Sen Hatch Would Like To Destroy Filetraders' PCs 1372
CBackSlash writes "Sen. Hatch is interested in technology to remotely destroy computers. But it would only be used if you're downloading copyrighted material, and only the copyright owner should be able to wield this awesome power, since having the feds do it would be against the law. Here is the AP story from Yahoo!."
Hatch has finally lost it (Score:5, Interesting)
things over the years, but this has to top the list.
I've been a supporter of Hatch for several years, even helping
with the election effort on several occasions. This takes the
cake though, it's time to get fresher blood into that office.
If you want to call his office and complain (as I will):
DC Office: 202.224.5251
SLC Office: 801.524.4380
here is his website:
http://www.senate.gov/~hatch/
Please call and voice your extreme antagonism to these types of
statements. Although the other Senators called him down, he
needs to know that we hear these statements and are against them
in the extreme.
I just got off the phone with the Salt Lake Office, and they had
no idea he had made statements of this nature. In fact she was
quite taken back to hear of them. Please call and let them know
how you feel about this. If they know their voters are against
this type of behavior, they will change it.
Meh (Score:4, Interesting)
1) destroy people's computers.
2) make them hate and fear you.
3) ???
4) profit.
1) Download firewall
2) Install firewall
3) Reap vast profit of pirated material
I mean really, how hard is it to make sure your computer is up to date with patches and has a good firewall installed. Preferably with an OpenBSD/Linux(with the bare minimum installed) box physically in between your home LAN and the internet.
Not that I'm in favor of destroying people's computers (I assume this means things like reformatting people's hard drives), that's just asinine. But I do think it's OK for record companies to spoof P2P networks and try to disrupt them.
Scary (Score:5, Interesting)
If you read his comments in context, the truth of what he said becomes obvious.
Cyberphobia among the old guard, as represented by people in Hatch's generation, has given way to overt, unbridled hatred of technology and its advocates. He views internet users as a group of miscreants who must be taught a lesson and his suggestions of remote computer destruction as a perfectly valid means of holding due process hostage to force us to solve the content industry's problems.
I am aghast.
This is already possible - Grubbnix! (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyways, the interesting part of Grubbnix was that it had a lot of capability and use when it came to flashing your BIOS (most major motherboard companies today still use a Grubbnix variant with their flashing utilities). I still remember one variant called Hucker (or something like that, maybe Huckey) that was spread around on disks to unsuspecting users. When you loaded it and left it running, it opened up your system enough so that someone via TCP/IP could execute commands, one of which was to completely shitfuck your BIOS, and sometimes even managed to cause damage to the CPU/motherboard by modifying threshold settings in the BIOS (depending on your model #).
It used to be passed out to "enemies" at HackerCons, who would then take it home, load it, and end up with a fucked PC.
Perhaps Senator Hatch needs to give the Cult of the Dead Cow an e-mail and see if they still have the source around somewhere
Against the law... (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually though, as long as they are still liable for any damages they inflict this will be fun. Let's see, they (will/would have) just destroyed a $1000 computer, with $10000 (and if you can't figure out a way to back that figure up you need help) of the user's own data to delete a $0.99 song. Can we spin this?
Of course, it is better to stop this now, before the circus...
Re:They know nothing (Score:5, Interesting)
If this idea becomes a reality, then that skript kiddie was just a visionary! Imagine the aftermath of an Internet worm that sent the 'copyright self destruct' message to a computer a week or so after infecting it (hopefully infected many other computers in the interm). It would make CodeRed look like a pleasant dream.
What About...? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's been a long time for this Baby-Boomer since I studied them in high school, but the phrases Innocent until proven guilty, unreasonable search and seizure, and due process of law seem to ring a bell.
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:5, Interesting)
Plus, one would HOPE you get a warning before they nuke your system.
Wonder if Dell is behind this plan?;)
Hatch's Kids (Score:4, Interesting)
Senator Hatch married the former Elaine Hansen of Newton, Utah. They are the proud parents of six children and have twenty grandchildren.
