Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Rumor · May 15, 2007, 01:40 PM

Tech news blog - Gonzales proposes new crime: "Attempted" copyright infringement | CNET News.com

Congress readies broad new digital copyright bill | CNET News.com

Why the Intellectual Property Protection Act is lame and what you can do about it - Engadget

#07-353: 05-14-07 Justice Department Focuses on Efforts to Protect Intellectual Property Rights

U.S. Draft Law Would Toughen Penalties Against Counterfeit Goods

I'm not sure what to say just yet.

Dakarʒ · May 15, 2007, 01:41 PM

So in what new way does this bend me over?

Big Mac · May 15, 2007, 01:44 PM

In multifarious ways, Dak.

Wow. I read about this new act, but not all of this, wow. . . .

Rumor · May 15, 2007, 01:46 PM

Up to ten years in prison for attempted IP infringement.

Dakarʒ · May 15, 2007, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

In multifarious ways, Dak.

Wow. I read about this new act, but not all of this, wow. . . .

I appreciate the use of the word multifarious. I'd appreciate it if you don't call me Dak, though. It grates me for some reason.

Originally Posted by Rumor

Up to ten years in prison for attempted IP infringement.

What exactly is attempted IP infringement?

Laminar · May 15, 2007, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ

I appreciate the use of the word multifarious. I'd appreciate it if you don't call me Dak, though. It grates me for some reason.

And you'll get banned if you ever call him Dak again.

Dakarʒ · May 15, 2007, 01:53 PM

I don't even want to go there...

Big Mac · May 15, 2007, 01:56 PM

it's comical that Gonzales wants Homeland Security to be a tool of the Hollywood cartels.

CharlesS · May 15, 2007, 03:36 PM

This is what bothers me:

The Fraudulent Online Identity Sanctions Act presumes that anyone who has tried to protect his or her privacy by faking the WHOIS info in a domain name registration is willfully infringing copyright or trademark. (see letter from ACLU, ALA, CDT, EFF, and PK)

Since I actually received a threat once from a certain MacNN forum member to show up at my out-of-date WHOIS address and "kick my ass", I'd really not appreciate being required to make that address correct.

Laminar · May 15, 2007, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

This is what bothers me:

Since I actually received a threat once from a certain MacNN forum member to show up at my out-of-date WHOIS address and "kick my ass", I'd really not appreciate being required to make that address correct.

Ha...looks like you are (or were) about 4 hours away from me.

Big Mac · May 15, 2007, 03:44 PM

Lame. Very lame. I was just remarking to my brother the other day that we will likely look back on this period of time and remember it as the end of when the Internet was still mostly free. Governments won't indefinitely tolerate liberating technology that empowers the masses.

CharlesS · May 15, 2007, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

Ha...looks like you are (or were) about 4 hours away from me.

I once thought of changing that address to the address of La Guardia Airport in New York or something. At least that way, if some idiot from MacNN decided to charge in there with weapons, the rest of us would get to find out whether Guantanimo has Internet access or not.

Big Mac · May 16, 2007, 06:53 PM

I am stunned to see that this thread has garnered so little attention. This is major news, guys.

Rumor · May 16, 2007, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

I am stunned to see that this thread has garnered so little attention. This is major news, guys.

Same here.

Maybe...

Dakarʒ · May 16, 2007, 07:57 PM

No one explained what attempted IP infringement is.

Railroader · May 16, 2007, 08:09 PM

Now this discussion just got interesting!

EDIT: I think we all just got a little sign that dakar is gay.

Rumor · May 16, 2007, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ

No one explained what attempted IP infringement is.

I put up several links, but the all seem a bit dodgy on what it is.

Criminalize "attempting" to infringe copyright. Federal law currently punishes not-for-profit copyright infringement with between 1 and 10 years in prison, but there has to be actual infringement that takes place. The IPPA would eliminate that requirement. (The Justice Department's summary of the legislation says: "It is a general tenet of the criminal law that those who attempt to commit a crime but do not complete it are as morally culpable as those who succeed in doing so.")

Basically, if you begin to d/l something, via torrent for example, then decide to stop the d/l, that is Attempted IP infringment.

Big Mac · May 16, 2007, 09:05 PM

That's great.

Dakarʒ · May 16, 2007, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by Rumor

Basically, if you begin to d/l something, via torrent for example, then decide to stop the d/l, that is Attempted IP infringment.

What, they didn't have enough people to sue already?

Man, they really don't even want you to think about it.

Originally Posted by Railroader

EDIT: I think we all just got a little sign that dakar is gay.

God dammit!
Well... I'm in the Maxim thread, along with my testes.

Testes, testes...
one...
two...

five...

Big Mac · May 17, 2007, 12:29 AM

If this or any similar act ever passes, it will force the tech savvy to start encrypting everything, and it will be a real boon for those who sell private domain name registration services.

Cipher13 · May 17, 2007, 12:47 AM

That is, until the act of encrypting something allows the government to assume you're trying to hide something and punish you regardless.

Every time I see something like this happen, I'm incredulous. A storm is coming...

