Wonder what this cost them…

[Tedob1]

Back during the enactment of the original patriot act the entertainment industry tried to tack on a clause exempting them from liability for damages they caused to computers during the destruction of files they considered to be their’s. i guess because they were about to embark on a campaign of terrorism this somehow fit into the PA

Now I hear these words echoed :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Jun17.html

+=+=+=+=+=+=++=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Tuesday he favors developing new technology to remotely destroy the computers of people who illegally download music from the Internet.

"No one is interested in destroying anyone's computer," replied Randy Saaf of MediaDefender Inc., a secretive Los Angeles company that builds technology to disrupt music downloads. One technique deliberately downloads pirated material very slowly so other users can't.

"I'm interested," Hatch interrupted. He said damaging someone's computer "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights."

The senator acknowledged Congress would have to enact an exemption for copyright owners from liability for damaging computers. He endorsed technology that would twice warn a computer user about illegal online behavior, "then destroy their computer."

+=+=+=+=+=+=++=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

rember that name: Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah,

[FrameWork]

"I'm interested," Hatch interrupted. He said damaging someone's computer "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights."

I am a conservative, and have always liked orrin hatch, but this cannot be allowed to pass. I don't promote stealing files and warez and what not, but this is a classic example of the lobbyist in washington wagging the dog.

[Kezil]

While indeed downloading pirated music/software/etc is illegal, destroying the offender's computer is not the way to handle this. First of all, the loss involved is not large enough to even warrant the eye-for-an-eye punishment (reserved for murder, (in some cases) rape*, and imprisoning someone else [though the last is incidental]). This goes even further, a-head-for-a-hair. Second, it is rarely (if ever) that a law is enacted which allows punishment of an offender by destruction of their property. The MOST that is ever (routinely) done is seizure of it (later to be sold in auction or disposed of if it is a hazardous material). Finally, the possibility of this tactic working for any extended period of time is extremely unlikely. Current mainstream computers do not have a destruct feature, and any virus or other program with destructive utilities will be quickly added to freeware if not commercial AV programs, and the better coders may even make filters inside of the P2P programs to keep it from spreading. Further, cheap boxes can be set up to take the risk while the main computers takes only the good files from the lesser. This may also have a detrimental effect on M$ as the multitude of P2P traders realize that the *NIX will be less vulnerable to the malware and more quickly patched/protected.

[cheyenne1212]

I agree with framework on this. I to have always been conservative, but think that this law should not be allowed to pass. I believe that they do not have the right to destroy your personal computers. I can understand about cracking down on illegal downloads such as music, videos software ect. But destroying our personal items goes a little to far I believe.