminal activity, it is unconstitutional.

Now I'm really getting pissed off at the political system, the RIAA and the MPAA. This shouldn't even be an issue. It's illegal, period. Unless they kill the 4th amendment to the constitution, this is out right and in all ways illegal!!!

Money grubbing whores...

Jammrock

[Gurm]

It'll never pass the courts. Although they've taken a beating lately, they DO have half a clue about constitutionality.

- Gurm

[Dr Mordrid]

I totally agree with Gurm.

While some may complain about courts they take this kind of thing very seriously. My guess is the Supremes will hammer this one 6-3 or better.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

Yeah. I love the fact that people get all bent out of shape about Republican courts...

"Oh no! With conservatives in the court, abortion will be made illegal again!"

No. With conservatives in the court, abortion will be handed back to the states again - where it BELONGS.

It's amazing to me how utterly uneducated people are about the constitution. You hear "unconstitutional" and "this is a constitutional issue" all the frickin' time, and most people just have NO idea what is and isn't in the constitution.

THIS case, however, will go to the supreme court. And they WILL shoot it down, because it's just stupid.

- Gurm

[ZokesPro]

I'm canadian and I know what's in the constitution!

[Wombat]

I agree that the Supremes will knock it down, but it will likely take months to get to them. It's the interim that will suck.

[Gurm]

Why will the interim suck? Stuff like this never goes into effect until it's done with the supreme court. Trust me, all the paranoid types are delusional. This is still the land of civil liberties (perhaps too many) and personal freedoms (can never have too many of those).

- Gurm

[Wombat]

The DMCA wasn't supposed to hold up in court, either. But it's been a while, and there's still isn't a great case to challenge it with.

[Gurm]

Has anyone been successfully sentenced under the DMCA yet? I've heard of a few cases "going to trial" but nothing more... maybe I just missed it?

- Gurm

[Wombat]

2600 has lost, and on their appeal as well.

Also, just having such an unjust law allows companies to threaten people all the time, like in the Vivendi/bnetd issue. The DMCA has provisions where companies basically get an injunction against you automatically, and then you have to prove it shouldn't apply.

Also, why do you think that there is still no "legal" way to play DVDs on Linux?

[KvHagedorn]

Traficant didn't get thrown out of the house because he was taking bribes. He got thrown out because he was too ****ing stupid to cover his tracks like every other member of congress does. Our congress is a disgrace. We are no better than latin american countries whose government is bought and paid for by the drug cartels. As far as anyone can tell, every single member of the house and senate is a ****ing crook. It's offensive that such honorless swine get to make this country's laws. Excuse me while i vomit.