OSDN | Our Network | Newsletters | Advertise | Shop     X 
Welcome to Slashdot Hardware Games Technology Microsoft Security
 faq
 code
 awards
 journals
 subscribe
 older stuff
 rob's page
 preferences
 submit story
 advertising
 supporters
 past polls
 topics
 about
 bugs
 jobs
 hof

Sections
apache
Aug 10
(1 recent)

apple
Aug 9
(3 recent)

articles
Aug 10
(35 recent)

askslashdot
Aug 10
(11 recent)

books
Aug 8
(1 recent)

bsd
Aug 10
(1 recent)

developers
Aug 10
(3 recent)

features
Jul 18

interviews
Aug 9
(1 recent)

radio
Jun 29

science
Aug 10
(13 recent)

yro
Aug 10
(6 recent)

American Movie Execs Could Face Aussie Jails For Hacking
The CourtsPosted by timothy on Tuesday August 06, @04:40AM
from the but-but-but dept.
pegacat points to a story in the Melbourne Age which says that "American movie, recording and software executives could be arrested if they travel to Australia, could be prohibited from entering Australia, or could be extradited to face criminal charges if Californian Democrat congressman Howard Berman's copyright protection bill, which allows cracking of computers, passes into law." That's because "Under section 9a of the Victorian Summary Offences Act (1966), 'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'. The penalty if convicted is up to six months' jail."

 

 
Slashdot Login
Nickname:

Password:

[ Create a new account ]

Related Links
· pegacat
· movie, recording and software executives could be arrested
· More on The Courts
· Also by timothy

<  Autonomous Robots' Desert Race | 10 Reasons We Need Java 3  >
American Movie Execs Could Face Aussie Jails For Hacking | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 445 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
Amendment (Score:4, Funny)
by mrbrown1602 (mrbrown@mrbrown.HORSEnet minus herbivore) on Tuesday August 06, @04:43AM (#4016754)
(User #536940 Info | http://www.mrbrown.net/ | Last Journal: Sunday July 28, @08:27PM)

One can only begin to imagine what this will bring - an amendment to the bill prohibiting extradition of media company execs to Australia.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Amendment by martissimo (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @04:46AM
      Re:Amendment (Score:4, Insightful)
      by Sj0 on Tuesday August 06, @09:14AM (#4017497)
      (User #472011 Info | http://powerusr.sphosting.com/ | Last Journal: Monday February 11, @02:42PM)
      hacking does't fall under consumer law. It falls under criminal law.

      To put it in a way that makes sense to the impressionable out there, these execs are seeking immunity from acts of cyber-crime on regular individuals(like you...you never used napster or kazaa though, right?).

      to put in a way the rest of us can comprehend, this amalgamation of corporations is seeking the legal permission to the equivilant of vigilante justice. Unfortunately, while this is generally illegal(especially when this form of 'justice' takes the form of an especially illegal act itself) for the common man, it's a-okay for a huge, irresponsible, amoral corporation to have, because they have the money to bribe the oh-so-bribable US polititans. The results of this law passing would be far reaching, possibly setting precident down a long road where corporations begin to gain more and more rights to seek vigilante justice, first on-line, but someday, perhaps in the real world.

      While I disagreed with the imprisonment of dimitry, because it was due to a law which did not make sense, was immoral, and was obviously bought, the thought of imprisoning criminals who happen to be rich enough to get an exemption appeals to me.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      • Re:Amendment by tomhudson (Score:3) Tuesday August 06, @09:38AM
      • Re:Amendment by WowTIP (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @01:39PM
        • Re:Amendment by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @05:15PM
    • Re:Amendment by Capsaicin (Score:1) Wednesday August 07, @03:58AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Amendment (Score:5, Insightful)
    by YeeHaW_Jelte on Tuesday August 06, @04:47AM (#4016769)
    (User #451855 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
    Yeah, and a law permitting the US armed forces to invade Australia to free captured media company execs.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Amendment by rodgerd (Score:3) Tuesday August 06, @05:35AM
    • Damn Straight. by Max the Merciless (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @08:15PM
  • Re:Amendment by 0x0d0a (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @07:55AM
  • Dammit! by Afrosheen (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @12:47PM
  • Re:Amendment by Sygnus (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @11:06AM
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
go aussies go!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
by hummer357 on Tuesday August 06, @04:46AM (#4016762)
(User #545850 Info)
Well, since a lot of movies are being made in Aussieland, maybe wel'll get to see a lot of visiting MIAA and RIAA people being thrown in the slammer!

