Patriot Act Used to Enforce Copyright Law? 725
iter8 writes " The Stargate SG-1 Information Archive is reporting that the Feds filed charges against Adam McGaughey, creator of SG1Archive.com. The website is a fan site for the television show Stargate SG-1. The charges allege that Adam used the website to engage in Criminal Copyright Infringement and Trafficking in Counterfeit Services. Two interesting things about the charges are that they were apparently set in motion by a complaint by our friends at the MPAA and the FBI invoked a provision of the USA Patriot Act to obtain financial records from his ISP. Is copyright infringment now a terrorist act?"
Very Interesting, But Quite Old (Score:5, Interesting)
Posted: Mar 30 2004, 11:46 PM
Surely this is interesting and all, but VERY outdated. I would think there is quite likely some more current information available. What has happened in the last four months?
Now... (Score:2, Interesting)
Criminal? (Score:2, Interesting)
Will they be charging college students who plagiarize geology papers to get an A?
Re:As I saw someone say recently ... (Score:2, Interesting)
home of the slave
http://home.student.uva.nl/marlies.meijer/biohaza
MPAA == Unscupulous Liars (Score:5, Interesting)
They also abused laws and I would not be surprised if they were the ones that damaged the equipment.
Perhaps the FBI are in leauge with them. How else could such gross incompetance be explained.
The MPAA should face charges of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and the FBI should be put under review.
Oh wait. This was a little guy and the MPAA has a lot of money. Ergo, the law does not apply. They probobly threatened the guy with legal action when he asked for his stuff back.
Expect such underhanded dealings when the MPAA drags 12 year olds/protestors/Apple/Independant Movie makers into court.
Funding a terrorist organization (Score:5, Interesting)
The FBI claimed that SG1Archive was part of an international conspiracy, raided his home, and used the Patriot Act to obtain his financial records. Man, I'd hate to see what they do to the people that fund this kind of site...
Kidding aside, I'm kind of curious as to what happened. This is definitely a biased article, but what were the official charges brought against him, where do the chargest stand now, and why did the MPAA get the feds instead of just sue?
Here comes a rant (Score:5, Interesting)
Proof that this act was dangerous came in the 1st weeks when the Vegas strip-club owner got arrested. This act has also been used against kiddie-porn and drug traffickers. Although I like the fact that these bastards get caught, the ends do not justify the means.
This case proves that government and business have gotten to intermingled and inbred, and every politician aligned with these afronts needs voted out. Normally, I would say the erroneous affadavit would lead to his acquittal but I cannot predict our justice system anymore.
As soon as this guy can afford it, a massive counter-suit against the MPAA, MGM, and the government needs to be filed.
Re:It's still illegal? (Score:2, Interesting)
not quite as innocent as it seems (Score:1, Interesting)
I've no sympathy at all.
Do Further Research! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Of course.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Guess what ?
Response doesn't fit the crime (Score:3, Interesting)
What? It's okay to have your property seized and trashed -- OVER A TELEVISION SHOW?! If what you say is true, then sure, he's an idiot. But shouldn't there be a difference in response between being under suspicion of terrorism, kiddie porn, or murder, versus under suspicion of trading low-quality (or even high-quality!) dubs?
If you're not going to donate to this guy's legal fund, you can at least throw a letter the way of MGM's consumer affairs department.
YOU are FUDding here! (mod me up) (Score:5, Interesting)
The guy was asked KINDLY by the MPAA to take down the episodes (which were of very crappy quality to begin with) and he DID so. That was in 2002, if I remember correctly. I've followed the site's development over the years and they haven't done anything illegal since then. Apart from posting a few spoilers here and there for overseas fans.
So it's you who's spreading FUD here.
that's why God gave us advertisers (Score:3, Interesting)
TV shows need advertisers. Companies that pay for the program so they can take a short moment to promote themselves.
So if you tell them that, because of their support of a particular program, you will, in fact not patronize them, it will get their attention pretty quick.
I know this article tries to sympathize with the people who work directly on the show, and a boycott would hurt them too. But the copyright holders only understand discourse in the form of money. There needs to be a monetary penalty for the mistreatment of fans. Start boycotting the advertisers and tell them know why.
Re:Not the point! Think about INDUCE. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:FUD ALERT (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:YOU are FUDding here! (mod me up) (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I've heard, he just made the episodes a little less public. Apparently, the archive of episodes was still being hosted and still being updated with newly aired episodes. The only catch is that the files weren't linked off of his site. Instead, the files used a predictable naming scheme, and details on how to find the files was given out via word-of-mouth.
Re:Not the point! Think about INDUCE. (Score:3, Interesting)
He was referring to what he saw was the lack of need for a bill of rights -- since Congress only had the power outlined in the Constitution.
