Piracy fight gets serious (Dem bill to legalize corporate viruses/DOS/hacking)

BBC News ^ | Thursday, 27 June, 2002, 16:17 GMT 17:17 UK | No byline

[weegee]

Record makers could win the right to carry out hack attacks on music sharing services if a US proposal becomes law.

Californian congressman Howard Berman has drawn up a bill that would legalise the disruption of peer-to-peer networks by companies who are trying to stop people pirating copyrighted materials.

If his idea becomes law, record companies will be able to carry out a variety of attacks on the sharing services to make them unusable or so irritating to use that people abandon them.

Existing legislation makes it an offence for anyone to carry out many of the attacks mooted in the proposal.

Better blockers

So far, music companies have used legal action to stop people spreading pirated pop through net-based peer-to-peer networks, such as Napster, Kazaa and Audiogalaxy.

Their attempts have largely been successful.

Napster has declared itself bankrupt and is trying to relaunch itself as a subscription service; Kazaa has run out of money to pay its mounting legal bills; and Audiogalaxy has agreed to remove copyrighted material from its network that it does not have permission to share.

However, legal action can take a long time to work and now Howard Berman, a democrat congressman for California, has proposed legislation that will let music makers act much more quickly.

Spoof tracks

His proposal would let the record makers carry out hacking-type attacks on sharing networks to protect copyrighted works.

If it became law, record companies would win the right to place spoof tracks on sharing services, block downloads, redirect people to non-existent files and launch attacks that disrupt the smooth running of the networks.

Some record labels have already been known to seed some networks with spoof tracks or adverts to try to stop people getting hold of music they have not paid for.

The law would also allow the record companies to place programs on the machines of peer-to-peer networks to let them trace who is pirating pop.

[TechJunkYard]

A license to hack and crack... kewl.

[The_Victor]

Legalized hacking and virus planting... I want to see this law as written.

Can you say "unintended consequences?"

I knew you could.

[per loin]

Unintended consequences? Yes. The record companies have now elevated the theft of their products to a moral imperative. To code! To code!

[Timesink]

Can you say "unintended consequences?"

Yup. I can also say "unconstitutional." This bill would essentially grant the record companies permission to break into your computer, in your home, and damage it. A total violation of the right to property and the right to keep those you don't want out of your home.

I don't know why they're even trying. No matter what they come up with, some geek will invent a better P2P trading system that routes around their roadblocks. At worst, we could all just switch to Freenet, a system that encrypts EVERY file and places bits of it randomly on the hard drives of all those who participate. It's completely impossible to know what's on there unless you know the exact name to type in, and even if you do, it's completely impossible to to find out where the file's being stored. The only problem is that Freenet as it stands now is almost impossible to use. But if serious work were ever undertaken on it, it could be made user-friendly.

[hchutch]

Me, too, because the hackees would go for PAYBACK.

[No.6]

Coming next: Black ICE.

[CecilRhodesGhost]

This hacking idea must have been born after last month's story re one of the record labels spending millions on a copy-proof CD... only to have it foiled by marking over the ID with a cheap ink pen. I guess it will come down to an internet war between the corporations and the users. Who will win? I place my bets on the large international corporations... who will use the government to protect their investments.

[Lunatic Fringe]

This has already begun- just last night I downloaded two songs that were just repeating snippets of the song, stretched out to fill the 3 minutes and 30 seconds of the original track.

[The Iceman Cometh]

Oh well, I guess it's back to the old fashioned way of stealing music......recording it digitally from the music channels on the satellite dish and then burning to CD.

[Zeroisanumber]

Damn. RIAA can try doing things like that if they really want to, but hit the wrong computer and you have a lawsuit. Really hit the wrong computer and the retaliation will cost you more than the lawsuit would.

[SevenofNine]

Hey Zero you know what I know this Congressman

Let me put this way he just LOST MY VOTEE HONEY

AHHHH you damage my computer FINEEE

SAY BYE BYE TO MY VOTE I make sure you won't re-elect JACK

Let me have my Jazz Cd files

[Charles_Bingley]

So the Record compaies will destroy net to keep control.

Wasn't copyright just to let the creative type a chance to make some money of a work BUT public domain enter into it fianlly. Further moroe, other creative types were always allow to use copyright works to increase art.

I guess copyright is just another name for property rights now.

[boris]

I wonder. Suppose they start doing stuff like this.

Some possible(?) responses:

- zip the mp3 files.

- change their extensions.

- jink the servers; keep moving them around and changing their IP addresses. Some way to let the new locations be known to legit users but not the snoops?

--Boris

[supercat]

This has already begun- just last night I downloaded two songs that were just repeating snippets of the song, stretched out to fill the 3 minutes and 30 seconds of the original track.

Such spoofing would seem to be entirely legal, and I don't see any particular moral or ethical problems with it either, though I would think that record companies would sell more records if they uploaded tracks that were 90% good and either just had a few glitches here and there or else an ad for a discount music site where the full track could be obtained.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Yup. I can also say "unconstitutional." This bill would essentially grant the record companies permission to break into your computer, in your home, and damage it. A total violation of the right to property and the right to keep those you don't want out of your home.

You've read the bill? Care to drop us a link on it.