Big Mac · May 17, 2007, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

That is, until the act of encrypting something allows the government to assume you're trying to hide something and punish you regardless.

Every time I see something like this happen, I'm incredulous. A storm is coming...

Yeah, I thought about that, and if this legislation goes through there's nothing to stop an anti-encryption bill from coming as well. Then we' d see nerds self-immolating.

Why is it that the House and Senate both have a plethora of committees devoted to various subjects but not one devoted to vetting the constitutionality of proposed legislation and regulations?

Jawbone54 · May 17, 2007, 10:49 AM

This is a lot of stuff that I don't feel like taking the time to understand. I just like the headline from Engadget.
DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK DAK

Jawbone54 · May 17, 2007, 10:55 AM

Okay, I lied. I've been reading.

* Create a new crime of life imprisonment for using pirated software. Anyone using counterfeit products who "recklessly causes or attempts to cause death" can be imprisoned for life. During a conference call, Justice Department officials gave the example of a hospital using pirated software instead of paying for it.

Huh? Someone help me out here. They're causing death by using pirated software? How is a hospital going to risk someone's life by using pirated software?

Listen, I'm a huge advocate of free market principles, but I say leave this crap alone until software publishers stop selling their software for hundreds of dollars more than what it's worth, especially when they pretty much operate a monopoly (such as Photoshop). If this stuff actually works, does that mean the GIMP and Open Office might see a rise in the coming years? I can't begin to tell you how many people I know using pirated copies of Photoshop and MS Office.

Laminar · May 17, 2007, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Huh? Someone help me out here. They're causing death by using pirated software? How is a hospital going to risk someone's life by using pirated software?

The computer controlling the Catscan machine is using a pirated copy of XP, and during a scan Windows Genuine Advantage™ lets you know your copy is pirated and simultaneously causes the machine to malfunction, attracting all metal objects within a two mile radius and forming a black hole that engulfs the entire earth.

Jawbone54 · May 17, 2007, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by Laminar

The computer controlling the Catscan machine is using a pirated copy of XP, and during a scan Windows Genuine Advantage™ lets you know your copy is pirated and simultaneously causes the machine to malfunction, attracting all metal objects within a two mile radius and forming a black hole that engulfs the entire earth.

Well, that doesn't sound so bad.

Laminar · May 17, 2007, 11:27 AM

I don't see what the big deal is.

Doofy · May 17, 2007, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

I say leave this crap alone until software publishers stop selling their software for hundreds of dollars more than what it's worth

Furthermore, they can all go jump until such a time that the user buys the software rather than a licence to use it. Doof doesn't rent, Doof owns.

Cipher13 · May 17, 2007, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

I don't see what the big deal is.

Then you're the biggest part of the problem.

forkies · May 17, 2007, 01:35 PM

are we still undecided about what it is? could it be like, if i search in a p2p program for some IP files, the files end up to be junk, but because i attempted to violate ip i am in the wrong

Rumor · May 17, 2007, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by forkies

are we still undecided about what it is? could it be like, if i search in a p2p program for some IP files, the files end up to be junk, but because i attempted to violate ip i am in the wrong

That sounds about right.

andi*pandi · May 17, 2007, 02:00 PM

that sounds like the pre-crime division of Minority Report.

and evil.

Laminar · May 17, 2007, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

Then you're the biggest part of the problem.

You realize I was referencing only the post above me, right?

Dakarʒ · May 17, 2007, 02:08 PM

Silence cur!

Cipher13 · May 17, 2007, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

You realize I was referencing only the post above me, right?

No. When one doesn't quote a specific post it is implied that their response is generalised to the current topic of discussion or the thread in general.

Dakarʒ · May 17, 2007, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

No. When one doesn't quote a specific post it is implied that their response is generalised to the current topic of discussion or the thread in general.

Judging from this thread, half the people subscribe to this belief, and half don't.

Doofy · May 17, 2007, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by forkies

are we still undecided about what it is? could it be like, if i search in a p2p program for some IP files, the files end up to be junk, but because i attempted to violate ip i am in the wrong

More like you downloaded a p2p app. You watch.

tutelary · May 17, 2007, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

If this or any similar act ever passes, it will force the tech savvy to start encrypting everything, and it will be a real boon for those who sell private domain name registration services.

and the goverment can crack any encryption out there. I mean really, whats the point?

Jawbone54 · May 17, 2007, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Furthermore, they can all go jump until such a time that the user buys the software rather than a licence to use it. Doof doesn't rent, Doof owns.

Seconded.

*sprinkles approval throughout Doof's post*

Big Mac · May 17, 2007, 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by tutelary

and the goverment can crack any encryption out there. I mean really, whats the point?

The government, in general, does not have a magical ability to decrypt all encryption. The NSA can, up to an extent, but it still takes resources to do so. If most people started encrypting most everything, the government wouldn't be able to brute force decrypt all that data.

Cipher13 · May 18, 2007, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by tutelary

and the goverment can crack any encryption out there. I mean really, whats the point?

Security through obscurity is your friend (along with other precautions, mind you).