I wonder how many of his kids' and grandkids' PC's would be wrecked?
Is this terrorism? (Score:3, Interesting)
my message to senator hatch: (Score:4, Interesting)
I have been increasingly concerned about the contingent of Hollywood Democrats who have sought to cripple, extort, and otherwise destroy the progress of technology in the name of defending copyright holders from distribution of their works online. I've found especially disturbing the idea that is is valid for the government to hold due process hostage in order to force the technology community to solve the content industry's distribution problems by developing and implementing technical means to protect their work - by threatening to allow private organizations to maliciously attack computer systems alleged to be used to distribute protected works without the legal benefits accorded under criminal and civil law. This is an especially outrageous abandonment of the principles on which our government is supposed to stand.
I thought I could look to the Republican party to serve as a balance against this senseless legislative paranoia with regard to technology, but it seems that this is not the case. Although I am not a resident in your state, your words on this issue have caused me to reconsider ever supporting anyone from your party for elected office.
send your comments to: senator@hatch.senate.gov
It's not technically possible, so why worry? (Score:2, Interesting)
Sure they'll be able to make a deal with Microsoft, and it'll all fit in their DRM vision.
But there's absolutely _no_ way any open source OS will ever allow such a backdoor to be added with which this 'law' could be enforced.
So the only effect, if this would ever come true, would be an increase in popularity of the free operating systems.
Just look on the bright side of things
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:3, Interesting)
You back up your data, your config, your bookmarks, you have your favorite distro on hand, etc..., etc..., regularly, right?
What could possibly be done in to your system that couldn't be ameliorated in the time it takes for an average
interesting read (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Just /dev/null (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What about due process? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, I realize that the original post is actually about the government's right to destroy property, but it is being proposed on behalf of the big money. Every notice how you never see legislation that says it's OK to crack/destroy computers of corporations that are guilty of supporting human rights abuses?
Perhaps someone could come up with a remote method for removing politicians who no longer see the Constitution as necessary or relevant.
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Campaign contributors (Score:3, Interesting)
Politics is a great investment. You can buy influence so much for such little money. Are these politicians really whoring themselves for a mere $10,000 or $20,000 a pop? They could ask so much more, but I guess there is a lot of competition in Congress for these dollars which might keep the price down.
Indirect consequences (Score:5, Interesting)
There are studies-- ones i can't remember the names of or links to, of course-- that show that spanking a child makes that child more likely to grow up to be a violent person. If I remember right, the claim was that people who had corporal punishment used on them as a child were more likely to grow up to be the kind of person who beat their wives or children.
The reason given for this, again if i remember right, was that by having violence used on them at such a sensitive age, the child grows up thinking violence is "normal", and application of violence is how you are expected to solve problems, and beating someone is an acceptable and normal way for one human to get another human to comply with a request.
So, here's my thought: what happens if the RIAA hacking and screwing up your computer if you've been filetrading becomes common? What happens to the children/teenagers who grow up under this kind of paradigm, and grow up seeing that the RIAA, this big important adult business thing that funds congressional campaigns and everything, reacts to people doing things it things are wrong by tracking them down and breaking their stuff?
If it works like spanking does, well, we may well wind up with a generation growing up thinking vigilante justice is normal. Or maybe growing up with a kind of "us vs them" mentality toward corporations; that corporations are some kind of big distant enemies who can do anything they like without the law applying. And you can't tell a kid that someone big is allowed to hit you and you can't hit back and have them believe you. They might wind up growing up thinking that terrorism by corporations against citizens, and terrorism against corporations by citizens, is normal, and the law considers such things acceptable enough they don't regulate them.. as long as one is doing the other doesn't like...
This is stretching, and of course, none of this will ever come to pass. But, just a thought.
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:3, Interesting)
Changed sides? (Score:3, Interesting)
Has Hatch changed sides so dramatically?
