Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Powerful Senator Endorses Destroying Computers of Illegal Downloaders (Orrin Hatch)
AP ^ | 6/17/03 | Ted Bridis

Posted on 06/17/2003 2:54:06 PM PDT by 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


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: copyright; cyberattack; cyberwar; download; filesharing; grokster; hatch; kazaa; krusgnet; mp3; napster; orrinhatch; riaa; rickboucher; rino; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 361-370 next last
To: Arkinsaw
If it also said "Page 68" and was bound in a book, then certainly they have a copyright, but not of the form, nor of the material - just the placement within their book.

An example of where a copyright could be construed over such material would be a book where the 5 or 6 pages leading up to "page 68" and the 5 or 6 pages following were an exact reproduction of the original work prepared by a different author.

My copyright might not be very good concerning certain things, but all it has to do is be better than your copyright to prevail.

161 posted on 06/17/2003 5:19:49 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
The Washington Post appended their "Warshpost copywrite" thing on the George Bush inaugural speech. Showing them what their copyright was worth, I copied the whole thing elsewhere and put my own copyright on it.

That's a case where neither party has any sort of claim to the intellectual property rights involved and is asserting a copyright out of spite.

162 posted on 06/17/2003 5:22:33 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
My e-mail to Senator Hatch.

Dear Senator Hatch,

I find your remarks today in support of destroying the computers of downloader’s disgraceful.

I'm a 45 year old Conservative member of my local REC and a full time Conservative activist.

I do not support the illegal downloading of music.

However I do take offense at the recording industry's refusing to make their products available in the way that consumers want to buy them.

Many times in my life I have spent $20 to buy a CD just to get one song. It’s annoying but I can afford it.

Obviously others that can’t go ahead and just download the music. If I were fifteen I might do the same thing.

The record industry will lose this battle because it refuses to bow to the will of the public it serves.

I'm sure the horse and buggy makers had some powerful politicians on their side against the car manufacturers.

Neither you nor they can stop technology or a changing industry with spiteful and petty reprisals.

I'm shocked that a Republican Senator would even think of supporting such tactics.

There would be a massive backlash against anyone that employed or endorsed such tactics and it wouldn't be just from fifteen year olds either.

163 posted on 06/17/2003 5:22:48 PM PDT by Jacvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS; Mo1; Excuse_My_Bellicosity; Utah Girl; Pete-R-Bilt
hey, orrin is a recording star! he's got a vested interest...

and please do not forget...

the senator from novell is not from utah.

Orrin Hatch is from Pennsylvania !

BWAHAHAHAHA !!

164 posted on 06/17/2003 5:23:07 PM PDT by glock rocks (shoot fast. shoot straight. shoot safe. practice. carry. molon labe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCLaw441
It works for me. If you don't want to lose your computer, obey the law.

Yeah, and let's just forget about that pesky Due Process stuff. I mean, what's a few Civil Rights Violations among friends, right?

165 posted on 06/17/2003 5:24:27 PM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Would Hatch also support the destruction of senators who violate the Consitution? Seems a straight forward extension of Hatch's "protect copyright holders by destroying computers" doctrine.
166 posted on 06/17/2003 5:35:06 PM PDT by jimkress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
I agree with Hatch about a number of things, but this certainly isn't one of them.
167 posted on 06/17/2003 5:35:13 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: adam_az
This is even worse than I thought.

Someone should educate Orrin Hatch about this. I think he was shooting from the hip, without thinking over what he was really saying and obviously doesn't understand the implications. (I still don't fully understand, but have a little better idea, thanks to your explanations, but had enough of a clue to know that giving these kinds of powers to private companies, not accountable to anyone would be disastrous).
168 posted on 06/17/2003 5:42:10 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
Orrin loves to rub up against Fat Ted every chance he gets ; )
169 posted on 06/17/2003 5:42:21 PM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: jimkress
Would Hatch also support the destruction of senators who violate the Consitution? Seems a straight forward extension of Hatch's "protect copyright holders by destroying computers" doctrine.

Thanks for the chuckle.

I personally don't think the "aware" people in the entertainment industry are stupid enough to try and destroy home users' computers - they would basically be declaring a war, and they would lose - the hacker-types would take the gloves off, and you would see attacks against the record and film companies the likes of which we have not seen. You would be unifying the hacker-types as well.

Putting that aside, anybody who thinks that the government supports this but would never use this type of technology against its citizens is an idiot pure and simple, or a liberal, which I guess would make them an idiot as well.

Hatch scares the hell out of me sometimes.

170 posted on 06/17/2003 5:45:19 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: randog
Most good bios programs have a selection you can set to not allow bios updates. It is a good thing to keep that selected unless you are actually intending to update it.
171 posted on 06/17/2003 5:55:52 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Hatch's provocative remarks were more likely caused by senility.
172 posted on 06/17/2003 5:55:58 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacvin
However I do take offense at the recording industry's refusing to make their products available in the way that consumers want to buy them.

Many times in my life I have spent $20 to buy a CD just to get one song. It’s annoying but I can afford it.

Many people in this country are sheep. I'm sure I'm pissing somebody off by saying that, but they are so conditioned by the recording industry to buy music the way the recording industry wants and not the way they want, that they lose site of things.

There is a reason why that $15 or $20 CD has just a few good songs that you like - it's because the rest is filler. They throw it on there to pad the album and make you feel like your somehow getting your money's worth, when they are just feeding you garbage.

Although I haven't tried it yet, Apple did right - $0.99 a song, just the songs you want. Of course the record industry complained and moaned that people would only buy single songs here and there and not ablums. Surprise! Half few million songs they sold in the first week or two were complete albums.

I think of it like this - If I want a hamburber, I should not have to order a dozen other things just to get the hamburger. If I want to see a football game, I am not required to see every football game that season. Apple has it right, and I don't just say that as a Mac fan either. People should be able to buy products the way they want.

173 posted on 06/17/2003 5:58:55 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

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

Unreal. I suppose I shouldn't expect any better from a group that supports confiscation of property for illegal plant growth.

174 posted on 06/17/2003 5:59:52 PM PDT by Djarum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Every time Hatch makes you think he's ok...he quickly reminds you what a real skunk he is.
175 posted on 06/17/2003 6:03:44 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #176 Removed by Moderator

To: NCLaw441
If you don't want to lose your computer, obey the law.

Which law?

"No person shall be ... deprived of ... property, without due process of law ..."

Amendment V, U.S. Constituition


177 posted on 06/17/2003 6:16:30 PM PDT by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NCLaw441
"It works for me. If you don't want to lose your computer, obey the law."

What a silly thing to say...

You are posting on Free Republic. Much of the text material and images are copyrighted. I would bet a lot of money that you have such material on your computer right now without a license.

Lets say your sister scans in pictures of her kids that are taken by a professional photographer and emails them to you. Almost all professional photographer’s copyright their work..

Bang! There goes another computer! I hate it when that happens…
178 posted on 06/17/2003 6:22:04 PM PDT by babygene (Viable after 87 trimesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
I don't like Hatch, the rino! How stupid is this?
179 posted on 06/17/2003 6:24:02 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Djarum
Unreal. I suppose I shouldn't expect any better from a group that supports confiscation of property for illegal plant growth.

You better hope they don't ban cloves... ;)
180 posted on 06/17/2003 6:24:15 PM PDT by adam_az
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 361-370 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson