House Bill Could Shut Down File Sharing

Extremetech ^ | July 25, 2002 | By: Mark Hachman

[vannrox]

A California Democrat introduced a bill Thursday that would make sharing of copyrighted files illegal, and would indemnify copyright holders from taking whatever actions they chose to prevent the sharing of those files.

The effect, if approved by Congress and signed into law, would be to virtually outlaw file-sharing as is commonly known. The bill was authored by and introduced by Rep. Howard L. Berman, a California Democrat representing the 26th Congressional District, which includes North Hollywood. Berman is the ranking member of the Congressional Committee on the Judiciary's subcommittee on courts, the Internet, and intellectual property.

[vannrox]

No more JPG. No more BMP. No more GIF.

[Mixer]

Are they also going to shut down all of Usenet?

[dr_who]

No more fair use, no more anything. The entertainment industries probably don't benefit nearly as much as the lawyers working for them. But I wonder if a lot of captains of those industries really aren't just part-time ambulance chasers in the first place.

[dr_who]

If they could, probably.

[Mixer]

That was my point. I doubt that can. In fact I know they can't, but they could hold ISPs responsible for material on the servers, which in turn would make usenet shut itself down.

[College Repub]

The majority of piracy (espeicaly at the root level where works are released) does not take place on file sharing networks.

[dr_who]

What them try anyway.

[Thebaddog]

The way I read this article, they want the ability to enter my computer without my permission and remove any file they chose as judge, jury and executioner. How is a copyright determined on a jp3 file anyway?

[Semper911]

The way I read this article, they want the ability to enter my computer without my permission and remove any file they chose as judge, jury and executioner.

That's how I read it, too. So if I own a CD, rip a song off of it onto my machine and convert it to an MP3 (which I do all the time), they can come snooping my hard drive and delete it. They have no way of knowing if I have paid for the music or not.

[Timesink]

A California Democrat introduced a bill Thursday that would make sharing of copyrighted files illegal, and would indemnify copyright holders from taking whatever actions they chose to prevent the sharing of those files.

Utterly unconstitutional (figures it's a Democrat who doesn't know the Constitution). It's a violation of the Fourth Amendment because it would allow private individuals or companies to flagrantly break into your home and commit searches and seizures without a warrant. (And yes, breaking in via a Net connection is still breaking in. If you wake up and find your files missing, it's irrelevant whether the files are missing because someone physically entered your home and took the hard drive out of your PC, or if RIAA thugs hacked in and destroyed stuff.)

Second, it would allow wanton destruction of property by the RIAA thugs, as long as the damage was less than $50. Also unconstitutional under the Fourth.

Third, the thugs have no way of knowing which music files on my PC are "legal" or "illegal." If I own a physical copy of the new Bruce Springsteen CD, I am perfectly within my rights to download copies of songs from that album via P2P. But the RIAA has no way of knowing whether I bought the album or not. They're simply going to go and (try to) zap every music file off your drive of every commercial artist who ever existed. And if you want to stop it, YOU have to file suit. In other words, you're guilty until proven innocent. WILDLY unconstitutional.

In any case, it really doesn't matter whether this law passes and stays on the books or not. The law would have no effect on file servers outside the US. There is no attack scheme the RIAA could come up with that would not be defeated by hackers within days. Tens of thousands of hackers would not just release programs to protect end-users, they would also immediately band together, break into the RIAA severs and drop trojan horses, ping-flood, and otherwise use every trick in the book to completely shut down all outgoing packets from IP addresses identified as P2P attack drones.

When they do start trying, the outrage amongst all music buyers - especially teenagers, the biggest purchasers of music, who have never known a world where file sharing wasn't an integral part of the music experience, would organize a boycott and stop buying albums entirely.

There is no way the RIAA can win this game in the end.

[Dick Vomer]

This is great..... all the senators and representatives and whomever else... judges, lawyers.... beaureucrats... are going to pass a .... LAW !!! to prevent shareware.. how pathetic.... they should pass a law against gravity... pass a law against the tide coming in.... pass a law against the sun rising, pass a law against.... name it.

These are the guys and gals in college who couldn't produce anything or went on to "fill" positions. They don't produce and can only justify their meaningless lives by trying to pretend that they make a difference ...

When the music company goes after some college kid at MIT or Cal Poly I want to see the payback these little mutants will wreck on them. I can just hear the squeals of identity thefts, denial of service e-mails, crashing hard drives that will "self-reformat", worms and all manner of electronic warfare. That's the college weenies.... wait till they hack off some 22-39 year old guy with no social life except his huge collection of mp3 files and internet gaming who after he is turned in well spend 24-7 trying to figure a way to screw the companies..... It could be World War III in cyberspace.....

Let's Get It On !!!

[AmericaUnited]

This bill will get struck down faster than a kid flying a metal kite in a lightening storm.

[AmericaUnited]

There is no attack scheme the RIAA could come up with that would not be defeated by hackers within days. Tens of thousands of hackers would not just release programs to protect end-users, they would also immediately band together, break into the RIAA severs and drop trojan horses, ping-flood, and otherwise use every trick in the book to completely shut down all outgoing packets from IP addresses identified as P2P attack drones.

TS, your comments are dead on the money. These corporate knuckleheads just don't have any clue how outmatched they are in this department.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

Good luck to those who would try to enforce this.

[Thebaddog]

I think Berman knows this is a loser of a fight, but he has to do something. What would stop those music weenies from doing what they are talking about right now without asking permission from Washington. And I read somewhere that there are 70 million users of one service. Which ones get the attention while the others get PO'd?

[thepitts]

Sure would be nice to own a congressman to do my bidding.

[MoJo2001]

Can you imagine them trying to shutdown the IRC, Newsgroups, or FTP's? Good luck to them! Some kid in cyberspace will be all over them on this one. Remember, what goes around comes around and this could end up backfiring on them in a huge way.

[vannrox]

Nicely said and stated. The companies that participate in the restriction of free flow and internet information will experience the same kind of shock that S&W got after they shaked hands with Clinton.

[demlosers]

Let's Get It On !!!

The short sighted Congressman Rat would start the biggest hack war the web would see. It would start to be open season on the recording industry and Hollywood. They would get more than they bargained for.

[vannrox]

"...This bill will get struck down faster than a kid flying a metal kite in a lightening storm..."

-That's what they said about the 16th Amendment and the Clean Elections Bill.