Powerful Senator Endorses Destroying Computers of Illegal Downloaders (Orrin Hatch)

AP ^ | 6/17/03 | Ted Bridis

[Jean S]

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.

Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., 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-Calif., 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.

---

On the Net: Sen. Hatch: http://hatch.senate.gov

AP-ES-06-17-03 1716EDT

[adam_az]

"So how about having to enter a password to download it?"

It just doesn't work that way - it's not people downloading it from "web sites," there is a LOT more to the internet than the "web."

These are programs that talk to other programs and run on peoples home computers - there is no centralized way to do it, and the file formats used are open protocols, like mp3, with no built in protection.

"P2P is a class of applications that takes advantage of resources -- storage, cycles, content, human presence -- available at the edges of the Internet. Because accessing these decentralized resources means operating in an environment of unstable connectivity and unpredictable IP addresses, P2P nodes must operate outside the DNS system and have significant or total autonomy from central servers."

from http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2000/11/24/shirky1-whatisp2p.html

[Arkinsaw]

The music industry has already deterred me by producing no new music I want to steal. Or buy.

True. The only things I have downloaded are things that nobody would buy or even put on the radio any more. The few things I have downloaded have been out of print for years and will certainly never come back. If they hadn't been available for download and HAD been available in stores I would never actually pay $15 for them.

I pretty much listened to them once or twice for the reminiscing effect and then never played them again. Its basically the same effect as choosing which old song to hear on the radio. How much money are they actually losing by me downloading Johnny Horton's "Sink the Bismarck" to listen to one time?

None. But they are willing to jack me around, sue me, or destroy my computer. Sure does not make me want to sympathize with them.

Its obvious that they are idiots. They are so wedded to the $15.00 CD business model and can't understand why their sales are going down. They were flabbergasted by the success of Apple's iTunes project. They fought VHS tapes, they fought recordable cassettes, they worried about DAT, they worried about CD's at first, they were reluctant about going to DVD, they fight every new technology and seem absolutely clueless and incapable of responding to a new emerging market or business model or seeing any potential beyond what they are doing at the moment.

They've had to be dragged kicking and screaming into every new market by the technology people.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

for the music industry he hopes to take by storm as a "rising star;" Knew about that, what a joke. for the pharmaceutical industry; for the legal profession; and, last but not least, for the innumerable hucksters who continue to peddle without oversight and regulation their generally useless and often harmful "nutritional suplements" from the backwaters of Utah

Didn't know about that, what an absolute scumbag Orrin Hatch is. The next time I see him on Hannity and Alien pretend to be a conservative I'm either going to yell at the TV or turn it off. Even if Estrada and Owens get through, I'll never forgive Hatch for uttering this buffoonery.

[adam_az]

Sean Hannity is an embarrassing ideologue. He ain't the sharpest crayon in the box, either. It angers me that Comes is the more intelligent of the two, even though he's usually dead wrong.

[bvw]

I do not know if you are still around, but perhaps if you are you might appreciate my reply above! Your knowledge and research on the copyright and patent was ever awesome.

[Arkinsaw]

We have published three books concerning very detailed genealogical records. They are protected by copyright. Our commentary and conclusions about various relationships are ours, yet folks will copy this stuff out of our books onto the Mormon forms, file them with the appropriate church authorities, and away that material goes into the archives to be published and distributed all over the world.

I am in complete support of your rights over your conclusions, your commentary, and your presentation. But it does irk me to no end to see a photostatic copy of a page out of the census records with a copyright notice on the bottom of it. Just because someone photocopies a page off of the 1860 census they think they have a copyright on it.

[EternalVigilance]

PING!

[tracer]

".....I'm.....going to yell at the TV....."

Hey, pal, looks like we have common interests!! 8~)

[BlessedBeGod]

Orrin Hatch doesn't think before opening his hatch.

[george wythe]

They fought VHS tapes, they fought recordable cassettes, they worried about DAT, they worried about CD's at first, they were reluctant about going to DVD, they fight every new technology

History repeats itself.

Just in the last decade, I've seen the cat-n-mouse game played in the streets of Mexico City when the local cops busting vendors for selling copyrighted material.

The first time I visited Mexico City back in 1990, the street vendors were offering bootlegged copies of audio and video cassettes.

When I went back in 1997, they were selling bootlegged CDs. Then in 2000, both CDs and DVDS were available for sale with movies sometimes not even available on the US.

How did the movie and music industries survived the wholesale bootlegging?

Apparently, these execs don't realize that their Chicken Little predictions have previously failed to materialize.

[TomGuy]

Yeh.

As soon as they try to do something like this, some kid will come out with a technology to subvert and go-around it; thus, defeating the whole purpose.

As a grad school prof once told me, pointing to his office key on the nail just above his office door, "Locks only keep honest people out."

[HiTech RedNeck]

Just because someone photocopies a page off of the 1860 census they think they have a copyright on it.

Technically they do, on their image. This does not preclude you making your own copy off the same original, public domain census. Quite likely it also does not preclude your transcribing the information as text, since your result in that case could not in any way be distinguished from the result if you had used the original.

[Paulie]

"This is a truly stupid statement."

Indeed.

[DoughtyOne]

Orin Hatch has finally gone so far over the edge that nobody will be able to defend his stupidity any longer.

Call the man a stretcher.

[adam_az]

Never misoverestimate Orrin Hatch!

[fat city]

Sounds like a presidential run to me </sarc>

[Taxman]

Senile old so-and-so ought to resign.

[killjoy]

Its obvious that they are idiots. They are so wedded to the $15.00 CD business model and can't understand why their sales are going down. They were flabbergasted by the success of Apple's iTunes project. They fought VHS tapes, they fought recordable cassettes, they worried about DAT, they worried about CD's at first, they were reluctant about going to DVD, they fight every new technology and seem absolutely clueless and incapable of responding to a new emerging market or business model or seeing any potential beyond what they are doing at the moment.

Why do DVD movies cost about the same as the CD music soundtrack that goes along with it? I remember back when movies were first released on VHS and they went for approximately $100. I don't know how many people actually bought them but I remember having a large number of movies on VHS that I taped off of HBO, Showtime, and other movie channels. I have bought many DVDs because they are affordable.

What has happened with music CDs? Unlike movies who's price keeps dropping, the price of music CDs keeps going up. It is no wonder people don't buy as many as before and have switched to downloading songs insted. If they would drop the price of music CDs to about $6 each, they would put an end to online swapping. They just don't get it, do they?

[EternalVigilance]

Should be an interesting convention next time around in Utah.

Many Republicans there are flat out sick of the guy.

[Centurion2000]

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

To Orrin Hatch: Way to respect the 5th Amendment and due process there man. NICE.