And Georgia was one of the leading opponents of the bill of rights. They argued that if we list them out, some idiot in the future will think that our rights are limited to just those. The counter-argument to that was, look, we've made this constitution so pure and perfect that it is a machine incapable of producing tyranny, so there's no need. The reality is that we don't even have the rights enumerated in the Constitution, never mind the other natural rights that were never explicitly listed because no one thought we'd ever have a government so corrupt as to trample them.
Re:FUD ALERT (Score:5, Interesting)
If we're going to write to our Representatives and Senators about problems with the Patriot Act, we need to have a good understanding of the issues.
I haven't been able to discern the details yet, but if it is true that the Patriot Act was used to bust this guy, then it's an important thing for us to know about. Why? Because it gives us a concrete example to cite when we write our Senators and Representatives to say that the Patriot Act is being abused for non-counterterrorism purposes.
Note that there are a load of "if's" in the above! All we have so far is one person's assertion that the Patriot Act was abused to bust him. We need to get some kind of corroboration before using this example in letters. Letters citing this case could blow up in our faces if it turns out there was no Patriot Act abuse.
Re:Is copyright infringment now a terrorist act? (Score:3, Interesting)
So yeah, the definition is pretty convenient. In essence, if you're a nation, it's war, unless you're going against the USA, in which case you're a terrorist. If you're not a nation, you're a terrorist. Note that the definition of nation is conveniently vague.
But yeah, our laws always seemed effective before. Police were allowed to ignore many due-process and search-warrant restrictions when in hot pursuit, or when they could show that they believed they acted to prevent immediate danger. Search warrants were fairly easy to get, but prevented abuse by not allowing fishing trips - they had to state what they expected to find, or see direct evidence of capital crimes. (Dead bodies, etc.)
Seemed reasonable. You could get by most roadblocks to get terrorists and other threats, but you couldn't use any other evidence to get a conviction on some unrelated crime to cover up your failure to find evidence of terrorist conspiracies.
So yeah, the patriot act is a crock. Once you're labelled a terrorist you're as good as guilty.
Re:Article Text (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Is copyright infringment now a terrorist act? (Score:3, Interesting)
("Illegal" is a bit awkward in there, unconstituional or void would be more appropriate.)
Perhaps it's a subtle point of law, but if a law is unconstitutional it does not "become" invalid when it is declared so by a court. It was always unconstitutional, always null and void. It was never actually law in the first place. It was merey an invalid bill that conress did not actually have the power to pass. Any enforcement of it before prior to it being ruled unconstitutional was always invalid / erroneous. Any refusal to comply was always proper and legal. Any conviction was invalid and gets expunged, any fines/damages incurred were improper and you are entitled to restitution.
Of course anyone who gets hit by invalid enforcement of a non-law is certainly going to be suffer until the courts publicly delrare that it is and always was a non-law and clean up the mess. But at least in legal theory it was never actually a law and any action taken under it was always invalid.
-
Re:No, I think the patriot act is terrorism! (Score:2, Interesting)
For the same reasons that the Romans were blinded to the corruption in their own society. Because they were too doped up on bread, wine, and circuses.
Our modern equals of this would be:
Reality TV
Fast food
Disposable pop music
Hollywood blockbuster fx films
Sport Utility Vehicles
Decoy issues (Gay marriage, War on Terror)
The white fucking picket fence.
Reminds me of RICO (Score:2, Interesting)
Fact, now: RICO is used on ordinary citizens over 10,000 times per year.
RICO is a prime funding tool employed by law enforcement agences all over the country. Property stolen from innocent citizens by police, acting on leads from criminals try to 'cut a deal', do not have to be returned. Write an article in a local paper criticizing a local police, or politician, and you could be the victime of 3:00 AM raid. Even if the lead fingered a real criminal, but gave an inaccurate address, the victims of the RICO raid still lose their property. If you are lucky enough not to be shot and killed (some have been), you can set on the front sidewalk in your pajamas and watch the your 'protectors' take your house, car, and personal valuables as 'guilty property', while neighbors gossip about what you could have done to 'deserve' such treatment. Even with the help of lawyers, which you now can no longer afford, you rarely ever get your property, or reputation, back. The only ones immune from RICO are the politically correct politicians.
We're not consumers (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with most of what you say, to some extent. But, we're citizens, not consumers. As soon as you let them label us as consumers instead of citizens, they win.
As citizens, we control them. As consumers, we are controlled.
Re:FUD ALERT (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you left out an essential one: Join the Libertarian Party.
Yeah, yeah, the [insert your favorite of the big two parties here] party was only kidding when they voted overwhelmingly to pass the patriot act, they're real nice guys, and they promise they won't do it again.
Let's face it, if we keep voting for democrats and republicans, this crap will never end.