Go Aussies Go!!!

or maybe they'll blackmail the Australian government into passing similar legislation, on the threat that there won't be any more films made in their country (so: bye bye dollars...)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Does Australia have an extradition treaty ? (Score:1)
by a_peckover on Tuesday August 06, @04:46AM (#4016763)
(User #228357 Info | http://www.scifiworld.co.uk)
If so, does it apply here ? Could the Australian authorities legitimately request the extradition of said media executives ?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Whoohoo. (Score:1, Troll)
by jmd! (jmd@@@pobox...com) on Tuesday August 06, @04:46AM (#4016764)
(User #111669 Info | http://pobox.com/~jmd)
This silly law would be worth it if I got to see Valenti behind bars.

Besides, the whole thing is rather childish. Heck, if the MPAA thinks they can "hack" me, they're welcome to try.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Let them pass it (Score:1)
by Schmelvic on Tuesday August 06, @04:47AM (#4016768)
(User #74744 Info)
I want to see the nasty lashback programs that will be created if this bill goes through. Go ahead - hack my machine at your own risk.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Symbolic threats are meaningless (Score:3, Insightful)
by twilight30 on Tuesday August 06, @04:48AM (#4016770)
(User #84644 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
I doubt very much the executives themselves will be attempting any cracking of systems here, don't you?

And please, don't quote the Gandhi 'First, they laugh at you' thing again. Without a concerted effort from other Western nations (at a minimum), the closest thing this approximates is a soggy spitball and straw against a tank.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Lawful authority? (Score:5, Funny)
by richie2000 (slashdot AT webhackande DOT se) on Tuesday August 06, @04:50AM (#4016775)
(User #159732 Info | http://www.gpz1100.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday March 14, @09:17AM)
"without lawful authority to do so"

Wouldn't the bill be considered lawful authority? If Australian law can be applied to US citizens, it's likely (though I ain't anal) that US law would apply to those same citizens.

Then again, Australia has a long and distinguished record of being a penal colony for the British, maybe it's time to reinstate that concept and ship RIAA and MPAA execs, all of Arthur Andersen, and all Fortune 500 CEOs to a remote part of the Aussie outback. We can even turn it into a spectator sport - Survivor 2.0 - broadcasting it live with free Internet feeds from ROVs orbiting the area. "Will Bill Gates eat Steve Ballmer? Tune in tomorrow on Survivor 2.0, same time, same server!"

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Hang on a minute! (Score:3, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 06, @04:50AM (#4016776)
The UK has similiar legislation, and I'm pretty sure most of the rest of EU has similiar legislation.

Does this mean that movie executives will not be able to travel outside of the US at all?! Cool!

Yeah, so I'm a dreamer. I know full well that Tony "Grining Laky" Blair would never arrest an American movie executive for something like this. It would make George Bush (His pal) cry, and we can't have that!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
wow (Score:1, Flamebait)
by RiotXIX on Tuesday August 06, @04:51AM (#4016779)
(User #230569 Info)
A country that obeys the current law rather than change it for "special" people (you know, the ones with corporate money).

Weird.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:wow by spongman (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @05:07AM
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
This is news? (Score:1)
by bass2496 on Tuesday August 06, @04:54AM (#4016786)
(User #597243 Info)
Australia has a law against hacking. Most countries do nowadays. America might pass a law that gives copyright holders the right to hack infringers in America. Like the earlier AC said, it isn't news that US law only applies the US, and breaking into Australian computers has to do with Australian law. Of course, there have been many recent Internet cases where laws from one country end up being misused and forced upon other countries, so who knows what might happen?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
I hope those execs are happy in the US (Score:1)
by unoengborg (uno@webworks.se) on Tuesday August 06, @04:54AM (#4016787)
(User #209251 Info | http://www.webworks.se/)
Those execs will probably have to stay in the
US, hacking is illegal in most countries,
not just in Australia.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Not just aussies people!!! (Score:3)
by sofar on Tuesday August 06, @04:55AM (#4016790)
(User #317980 Info | http://freshmeat.net/projects/ferm/)

Same laws that prohibit entering and breaking in computer systems are in effect all around europe, and personally, I as a dutch person would love to see someone from the RIAA or MPAA hang in front of the new ICC in The Hague (That would be a laugh!)

