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

AP ^ | 6/17/03 | Ted Bridis

[Jhoffa_]

My position exactly...

I wish I would have worded it as well as you did, however..

[tracer]

He indeed is a corporate shill -- for the music industry he hopes to take by storm as a "rising star;" 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. Thanks for reminding me, PRoLA.....

[Alberta's Child]

Here's a dumb question . . .

If Sony Records wants to destroy your computer, how can they do it if you are downloading their property from a third-party "host" server? The owner of the "host" server would have to be an accomplice in anything that Sony does to your home computer.

[Arkinsaw]

You could always at that point re-record the audio, and encode it in a non-protected format... like MP3. Bye bye protection!

The only way this will ever work is to put it into a format that cannot be heard by human ears. Otherwise it won't work.

[Mo1]

As long as Hatch is in this kind of mood, why don't we re-design the U.S. Capitol so that the roof caves in on both chambers whenever Congress passes an unconstitutional law?

Just sneek it in a bill, they won't know it because they never read even their own Bills

[Arkinsaw]

how can they do it if you are downloading their property from a third-party "host" server?

They've already hired companies to put up fake servers with trashed MP3 files on them. All they have to do is pose as a peer and users will connect.

[TomGuy]

Next Hatch will be advocating blowing up libraries.

[Dog Gone]

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

Or even listen to.

What more do they want?

[tracer]

"Is he politically invulnerable in the Beehive State?"

It would appear that he is -- as long as he continues to show up in church on most Sundays. That said, I'd vote for the Rev. Moon over him if I lived in Utah.....

[Thud]

Time for involuntary retirement. Or send him back to orbit on the shuttle.

[Myrddin]

Hey, man, what's your hourly rate. I'll pay in cash, if you wish... 8~)

If it happens to me, it will be a labor of love to destroy the persons who did it. I would have the resources of the company attorneys to defend the losses incurred by my customers. The last time the attorneys called for help, I provided them a 284 page deposition. A little quid pro quo would be nice.

I had a hard disk crash on a QNX system a few months back. I had used an old drive and failed to keep regular backups. When it failed, I rebuilt everything on my own time. The customer paid for the development time and products. It was my failure to backup.

[muawiyah]

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.

It's not likely I will bring suit against the Mormons for doing this. First off, they have a lot more money; secondly, they have lawyers who can win every single time; thirdly, I actually support them in this effort.

In fact, I would be first in line to protest any law that allowed a copyright owner to trash someone's computer because he thought they'd violated his copyrights!

Hey, that's what we have the Second Amendment for anyway ~ to obtain redress of grievance when the government is on the side of tyranny.

[FairOpinion]

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

I think there are a lot of things they could do short of destroying people's computers.

Just as when you go to carfax to check a used car, you can pay and they let you request 10 or 15 checks. Why can't they do something similar. People can pay so much for so many song titles, or movies, whatever and the site keeps track of the number of downloads from that password, when they reach their limit, the password expires. And of course those without a password couldn't get in to download anything.

Sure everything can be hacked, but this kind of simple stuff would stop 90% of the people.

Then they should go after sites, which allow free downloading without paying and shut down those sites.

[tracer]

"As long as Hatch is in this kind of mood, why don't we re-design the U.S. Capitol so that the roof caves in on both chambers whenever Congress passes an unconstitutional law?"

Golly, is tomorrow a slow news day??

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

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

I am sure that they can find something in the tens of thousands of laws to destroy your computer for.

Kind of Totalitarian really, "you are morally wrong and broke the law because we said so. It says so in the law right here" kind of logic.

I've always been curious, can you copywrite sound? Is it the sequence of notes or what? Its obviously not the physicality since they are being created on other pcs. Kazaa Lite is the best thing to happen to music since the radio

Free the Music!

[adam_az]

If Sony Records wants to destroy your computer, how can they do it if you are downloading their property from a third-party "host" server? The owner of the "host" server would have to be an accomplice in anything that Sony does to your home computer

That's not how it would work. In a peer to peer (P2P) network, the nodes are all both clients and servers. They would search the network for a particular file, and then fingerprint to make sure the file they detect is one on their baddie-list, for example by downloading it then using audio analysis software to compare the known song and the downloaded one. This way, you can rule out someone putting their own song online, but naming it after a madonna song.

Not a dumb question - and a lot smarter than some of the "answers" you've had in Israel related posts. Are you, Seti 1, and Illbay triplets, by chance?

[HiTech RedNeck]

You are such a joke with "Law" in your name. You are not about Law, you are about Vigilantism. It does not take a genius to realize that anyone who can hack or virus into someone else's computer can then precipitate the proposed RIAA Vigilante reprisal upon that person's computer, and guess who gets the blame!

Hatch and you both need to be sent back to the hinterlands, the quicker the better.

[tracer]

From what you wrote about family history, etc., you might well be able to get Orrin to amend his legislation to exempt you.... 8~)

[bvw]

"Can History be copyrighted"

I can answer that. YES. Why? Because "intellectual property" -- especially in such loose forms has copyright and patent have become is expansive. There is no check to it. A powerful holder of such an expansive grant to use of the Force of the State on his behalf -- which is what a copyriight is -- the right for Eisner, say, to call down the Federal Hounds of Hell on you, for viewing a pirate copy of "Steamboat Willy". Wait!

That's not enough of the analogy -- I beg you read on --

Walt Disney made "Steamboat Willy" in 1923. When made the limited duration of the copyright was then set in law as 14 years, with provision to request an extension at the end of that for another 14. Interpreted as a contract that grant would mean images others might produce or copy of Mickey Mouse returned as property of the owner of the physical item on which the image appeared in 1951.

Yet the Federal Government under sway of the forces of the near-nobility established by such "grants of title" by the State -- the legislature, the excutive and the judiciary, all three -- has magically transformed a "contract" between the government acting as agent of "We, the People" and the copyright grantee into something that can ONLY be construed to be a grant of a State Sovereign, and not an agent. That is NOBILITY.

"Steamboat Willy" and Mickey Mouse remain the sole NOBLE RIGHT of Lord Eisner and his Disney Corporation.

* * * *

And there is the GIST of it. By the ever expansive intrepretation of the copyright and patent clause, we have become Subjects of the State, and of the Nobles to whom the State choses to grant "intellectual property" to.

So YES, history can be and WILL be copyrighted. Such absolute power is not slack in finding its extremes.