Attack disables music industry Web site (RIAA DOS attack)

Cnet.com ^ | July 29, 2002, 4:20 PM PT | Declan McCullagh

[Musket]

I bought the CD and I should be able to give it away if I want to.

That's not the same thing as making digital copies and distributing them on a world wide network.

[BikerNYC]

It's only a matter of scale. It's still my CD.

[Diverdogz]

They must have hired Major League Baseball's PR department.

[AFreeBird]

Nice people or not, like them or hate them--doesn't matter. They are trying to protect their property and the hackers are wrong.

So in other words you would support the RIAA sending in SWAT like teams into homes in no knock raids to protect their property as well? Same difference here. The hackers will fight back as would the home owner. And what if there are people out there in cyberland who have peer networks set up but don't trade in music? Their cyber home has been violated by the RIAA SWAT teams. All with Congressional approval too.

RIAA is setting themselves up for a good old ass kicking and they apparently don't even know it. Whatever thechnology they try and force down our throats will be circumvented. (not that I engage in such activities, but I know the technology and the mindsets of creative people. And those types just LOVE to solve problems.)

Their better choice of action would be to sit back and reasses the situation; causes and effects, and come up with something better that all canlive with. Fair use has its place, and I don't relish the idea of having to replace all my entertainment hardware because RIAA/Hollywierd are going to demand that no CD can be played on any device that isn't registered with them; able to phone home (a la Winders XP) and tell the nice little database what music you're listening to, when and for how long, and whether or not the CD you're listening to is a compilation CD of your own legally purchased CD's or someone elses CD... ad nauseum.

This disabling of PC trying to play a so called legally purchased, protected CD's is IMHO criminal and they should get their collective asses sued for a couple of trillion.

[Musket]

Of course I wouln't go for SWAT teams going into homes, but this isn't the same--it's a world wide network, not a home.

And what if there are people out there in cyberland who have peer networks set up but don't trade in music?

I think the record companies will be able to tell the difference--that is- what is being traded/transfered.

RIAA is setting themselves up for a good old ass kicking and they apparently don't even know it. Whatever thechnology they try and force down our throats will be circumvented. (not that I engage in such activities, but I know the technology and the mindsets of creative people. And those types just LOVE to solve problems.)

Hackers can fight it all they want, but in the end the record companies will win, and when hackers are caught--they're toast. Remember Kevin?

This disabling of PC trying to play a so called legally purchased, protected CD's is IMHO criminal and they should get their collective asses sued for a couple of trillion.

That'll never happen.

I'm not saying I agree with any of this but, considering the history of the record companies, it will go down. And the record companies will win.

[weegee]

This is more than just DOS attacks on mp3 servers, this is the deliberate transmition of viruses as well.

Letting corporations willingly design and transmit viruses and hack "competitors" websites is dangerous legal precident.

There are photographers who's photos are stolen and posted on the web. Are their publishers entitled to the same type of tactics?

What about sites trading cracked "shareware/demo" software that won't expire?

Can't beat them in the courts so just kill their system, hmm? Didn't the recording industry come out with a CD-audio protection scheme that could kill a Mac just for playing the original disc?

[weegee]

Remember a few years back when artists like Garth Brooks stood shoulder to shoulder with their record labels and tried to prevent disc owners from even selling the used CD?

Microsoft has the power to shut down unlicensed software sales on eBay (can't sell opened product, can't sell sealed product without an authorized dealer ID).

Back in the 1980s, the recording industry tried to prevent public libraries from stocking CDs as "customers" could make a "perfect copy" of an album. You don't realize just how much the recording industry would like to roll over your rights. You do realize that you can home tape your own compilation right? Not with current digital protection technology and circumvention of which violates the Digital Copyright Millenium Act.

[Musket]

I don't think that they will get the O.K. to transmit viruses but I do think that they will stop at nothing and spare no expense to get control of this situation, and they have only just begun. And they will win, they always win. Count on it.

[weegee]

Of course they "win". They write the laws that their puppet bill sponsers put before congress.

[gd124]

This legislation gives them the freedom from prosecution for $50 of damage, per illegal damage.

[KneelBeforeZod]

1337 LIEK JEFF K!!!!!11!

[gd124]

I meant $250, per illegal file.

[usconservative]

"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack our site?" asked the RIAA representative, who asked not to be identified.

Lost on them is right. In addition to their putting out LOOPED music and infiltrating the p2p community, contacting ISP's of those sharing music in order to disrupt/disconnect their internet service, the RIAA has now become the Gestapo (oh hell, the TALIBAN) of the 'net.

Frankly, I expect to see MORE attacks on RIAA in the not too distant future. The more they piss off music fans, the more of these types of activities they can expect to see.

They've only begun to reap what they sow.

[meaje]

ok granted they are trying to protect their property.... However ask them to deleneate how much profit they generate off a cd sale and they will not give an answer, however out of a $25.00 cd sale the artist if their contract was signed before 5 - 10 years ago will recieve $0.05 and current recording contracts have zero ($0.00) royalties attached an artist makes _ALL_ their money off performances not recording sales. The RIIA gets almost 100% of all profits generated by recording sales. So in short I find myself increasingly wondering why I should feel bad about people sharing music as statistics show that while "piriacy" has gone up, almost by the same linear distance so has sales for those albums, which at least I am interperting people are sharing music and then when finding stuff they like go an buy the album. It is the same thing that has been going on ever since tape players hit the market. People share what they enjoy so others can hear it and if they like it go and purchase it. This has been accepted as "Fair Use Not For Commercial Pourposes" up untill very recently. As a male approching my early 30's I can rember this going on ever since I started attending school and sharing music with my friends. Why is it that now the RIIA is complaining about their "Word of Mouth Advertising" which now with the advent of the internet is global in scope. I personally have no problem with someone who downloads a piece of music to see if they will enjoy the album. I equate it with sites like Amazon .com who offer a short sample of what is on the cd before you buy it. I don't go into a reccord store just pick up a CD and take it home with out listening to it first to see if I will enjoy my new investment.

[meaje]

----someone who has a problem with burglars may take various legitimate steps in self-defense -- but if he sends hired goons to harass everyone in the neighborhood looking for stolen property

did you realize the RIIA and MPAA have sent goons around to various college campuses going room to room _WITH_ the college / University's authority looking at peoples computers for "Piriated Works". But the way they are getting away with this disgusts me, as they are threating to tie up in court and sue for damages ISP's, Universities, and Colleges (who are not to blame for what their end-user does with their own personal computer, and in most cases can not afford to litigate against these monsters. So soon we will see ISP's shutting down, Libraries, and other Public Institutions refusing to allow access to their networks publicly and forcing their users to a EULA due to the rising cost of risk management (AKA. Insurance)) for allowing their bandwidth to be used for illegal pourposes. What have we come to here. Honestly 2 months agao Colorado State University had one of these teams go through the dorms and University owned Appartments (What Balls!!!)