DoS my gnut and come over if you dare!!!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Black/While/Grey (Score:5, Insightful)
by xA40D on Tuesday August 06, @04:57AM (#4016799)
(User #180522 Info)
Things are right, wrong, or grey.

If something is wrong don't do it. Take cracking or DoS attacks. Totally wrong. Lock them up and throw away the key.

But you start to legislate that it's okay for some users (I don't care how much money Hollywood has, they are still users just like you and me) to crack and DoS others then you make it grey. So the next time you catch a cracker you've got a much harder job dealing with him. And the next time it's harder still. And fairly soon cracking just becomes one of those things you live with.

At least the Aussies are doing their hardest to keep it black and white.

But I don't think it makes much differance. The US Government doesn't seem to give a toss about what the rest of the world thinks. As long as those campaign contributions keep pouring in nothing else matters. (Don't you just love democracy.)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Not extradition (Score:5, Insightful)
by lpontiac on Tuesday August 06, @04:59AM (#4016802)
(User #173839 Info | http://www.sullust.net/)

No way Australia would be able to extradite anyone from the US for doing this. Generally, extradition treaties only come into effect when a crime is recognised as such by both countries. So Germany can extradite someone from the US for murdering a German national, but they can't extradite someone from the US for claiming that the holocaust never happened. (A serious offense in Germany).

This can even extend to whether the country holding a person believes the penalties they face will be fair and reasonable. My understanding is that countries such as the UK have refused to hand over criminals because they may face the death penalty in the country requesting extradition.

Incidentally, other state and federal laws present greater penalties than 6 months (as apparantly the Victorian laws do). Where I am (Western Australia), it's up to 2 years jail for simply breaching security and having a look. Up to 10 years if I actually cause damage.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Not extradition by lennart78 (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @05:10AM
      Re:Not extradition (Score:4, Insightful)
      by TWR on Tuesday August 06, @11:26AM (#4018379)
      (User #16835 Info)
      Unless of course, the US government coughs up another bill that will allow them to extradite these people from foreign country using military means, and effectively saying: "We can do whatever we please, wether you like it or not, and if you do anything against it, we'll shoot you"

      Like when Carter sent the Delta Force to get the US Hostages from Iran? Sure, the mission screwed up and had to be aborted (like most of the Carter presidency, actually), but that's the most similar case. No Congressional approval was requested ahead of time.

      I bet it hurts your brain to think that Carter, a good Liberal who oversees foreign elections and builds houses for poor people, sent US troops to a foreign (Muslim, even) nation without the permission of Congress or a declaration of war. He's also one of those evil born-again Christians, in case you're interested.

      The only sensible way for the rest of the world to react to this kind of nonsense is to isolatie the US from the rest of the world. No more trade. Maybe if its export markets plummets to rock bottom, the US will realise they've done something wrong.

      You know nothing about economics. Cutting trade hurts in both directions. It would be an economic disaster for the rest of the planet if the US economy was removed from the system.

      And US grain exports feed a good chunk of the world. Raise your hands if you want to starve people in the Third World because you are mad about DVD encryption.

      America haters need to get their priorities straight. Or just admit that they are raving loonies who don't care about anything as long as America is reduced to smoking ashes.

      -jon

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Not extradition by CaptainZapp (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @06:00AM
    • Just label computer crimes as terrorism (Score:4, Insightful)
    by Hektor_Troy on Tuesday August 06, @06:40AM (#4016983)
    (User #262592 Info | http://fair-use.dk/)
    If the US wants to fight terrorism all around the world, then it'd be rather difficult to argue that terrorism isn't terrorism when wealthy companies does it ... :-)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Not extradition by GauteL (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @07:04AM
  • Re:Not extradition by barberio (Score:3) Tuesday August 06, @10:20AM
  • Re:Not extradition by Alsee (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @07:47PM
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
How much does it cost? (Score:3, Funny)
by Epeeist (Colin@murorum.demon.co.uk) on Tuesday August 06, @05:03AM (#4016818)
(User #2682 Info | http://www.murorum.demon.co.uk)
How much does it cost te set yourself up as a recording company in the USA? If you are a recording company and this law passes then presumably all you need to do is to have a suspicion that the RIAA is stealing your copyright material and away you go.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
But they WILL have lawful authority! (Score:1)
by skinfitz on Tuesday August 06, @05:05AM (#4016822)
(User #564041 Info | http://www.mywebsitelinks.com/)
'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'

The whole POINT of the new bill is to GIVE them 'lawful authority to do so' so how does this law apply? I think they will need to make it more specific.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:But they WILL have lawful authority! by kuiken (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @05:34AM
  • No, they won't by PastorOfMuppets (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @06:08AM
  • Re:But they WILL have lawful authority! by 10Ghz (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @06:24AM
    • Lawful authority, but only in the US (Score:4, Interesting)
    by Saint Fnordius on Tuesday August 06, @06:34AM (#4016970)
    (User #456567 Info)

    The way I see it, the Australians are calling the game right. What the law is essentialy allowing is vigilante vandalism within the US. It's the same as if the MPAA/RIAA sent goons over to whack your home entertainment system with baseball bats.

    Now even if this were allowed in the USA, it ain't allowed in Australia*. Even if the target is an American, as soon as the goons start vandalising Australian property, they're subject to Australian jurisdiction. Their corporate masters could aso be charged for giving the orders ("taking out a contract").

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • The Prime Minister by pommiekiwifruit (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @10:40AM
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
the joys of global law. (Score:2, Interesting)
by benson hedges (reo@gmxRABBIT.at minus herbivore) on Tuesday August 06, @05:06AM (#4016828)
(User #595198 Info)
those are the problems that can, and will arise more and more, the more we communicate and exchange globally. remember the Yahoo! lawsuit [ft.com] where a french court ordered them to block french people from access to neonazi sites? Same problem. In the us, there is no law that would block you from viewing nazi stuff (I'm not from the us, but I think that's covered by the 2nd amandment to the constitution), but in france, it's illegal. Or, the story about the italian police shutting down an us-based website [slashdot.org] because of blasphemous content. It's the same in realworld-land. say, you go to holland, smoke a joint in a coffeeshop, and then go to a land where the consumation of marijuana is illegal. eventhough you smoked it in holland, where you are allowed to, you can still get fined for drug abuse elsewhere. we live in a global word (sorry for that buzzing), with laws that apply to local groups. this will be a problem for quite some time. just think, there are probably lands where child porn is legal, or where critical writing about politicans is illegal.. all sorts of problems. the only solutions I can think of would be "one global law" (which is pretty much impossible before there is one global land), specific "net laws" that state that "analog laws" do not apply to the internet anymore, or anarchy. don't ask me what would be best, I'm a geek, not a philosopher. :)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
executives? (Score:1)
by hajmola on Tuesday August 06, @05:09AM (#4016839)
(User #82709 Info)
shit, and i just upgraded to ELF.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
UK has a similar law. (Score:1)
by _Shad0w_ on Tuesday August 06, @05:10AM (#4016842)
(User #127912 Info | http://www.shad0w.org.uk/)

The UK's Computer Misuse Act says much the same, but I suspect extradicion is out of the question, you could however arrest them as soon as they stepped foot on British soil (or possibly European soil if Eurowide arrest warrants come in to force).

I like the prospect of arresting any RIAA offical entering Europe.

Text of the UK act can be found here [hmso.gov.uk]. This is incidently the law which has an addition pending atm, specificly making DoS attacks illegal, mentioned in an earlier /. article, which I can't be bothered to try and find.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Cracking computers == breaking and entry... (Score:2)
by FyRE666 on Tuesday August 06, @05:10AM (#4016843)
(User #263011 Info | http://www.javascript-games.org/)
Since the most important company information, and indeed in many cases the company assets are stored on electronic media, I'd say that cracking a company's computer network is a more intrusive crime than smashing in the door to their offices and stealing the hard-copy.

I don't think even our politicians in the UK are quite corrupt enough to consider passing a law to allow this kind of behaviour from corporates with big pockets. Hopefully it really is the sort of thing we'll only see going on in the US...
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Wrong dept., timmy (Score:3, Funny)
by Talisman on Tuesday August 06, @05:14AM (#4016854)
(User #39902 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
It should be from the butt-butt-butt dept.

I expect that bad things happen in Aussie jails...

"G'day, mate! Wouldya like jelly or syrup?"

(((shudder)))

Talisman
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
The summary is misleading... (Score:1)
by Critical_ on Tuesday August 06, @05:22AM (#4016870)
(User #25211 Info | http://www.ucla.edu/)
Technically speaking, if the law passes in the US, it would make hacking legal for the companies. Since most corporations have to be sued as an entity but not the individual, I doubt this will work on studio executives. I could imagine that if a studio hacked an Austrialian computer system, then the studio would be help liable and could be technically sued for infringing upon the rights of Austrailians. I fail to see how you could implicate a studio executive unless they specifically authorized it themselves, then they might be held liable. I guess complicated laws are why we lawyers, right?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Um, look again folks, this is a strange one... (Score:2, Interesting)
by gorehog on Tuesday August 06, @05:24AM (#4016873)
(User #534288 Info)

"Under section 9a of the Victorian Summary Offences Act (1966), 'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'. The penalty if convicted is up to six months' jail."

and

"...if Californian Democrat congressman Howard Berman's copyright protection bill, which allows cracking of computers, passes into law."

Well, it seems to me that if the American bill does become a law then it will not be a long journey to find sympathy among the Australian government. Keep in mind that Australia and the US have good relations, particularly when it comes to law enforcement. The pasing of this law by the American Government may be all the "lawful authority" that the Australians require. The important thing is to write your congressman and senators, to anyone you can. Point out that this law would be like allowing business owners to booby-trap their places of business. It would also open a loophole by which ANY vicious hacker would gain the "right" to viciously hack, simply by releasing an album on his own label and then "finding" mp3's being shared on peer-to-peer.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Um, look again folks, this is a strange one... (Score:4, Insightful)
    by Quila (frank&quila,com) on Tuesday August 06, @05:45AM (#4016905)
    (User #201335 Info)
    The pasing of this law by the American Government may be all the "lawful authority" that the Australians require.

    The break-in would be occurring in Australia, not the U.S. If such international authority of U.S. law existed, there would be no law besides U.S. law. Remember the Helms anti-Cuba act, which let the U.S. sanction any foreign business doing business with Cuba? That didn't go far because the EU (which does lots of business with Cuba) didn't like the U.S. trying to extend our laws onto their turf.

    Claiming immunity under the Campaign Contributor Hacking Permission Act might have just the same effect.

    Contrary to calling congressmen to stop this thing, I'm thinking of calling them to keep it going. It's a gamble, but this law is sooo bad on both sensible and constitutional grounds (14th Amendment) that maybe it'll be the one to finally raise public awareness as to what's going on.

    Aussies, time to amend your act to say that if someone performs hacking as a company employee, all officers in that chain of command are liable for jail terms up to the level the general action was even informally approved. We know Rosen loves the idea, so bye-bye.

    Interestingly enough, Valenti is backing off because he realizes the bill allows any copyright holder to hack, not just the big guys.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Try again by cafeman (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @07:01AM
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
I'm so glad I live in Australia (Score:1)
by acehole (sloshed@home.com) on Tuesday August 06, @05:28AM (#4016879)
(User #174372 Info)
Does this mean that they'd have to limit who they 'hack'?

If they can't attack citizens of countries that the amendment does not have juristiction over does that mean they'd have to check into where they come from?

What about if I use a system in America to do my downloading? I'm in Australia, but the system is in America... how would that play out?

on a side note, because of the prices of cable/adsl here not many people can download vast amounts. Maybe if I sell that spare kidney I have I might be able to get adsl.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Steve the Crocodile Hunter (Score:5, Funny)
by Associate on Tuesday August 06, @05:35AM (#4016894)
(User #317603 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
I envision Steve, the Crocodile Hunter, sneaking up on a Recording Exec and sticking his thumb up his bum hole. Ah, this one’s angry! Look at his markings. He’s a beaut’. Now ordinarily we would let him go. But, as it turns out this is one of the most dangerous creatures in the world. Up there with Lawyers and US Congressmen. No, instead, we’re going to take this one back with us. We’ll put him in a nice safe place where he can listen to Britney Spears all day long.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Down under and copyright vs consumer rights (Score:2, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 06, @05:37AM (#4016896)
This isn't the first case where copyrights versus consumer rights have been clashed (often with the consumers winning):

1) Jukebox CD burner machines are legal
2) A small video chain wins case with respect to rental vs retail DVD prices
3) Use of Mod chips in Playstations ruled to be legal
4) DVD zoning currently under investigation by the local consumer protection watch dog
5) Watch this space.... (probably a few more)

Is there something culturally different between the two continents?

Or is it that some people in Australia believe that all this extra copy protection (real and legal) does nothing for the problem and harms the legitimate users?

[Coward hiding under his rock]
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
whats the big deal! (Score:2)
by tanveer1979 on Tuesday August 06, @05:51AM (#4016913)
(User #530624 Info | http://www.geocities.com/tsk1979 | Last Journal: Sunday March 24, @10:00AM)
I dont want to be trolling, but come to think of it most countries have laws which Prohibit breaking into computer networs. I cant seem to get the point in this story. Of course of you crack a EU computer, you will be punished as soon as you go to EU. Whats happening to slashdot.. This is no news! Whats Next "Stealing Illegal in germany....Murder illegal in sweden..."
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
How? (Score:1)
by jaavaaguru on Tuesday August 06, @06:07AM (#4016936)
(User #261551 Info | http://www.sorn.net/)
Steve White says the Berman bill is "stupid and counterproductive", and he believes it will lead to an online arms race as PC owners and the networks seek to thwart the efforts of copyright holders.

Yeah, they'll have to get through my firewall and figure out my SSH passwords first. Do they have a hope in hell? How exactly do they intend getting access to computer systems. Realistically, a lot of home computers (the non-geek ones) don't even have any form of remote access software running (at least not until MS convinces them to "upgrade" to XP).
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Could be, but won't be. (Score:2)
by autopr0n on Tuesday August 06, @06:13AM (#4016942)
(User #534291 Info | http://autopr0n.com/)
Yes, and they can be exicuted if they traveled to China.

But, they won't be.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
The only solution... (Score:1)
by stor on Tuesday August 06, @06:17AM (#4016948)
(User #146442 Info)
G'day, Stor frum Oztraya 'ere.

Dunno what you boys are on about but I reckon we should do what we usually do and give 'em a mighty good kick up the bum, Simpson's style.

Cheers
Stor
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
RIAA Execs in Woomera (Score:1)
by cranos on Tuesday August 06, @06:49AM (#4016998)
(User #592602 Info)
At last we have come up with a proper use for the camps at Woomera. Instead of locking up the asylum seekers we can put the execs there when their companies hack our machines.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
So do most states . . .. (Score:4, Informative)
by werdna (werdna at mucow dot com) on Tuesday August 06, @06:52AM (#4017000)
(User #39029 Info | http://www.carltonfields.com)
The conduct complained of here would also violate computer crime laws in most states. Thus, while Valenti might avoid federal prison for violation of the CFAA, he might still have to face charges and related civiil actions for violation of State laws in Florida.

Absent an express preemption clause, the bill would not have the desired effect for its authors -- and if they added an express preemption clause, the bill might become defective as unconstitutional under a host of theories.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Similar legislation in the UK (Score:2)
by Moderation abuser (Email? That's sooo 20th century.) on Tuesday August 06, @07:06AM (#4017031)
(User #184013 Info)
However, I think putting media moguls in prison is a great idea.

So, on with the madness.

 
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
As if (Score:1)
by WCMI92 (<wcmi> <at> <wvradio.net>) on Tuesday August 06, @07:23AM (#4017060)
(User #592436 Info | http://wvradio.net/)
Hillary and Jacko's personal Congressmen would stand for such a thing? About as likely as we are to see the principles in Enron and Global Crossing (too many high political ties to both parties) to get the ride in the police car the Adalphia and WorldCom people got.

It's not just how much money you give, it's WHO you make rich (Clinton SecTreas Robert Rubin in Enron/Citigroup, and DNC chair Terry McAuliffe in Global Crossing).

Remember the 21st Century theroy of American Law: Law applies merely to we consumers (called peasants in earlier times)...

Who's to say that the Australian arm of the RIAA/MPAA won't just buy their own version of the Berman bill...

Given how much stupid legislation has passed concerning the `Net in Australia already (they seem to be going for Comstock Laws), I'm not that sure that such a thing WONT happen...
 
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:As if by danheskett (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @08:12AM
Send Rosen one way trip to Aussie Jail (Score:2, Funny)
by linuxislandsucks on Tuesday August 06, @07:25AM (#4017067)
(User #461335 Info | http://www.diaries.com/ShareMe/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 10, @10:10AM)
I vote we start a slush fund to send all RIAA and MPAA mangement to Aussieland..just to see the expression on their faces when they go to jail..

I got $5 is anyone else in?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
I hope they do come. (Score:1)
by Shanep (shanep@penguinpowered·com) on Tuesday August 06, @07:33AM (#4017082)
(User #68243 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
Because Aussie gaols can give them what some of them deserve...

A favorite trick in Aussie gaols, involving a victims anus (a favorite target in any gaol/jail I guess:), is to insert pvc tubing into the victim, then insert barbed wire into the pvc tubing.... then the tubing gets removed, leaving behind the bare barbed wire inside the execs arse. At which time, the barbed wire is absolutely wrenched outa there with all the force required, with the aim of ultimately causing a condition where a bodily organ exits the body through an orifice (I forget what this is called). Of course, the givers of pain will always settle for just extreme pain. ; )

I rekon this could be just retribution for trying to fuck over young Jon for "hacking", then turning around and doing the real thing.

So please, hack, and come over and throw a shimp on an Aussie barbie.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Sequester Assets? (Score:1)
by grahamm (gmurray@webwayone.co.uk) on Tuesday August 06, @07:45AM (#4017112)
(User #8844 Info | http://www.webwayone.co.uk/)
While it may not be practical to extradite the executives, would it not be possible for a court to find the Company guilty and freeze or sequester the assets of the Australian (or whichever country) office/subsidiary?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
That would mostly deserved... (Score:2)
by Juju (guegan@mailexcite.com) on Tuesday August 06, @07:45AM (#4017113)
(User #1688 Info)
...for making all those crap films/music in the first place.

Anyway, this is great if it means that they can not leave the US for fear of being prosecuted!

P2P is the greatest thing that came out of the net these last years, those guys should be shot just for trying to stop it.

Anyway, whatever they try will just makes the movement stronger, and in a few years, we will be able to download any film or music from the net. Everybody will have 500Gb disks shared with broadband...

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
I Guess (Score:2)
by Perdo on Tuesday August 06, @08:02AM (#4017165)
(User #151843 Info | http://jobsearch.mon...http%3A%2F%2Fcompany)
Mad Max 4 is out of the question now
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Berman is a pure idiot.... (Score:2)
by Newer Guy on Tuesday August 06, @08:13AM (#4017196)
(User #520108 Info)
Who has no clue of the morass his bill would cause. What this guy simply doesn't understand is that if this bill passes, it's open season for hacking...and the hackers know 10,000 times that of the RIAA and MPAA'S 'experts'. This is yet another example of the technologically clueless setting technology policy. What this guy is doing is setting up a technology 'cold war'... You'd think that they would have figured out by now that the cold war was a failure...but I guess you can't teach lessons to the stupid.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
No exec is going to jail (Score:1)
by Burning*Cent (burning_cent@cent ... et ['yte' in gap]) on Tuesday August 06, @08:20AM (#4017223)
(User #579896 Info | http://www.amherst.k12.oh.us/index.shtml)

Do people really think that the CEOs would go to jail?

What's more likely is that the well paid technicians that actually do the attacks for the RIAA and MPAA would be the ones indicted. Of course, I bet those folks would be smart enough to never to go to Australia, which doesn't sound very good from recent /. [slashdot.org] stories [slashdot.org].

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Oooookk... (Score:1)
by EdMcMan (EdMcMan@despammed.com) on Tuesday August 06, @08:39AM (#4017307)
(User #70171 Info | http://www.m00.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday June 05, @11:39PM)
Let me get this straight. You automatically commit a crime in Australia if you live in another country where the offense is not illegal? That sounds like an interesting way of doing things. This article is more or less flamebait, I'm not sure why it was posted.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Oooookk... by EdMcMan (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @02:52PM
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
What violation? (Score:1)
by PMuse on Tuesday August 06, @08:39AM (#4017309)
(User #320639 Info)
"Under section 9a of the Victorian Summary Offences Act (1966), 'a person must not gain access to, or enter, a computer system or part of a computer system without lawful authority to do so'. The penalty if convicted is up to six months' jail."

A. Are we sure that RIAA, etc. would be violating this Australian law by DoSing a file sharer in Australia? -- Here's the scenario: 1. RIAA goon searches for title of copyrighted work. 2. File sharers, including one in Australia, happily and consentually transmit search results. 3. RIAA goon reads search results. 4. RIAA goon requests download of file from the Australian. 5. Australian happily and consentually sends it. 6. RIAA goon listens to it; determines it is the copyrighted work. 7. RIAA goon DoSes the Australian file-sharer. -- Where in there did the RIAA goon "gain access to, or enter, a computer system"?

Hey, I think this proposed U.S. bill stinks, but I'm not sure the Australian law is adequate protection against it.

B. If the Australian law does protect file sharers in Australia, that's great, but it would do nothing to protect file sharers in the U.S., which is the only target of the proposed bill anyway. Isn't it relatively simple for the RIAA goon to check the IPs he's planning to DoS and then only pound the ones that reside in the U.S.? And, anyone (residing anywhere) who shares files off a machine in the U.S. is acting in the U.S. and is subject to U.S. law (or lawlessness).