Re:Campaign contributors (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a question for the Senator from Utah. Under the recently passed Patriot Act distruction of a computer system is considered an act of terrorism. Does the senators recent comments mean he is now supporting act of terrorism?
Re:This is already possible - Grubbnix! (Score:1, Interesting)
or perhaps a system without a bios in the same way (Mac)
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:3, Interesting)
Dear Senator Hatch,
You sir, are a moron. Your arrogant, short-sighted, blatantly illegal ideas on Copyright protection are utterly offensive. Perhaps copyright infringement is *wrong* and illegal, but your proposed methods of combatting these *offenses* are so incredibly inane I must question how you became a senator. Do you have any comprehension of the measures in place to protect privacy, are those laws merely temporary?
It is truly amazing to me that you could support protecting intellectual property rights to such a degree that you would endorse destroying what is tangible, not to mention expensive property. I am truly worried for this country if law enforcement can now be put in the hands of everyone, and no legal recourse will be pursued. I equate the endorsement of this act to endorsing cutting off the hand of one who shoplifts, but of course that would be absurd. .
You disgust me.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
the follies of vigilantism (Score:2, Interesting)
Coincidentally, I've been reading a book called "The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment" (by Franklin Zimring) that argues, among other things, that America's strong vigilate tradition, especially in the South, is one of the primary reasons it has become one of the last developed nations in the world with a death penalty; and that the values associated with vigilatism prevent Americans from critically examining the gross inequities in their capital punishment system, such as the vastly differing rates of executution of the condemned by income and race.
When I read something like this, it makes me feel like senator Hatch has a lot in common with those Good ol' Boys in the white hoods. Lets all hope that cooler heads prevail.
Vigilantie Senators. (Score:5, Interesting)
First, an Article 3 created court needs to determine guilt or innocence. Second, destruction of property as a punishment appears nowhere in the penal code [hehe, hehe, he said "penal"]. Last time I checked, we didn't cut off hands, either.
If I am a farmer and I think you may have stolen corn from my field as you drove by, could I destroy your refridgerator?
Hatch has no concept of technology or the dynamic of the problem he seeks to address. Thus, he speaks as one insane.
"I'd do away with the pixies if you could give me something more." Ben Lee
yea *brilliant* (Score:4, Interesting)
what if he has a politial agenda against your country?
these guys are soooo "smrt", i can tell!
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:2, Interesting)
Try telling jonson or skylarov that. The USA controls us all - i drink my starbucks like every good (british) citizen.
Re:Why would he do that? (Score:0, Interesting)
stupid future. (Score:1, Interesting)
"you have the music on your machine and have had it for six months don't you think it's time you paid for it".
"Sure it's there it's under c:\windows\ext\loa\ch\sub\downloads\media\music\p
"You'll just have to go through our arbitration process to prove that YOU didn't install the software and that YOU didn't download our copyrighted material. It's all pretty simple, unfortunately it takes about 6 months and if you lose it could be a pretty hefty fine. How about a nice little subscription to our service which is much more cost effective?"
Should you refuse the "service" that's okay. AOL also purchased Gateway. They disable your computer prior to arbitration. They know that there's a 1 in 5 chance you'll buy your next computer from Gateway not realizing they're owned by AOL. And since you're a "pirate" and all they can't have you doing you're "pirate" thing and just getting away with it. So while you're waiting for arbitration they've disabled your DVD player, stereo, and disconnected your cable (cuz they own that too). Can't have you breaking the law now can we.
next virus (Score:3, Interesting)
How does Hatch know he is targeting US citizens? (Score:3, Interesting)
US. Gov't vs. The People :: Forfeiture (Score:5, Interesting)
I was recently warned that in Los Angeles county, if you're caught racing (by the judgement of the arresting officer), your vehicle is forfeit to the county.
In Florida, any vehicle involved in any drug violation may be forfeit to the state. Of course, the state is in it for the money, so they'll be nice enough to sell you your own vehicle back. A friend of mine paid over $5,000 to get her own car back over a minor violation. It took over a month to get things arranged, and several trips to that city. She had only been passing through the town, she wasn't a resident.
One particular sheriff's department has some of my handguns still, which I'm particuarly upset about. My ex-wife was getting violent, so I gave a friend everything dangerous from the house. She locked them all away in the trunk of her car. A couple days later, she was pulled over on suspicion of DUI. She wasn't arrested for DUI, but because she was pulled over on suspicion, they seized the weapons. It did absolutely no good to try to explain it to anyone. And yes, they were all perfectly legal. The begging to get my stuff back ended when they finally came up with the standpoint of "we don't know where they are." They just disappeared out of the system. {cough}{cough}. Ya into someone's personal collection, I'm sure.
The gov't is already seizing property without due processes or reasonable cause. I doubt they'll get the law through saying you can hack, but I'd bet they'll pass laws saying any equipment used in the act of the crime (the crime being music piracy) can be seized. I'm sure it'll be broad enough to include just about anything in house/apartment.
As for just killing machines on demand, I'd bet Microsoft will include that in future releases of Windows very willingly. It would terrify me to know that they could just pick and choose machines to zap.
If I was Joe-ISP hosting on Windows machines (ok, that would never happen), and one site had MP3's on it, they could not only destroy that site, but every site hosted there? They could cause damage to the machine itself (i.e., wipe the BIOS, drop the partition table, etc). I'd be afraid to think what would happen with a single BIOS change to bump the voltage up to the CPU and watch it fry. What would 12v do to a low voltage CPU line? Now what if that hosting machine happened to be a big expensive hosting machine? I've seen pricetags over $40k come by. It wouldn't be very good to see one of those go up in smoke.
I'd be just as upset if my kid had friends over, and they were downloading files and got *MY* machine destroyed. I'm not exactly going to be satisfied with "The RIAA destroyed your computer because someone was downloading Enimen's new album. They're legally protected in this action." Well, I'd probably be more upset as this would be my own machine. Customers can live with a server down for a day or two (but they won't like it). My personal property is *MINE*.
Re:Sen Hatch claim he support acts of terrorism. (Score:2, Interesting)
Damn, this is what the title of the post should have be :
"Sen Hatch claim he support acts of terrorism."
Re:Why protect a dead industry ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, the truth of the matter is, acting upon his thoughts would cause massive economic damage to the entire world. Tens of millions of machines could be affected, including corporate and educational machines, government and research machines. It would affect computers worldwide. Furthermore, we have no idea how much damage would be done. Perhaps the virus would merely wipe out the hard drive. Perhaps it would increase the FSB on the motherboard and the memory clock on common video cards to wipe out the video memory, motherboard, memory, and CPU in one shot, possibly also taking out the other peripheral cards in the process.
Overall, it looks very much like destroying the world to save a bunch of ungrateful, whiney, untalented pieces of garbage who have never created a thought of their own, let alone music.
Re:Scary (Score:3, Interesting)
Sweet Exemption (Score:3, Interesting)
Cool. So if I write a virus/trojan/worm, I have recorded an expression of mathematical thought in fixed form. Under the Berne Convention, I am now a copyright holder. Which means I can now destroy anyone's computer that has my copyrighted material on it...(after a couple of warnings). I think 2 popup windows telling them to get rid of my malicious code should be enough. As soon as they close the window a second time, I guess my code can destroy the computer now.
What's even better is that if they make this a hardware requirement to have this kind of a backdoor, they've just left the entire country open to a terrorist attack.
"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.
Yay. Let's intentionally make it easier for assholes to destroy our country. Nice idea dipshit. Perhaps he didn't think that far ahead.
Great for Open Source (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm quite certain that if i made a real effort to properly lock down a linux box, register alerts to people snooping and ther likes that even the top govt experts would struggle.
Then i'll just stick a Linux, BSD and Solaris box in a chain so they'd have three to get thru.... that'd cost more than buying the damn cds in the first place, but that's almost not the point anymore.
no, no, no! (Score:3, Interesting)
Nothing could keep a determined and well funded attacker from causeing massive harm if this were legal. The first strike would be aimed at the same poor fools that got the p2p harrasment letter and other easy target windoze machines. It would cripple a large proportion of corporate computers and world industry. The first week might trigger the next great depression as small businesses cupmpled an larger ones dependent on Microsoft were injured directly and indirectly. Teams of crackers could find exploits in just about everything and cause harm to more rational systems as well. All systems can be cracked, it's just a matter of time and effort. Even OpenBSD has suffered one or two remote root expoits. All it takes is one hole, lots of bandwith, and a bad attitude. The first box dammaged is unacceptable loss.
Not that I'm in favor of destroying people's computers (I assume this means things like reformatting people's hard drives), that's just asinine. But I do think it's OK for record companies to spoof P2P networks and try to disrupt them.
No, no, no, no! Spoofing is every bit as obnoxious an offense as the actual copyright violations themselves. It consumes bandwith by simply forcing the downloader to look again. The remedy should not be worse than the dissease.
Did Orrin mention that he accepted over $175K.... (Score:5, Interesting)
First he brings us the DMCA and now this....
Absurdity draw public attention (Score:3, Interesting)
I think he actually intends to send the opposite message. He wants to get the public excited about the issue. When people read this, they will be infuriated. He wants people to realize that excessive copyright legislation has been slipping into law over the past few years. He's hoping that once the public is aware of it, they will lobby to reverse the trend toward excessive copyright enforcement.
He sponsored the DMCA, but perhaps he couldn't get it passed without the ambiguous language in section 1201. Perhaps he's now trying to fix that section, but he can't do it without public support.
I know this seems a bit of a stretch, but his suggestion is so crazy that it is quite unreasonable to take him literally. This could be a clever way to meet his real goals.
OTOH, perhaps the insanity of DC traffic has driven him mad. I hear it's a common phenomenon.
A Virus Writers Dream Come True (Score:4, Interesting)
Can you imagine what a virus writer could do once this technology got into the wild ? Imagine a virus that could would wipe out all those PCs, or maybe a select set of IPs ... scary ... hmmm ... wonder what the IP addresses of the RIAA are ?
When Lobbying goes wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
The old DRM Lobby has been trying a bit too hard. Some old folks in congress have got such a huge misunderstanding of how the machines that power our lives work it's incredible.
BTW, according to netcraft [netcraft.com] http://www.hatchmusic.com/ [hatchmusic.com] is running Apache on Linux.
That means Linus, as well as most other programmers who have worked on Linux or Apache would be able to remotely destroy his site. Bill Gates would be able to destroy 90% of the computers in existence.
I suppose this law would quickly be followed by a law making it illegal to block the port they pick. Or maybe they will just talk to your ISP, go to your house and take your computer. They can cut them up with axes in the street like the old prohibition days. I bet Hatch can remember those days himself. :)
Senator Hatchs Website Violates Copyright? (Score:3, Interesting)
It would be quite embarrassing for the good Senaturd from Utah if it was actually found that he himself was a copyright violator, ripping off the hard work of Milonic Solutions Ltd., with all such made public in light of his recent comments. What choice would he have but to rig his own computers and pompous ass for detonation.
Re:I've got a solution to this whole mess ... (Score:2, Interesting)
the whole election thing (as it seems to not be
working), and instead we just pick random people
every year for office
it, we give the normal person the right to kick them
if they do anything deemed stupid by 3 or more
people.
Bochs (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Campaign contributors (Score:3, Interesting)
I assume then that you propose outlawing private contributions as well. Otherwise you'd just be shifting the financing from the company to it's owners, who are real people, and who are making such contributions for their personal benefit, be it through the company or otherwise.
Then there's the question of why individuals should be allowed to buy politcal influence if companies are not. Or who would fund politics if it weren't for individual or corporate contributions. I'm all for a low-budget election, but low-budget to the point of people not knowing the candidates doesn't help anyone.
In short, you've got a great idealistic statement. Wonderful. Come back when you've got a suggestion for improvement, rather than just a complaint.
Hatch: the man, the legend (Score:3, Interesting)
So, despite file trading and p2p networks, Sen. Hatch is earning more money than before. And they say file sharing is taking money away from artists, eh? Must be all those sales of the soundtrack from Rat Race [imdb.com].
Letter to my representitives - help yourself to it (Score:2, Interesting)
Representitives-
I wish to bring a disturbing article concerning remarks made by Senator Orrin Hatch regarding remotely destroying the computers of copyright violaters to your attention. I ask your attention not just as a constituent, but also as a computer engineer and student at Northwestern Law school. In case you are already aware of the article, let me say that the Senator's ideas are dangerous, unconstitutional, and demonstrate to me a complete disconnect with the Senators supposed job of serving the people, as opposed to serving corporations and himself - according to the article the senator is a copyright holder who made $18,000 last year.
In this article (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a
"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.
Even without getting into a discussion of the way copyright law has been perverted so as to prevent material from ever entering the public domain (I challenge you to find material that has entered the public domain via any process except an artist explicitly contributing it to the public domain), the idea of giving copyright holders vigilante power, especially in a case where they cannot possibly know the value of what they are destroying, defies reasonable explanation. What if an email from a soldier to his mother was on the destroyed computer? What if it was an innocent relative's entire financial records? Taken to an extreme, it is possible that a person could hold the cure for cancer on their computer, all to be wiped out because a copyright holder thinks that person has violated the law.
Finally, if you have a moment further I ask you to consider this. I would just like to say that intellectual property is explicitly different from other properties. Whereas when you create something physical, like a piece of furniture, it is very clear that you should own that one piece of furniture completely because you paid for each piece of it, and all the labor was your own. Furthermore, your building that piece of furniture does not prohibit someone else from doing it. However, with every single piece of intellectual property, a person has truley stood on the shoulders of thousands of years of civilization, and owes a debt to everyone from the first human who harnassed the power of fire and basic tools to more modern day people such as Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. The intellectual property owner owes a huge debt to society, because their idea isn't composed solely of their own contribution - it is one tiny part in an idea composed of the work of centuries of human effort. This is why an intellectual property holder owes a debt to society, and why they should be granted limited rights for a limited time over their idea or creation. In the constitution, intellectual property rights were created expressly with the idea of promting the useful arts and sciences, not to compensate those who came up with the ideas. The compensation was merely viewed as a necessary way to motivate people to innovate. However, if we follow the intent of the constitution this compensation should not our primary goal, rather it should be the promotion of the useful arts and sciences for the good of society at large.
Thank you for your time.
Adam Grove
Re:Later in the discussion... (Score:3, Interesting)
Dear Sen Hatch:
I'm writing the letter in response to your proposed legislation that would allow copyright holders to "destroy" the computers of file traders, etc. This legislation suggests that people should take the law into their own hands instead of letting the courts decide. This type of action goes against established principles of "due processes" and "innocent until proven guilty". It also sounds like the first seedlings of creating an anarchy. I seriously hope this isn't what you intended.
If computer hardware was build with the ability to destroy itself, it would be only a matter of time before some weakness was exposed that would allow cyber terrorists to trigger this ability and use it to command terror over computer users nationwide. This level of control would give such individuals unprecedented power over US citizens. In essence, it would be a powerful new weapon terrorists could use against us. Are you sure you want to be responsible for this?
One last thing before I go. This letter is, by definition, copyrighted by me. If it appears on your computer, it means that you now have property copyrighted by me in your possession, thus giving me the right (under your proposed law) to destroy your computer. If you say this wouldn't be covered by your law, then where do you draw the line? What if I emailed copyrighted music to you? Would that be covered?
Thanks for your time, and I truly hope you'll reconsider what you're trying to do.