Just what is Sen.Orrin "Johnny Trapdoor" Hatch thinking?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

diamond

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
May 3, 2002
Messages
12,849
Location
Tempe, Az USA
:eyebrow:

Hatch Takes Aim at Illegal Downloading





By TED BRIDIS
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 17, 2003; 5:22 PM


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.

The surprise remarks by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, during a hearing on copyright abuses represent a dramatic escalation in the frustrating battle by industry executives and lawmakers in Washington against illegal music downloads.

During a discussion on methods to frustrate computer users who illegally exchange music and movie files over the Internet, Hatch asked technology executives about ways to damage computers involved in such file trading. Legal experts have said any such attack would violate federal anti-hacking laws.

"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."

"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.

Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., who has been active in copyright debates in Washington, urged Hatch to reconsider. Boucher described Hatch's role as chairman of the Judiciary Committee as "a very important position, so when Senator Hatch indicates his views with regard to a particular subject, we all take those views very seriously."

Some legal experts suggested Hatch's provocative remarks were more likely intended to compel technology and music executives to work faster toward ways to protect copyrights online than to signal forthcoming legislation.

"It's just the frustration of those who are looking at enforcing laws that are proving very hard to enforce," said Orin Kerr, a former Justice Department cybercrimes prosecutor and associate professor at George Washington University law school.

The entertainment industry has gradually escalated its fight against Internet file-traders, targeting the most egregious pirates with civil lawsuits. The Recording Industry Association of America recently won a federal court decision making it significantly easier to identify and track consumers - even those hiding behind aliases - using popular Internet file-sharing software.

Kerr predicted it was "extremely unlikely" for Congress to approve a hacking exemption for copyright owners, partly because of risks of collateral damage when innocent users might be wrongly targeted.

"It wouldn't work," Kerr said. "There's no way of limiting the damage."---
capt.1055362091.multimedia_2330816_civil_rights_chief_wx119.jpg


Last year, Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., ignited a firestorm across the Internet over a proposal to give the entertainment industry new powers to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies. It would have lifted civil and criminal penalties against entertainment companies for disabling, diverting or blocking the trading of pirated songs and movies on the Internet.

But Berman, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary panel on the Internet and intellectual property, always has maintained that his proposal wouldn't permit hacker-style attacks by the industry on Internet users.
capt.1055362091.multimedia_2330816_civil_rights_chief_wx119.jpg
 
Last edited:
Orrin Hatch is a nut. One of the assorted, salted, roasted nuts that seem to overpopulate the Republican Party.

And I bet he joins the illustrious list of Americans who need help turning on their computer and can't find things in their "Start" menus. :|

Melon
 
ah...republicans
they make for a good laugh if anything!
 
:angry:
Can we be more constructive w our comments?
I have heard Mr Bono publicly say nice things about Senator Hatch from stage.
He's not all bad.
Just a little mixed up here.
That was a funny comment though Melon:angry:

thank u-

Db3
 
diamond, noone cares what bono has to say about politicians. hes kissing all of their asses for mone for africa. whether or not thats a good thing isnt even an issue.

orrin = :down:
 
There have already been music CDs produced that do the same thing to people's computers. This idea is really nothing new. He just took it a step further. :angry:
 
Well, just so you all know:

He wont be getting my vote this next election.
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:
Is this the same Orrin Hatch who thinks polygamy is just fine and dandy?

Just to clarify things, Orrin Hatch IS a Mormon. The Mormon church DOES NOT believe in or practice polygamy. If you are a member of the Mormon church and are a polygamist, you will be excommunicated from the church.

I have no idea if he's ever made any comments about polygamy or not, I just wanted to clarify things.
 
Sorry, I wasn't meaning to insult Mormons or to imply that Mormons accept polygamy, I know that poygamy isn't practised by Mormons any more. However, Senator Hatch has actually made comments in the last few months to the effect of "I know some polygamists who are very fine people" (not an exact quote) and totally refused to condemn polygamy. There was a whole discussion about this in FYM a whie ago, I think it was in the thread with discussion about Senator Santorum.
 
Last edited:
Hatch can start with his own computer

A fine example of thinking before speaking -

From Wired News


Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) suggested Tuesday that people who download copyright materials from the Internet should have their computers automatically destroyed.

But Hatch himself is using unlicensed software on his official website, which presumably would qualify his computer to be smoked by the system he proposes.

The senator's site makes extensive use of a JavaScript menu system developed by Milonic Solutions, a software company based in the United Kingdom. The copyright-protected code has not been licensed for use on Hatch's website.