Berman's bill is bad, bad news.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Too bad its not the caribbean (Score:1)
by Joel Ironstone on Tuesday August 06, @08:39AM (#4017310)
(User #161342 Info)
I think it would really screw these people if we could just get Bermuda, Barbados and the Cayman Islands to enact some kind of similar law targetting entertainment execs. The country that contains their assets could then cease them, and I'm sure cayman jails are pretty nasty.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
yeah, that would really sadden me (Score:1, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 06, @08:49AM (#4017354)
ever note how hoe mnay americans call for law & order, but are willing to walk away from it when it suits their purpose?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
What is ostracision? (Score:1)
by marko123 on Tuesday August 06, @08:52AM (#4017372)
(User #131635 Info | http://www.pcblues.com)
All of a sudden, a whisper travels ever so lightly on the breeze. You listen closely, and you hear the sounds of US legislation being debated.

This shit's funny. A gun from a GI Hoe got confiscated at an airport. Congressmen are lobbying to wear vigilante cyber-berets. I LIKE the pace aussie rights are being suppressed compared to yours, my American friends. It's the difference between getting your arse caught in the bath plughole, and the way a crab gets sucked into a hole in a trans-continental undersea pipeline.

http://www.punchbaby.com/media/laters/clips/ouch/c rabVsPipe.mpg
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
It's the same in the UK (Score:1)
by h4mmer5tein on Tuesday August 06, @08:53AM (#4017382)
(User #589994 Info)
Under the terms of the 1990 Computer Misuse Act [ja.net]
1.-(1) A person is guilty of an offence if-

he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.

(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at-

any particular program or data;
a program or data of any particular kind; or
a program or data held in any particular computer.

Note : The link isnt to the full act itself, but to the excerpted version provided by JANET/CERT [ja.net] as a referance for academic institutions in the UK with lots of nice hyper links. If you want the real Mcoy in one big lump it can be found here [hmso.gov.uk]

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
DOS-attacks != gaining access (Score:2)
by gotan on Tuesday August 06, @09:25AM (#4017551)
(User #60103 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
The RIAAs and MPAAs plans were to use DOS-attacks on the sites/networks which (they claim to) distribute their copyrighted content. Flooding the networks with faked mp3 or bringing servers down to their knees with faked download requests isn't breaking into systems. Not that i would consider waging DOS-wars over the internet a good thing, and yeah, i'd love to see some music exec locked away in a stinky jail (although that will never happen).

But wouldn't the proposed US-law only allow the copyright-holders to use DOS-attacks, and aren't DOS-attacks considered a lesser offense in most countries (especially if you don't break into thousends of foreign systems to misuse them but buy the necessary bandwith)?

Also who would sue those execs and set the lawyers and the police into motion to catch that evil hacking RIAA-exec? The owner of that site who probably did infringe on copyrights? The provider who only thinks about business and anyway doesn't like customers which use more bandwith than others who pay the same?

It'd be better to use political leverage: since every action has to be allowed by US-officials those officials (and thereby the USA government) can't free themselves from the responsibility for such attacks. Thus other countries can respond politically. That would be more of a threat, if those countries took it upon them to make the internet a place that can work without the US-backbones.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
EULA (Score:4, Interesting)
by Jacer (jace.miller@NosPAM.polarisind.com) on Tuesday August 06, @09:34AM (#4017601)
(User #574383 Info | http://www.slashdot.org/~Jacer/fans)
What if the P2P hackers (coders) were to include a clause into the EULA about no profit organization can use the software, make it a license violation if the mpaa or the riaa use the software. I'm not saying it's a solution, however, it may buy some time. That or we can pay the kids at their isp to null route them into an intranet
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:EULA by Rufus211 (Score:1) Tuesday August 06, @11:46AM
    • Re:EULA by Jacer (Score:2) Tuesday August 06, @11:59AM
  • Re:EULA by HiThere (Score:3) Tuesday August 06, @12:03PM
Love (Score:1)
by jdubois79 on Tuesday August 06, @09:39AM (#4017630)
(User #227349 Info)
I love you Australia.

Thank you.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 26 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • (1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
    		  How come everyone's going so slow if it's called rush hour?
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2002 OSDN.
    [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles | OSDN | advertise | self serve ad system | about | terms of service | privacy | faq ]