"It's an unlicensed copy," said Andy Woolley, who runs Milonic. "It's very unfortunate for him because of those comments he made."

Hatch on Tuesday surprised a Senate hearing on copyright issues with the suggestion that technology should be developed to remotely destroy the computers of people who illegally download music from the Net.

Hatch said damaging someone's computer "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights," the Associated Press reported. He then suggested the technology would twice warn a computer user about illegal online behavior, "then destroy their computer."

Any such technology would be in violation of federal antihacking laws. The senator, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested Congress would have to make copyright holders exempt from current laws for them to legally destroy people's computers.

On Wednesday, Hatch clarified his comments, but stuck by the original idea. "I do not favor extreme remedies -- unless no moderate remedies can be found," he said in a statement. "I asked the interested industries to help us find those moderate remedies."

Just as well. Because if Hatch's terminator system embraced software as well as music, his servers would be targeted for destruction.

Milonic Solutions' JavaScript code used on Hatch's website costs $900 for a site-wide license. It is free for personal or nonprofit use, which the senator likely qualifies for.

However, the software's license stipulates that the user must register the software to receive a licensing code, and provide a link in the source code to Milonic's website.

On Wednesday, the senator's site met none of Milonic's licensing terms. The site's source code (which can be seen by selecting Source under the View menu in Internet Explorer) had neither a link to Milonic's site nor a registration code.

However, by Thursday afternoon Hatch's site had been updated to contain some of the requisite copyright information. An old version of the page can be seen by viewing Google's cache of the site.

"They're using our code," Woolley said Wednesday. "We've had no contact with them. They are in breach of our licensing terms."

When contacted Thursday, Woolley said the company that maintains the senator's site had e-mailed Milonic to begin the registration process. Woolley said the code added to Hatch's site after the issue came to light met some -- but not all -- of Milonic's licensing requirements.

Before the site was updated, the source code on Hatch's site contained the line: "* i am the license for the menu (duh) *"

Woolley said he had no idea where the line came from -- it has nothing to do with him, and he hadn't seen it on other websites that use his menu system.

"It looks like it's trying to cover something up, as though they got a license," he said.

A spokesman in Hatch's office on Wednesday responded, "That's ironic" before declining to put Wired News in contact with the site's webmaster. He deferred comment on the senator's statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which did not return calls.

The apparent violation was discovered by Laurence Simon, an unemployed system administrator from Houston, who was poking around Hatch's site after becoming outraged by his comments.

Milonic's Woolley said the senator's unlicensed use of his software was just "the tip of the iceberg." He said he knows of at least two other senators using unlicensed copies of his software, and many big companies.

Continental Airlines, for example, one of the largest airlines in the United States, uses Woolley's system throughout its Continental.com website. Woolley said the airline has not paid for the software. Worse, the copyright notices in the source code have been removed.

"That really pisses me off," he said.

A spokesman for Continental said the airline would look into the matter.

Woolley makes his living from his software. Like a lot of independent programmers, he struggles to get people to conform to his licensing terms, let alone pay for his software.

"We don't want blood," he said. "We just want payment for the hard work we do. We work very, very hard. If they're not prepared to pay, they're software pirates."
 
melon said:
Orrin Hatch is a nut. One of the assorted, salted, roasted nuts that seem to overpopulate the Republican Party.

And I bet he joins the illustrious list of Americans who need help turning on their computer and can't find things in their "Start" menus. :|

Melon

LOL.

This is the first I've heard about this guy.

And from this whole story...he sounds like an idiot to me.

His idea is possibly one of the dumbest ideas anyone's ever come up with.

Angela
 
Read the lines...

I personally am not supporting what this nut has to say about wanting to destroy anyone's personal property (which if damage is over 500.00 constitutes a felony offense> yeah 2 federal criminal offenses make a right 'eh?). My personal sentiment is that if I buy the darn things they should be able to be played wherever I feel like listening to them..but if you want it...get your own box. It is pretty much beaurocratic crap to me.

I personally do not knowingly download nor copy "copyrighted" material off the internet. My (almost complete) U2 collection of official released CD's and DVD's were purchased.

However....live recordings I feel differently about. I think if I had a wonderful time at a concert and paid 115.00 for a seat and want to relive that fond memory of how I felt listening to a band with 30,000 back up singers, I should be able to. I love old live recorded material..concerts, not bootlegged artist official released material. :dance: :dance: :dance:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom