Senator Orrin Hatch a Pirate? 933
Stigmata669 writes "Remember a few days ago when Senator Orrin Hatch decided that software piracy was punishable by destruction of computers? Well a bored and unemployed Sys. Admin in Houston smelled a rat when he was rooting through Hatch's website source. As it turns out Sen. Hatch is a common software pirate himself."
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
MPU (Score:5, Insightful)
Way to advertise yourself Laurence Simon (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
And ?
This is no different from what he's claiming everyone else is. He IS a commercial site (He isn't someone doing their family web site). He is a "commercial" entity (in a broad sense). He's using it to promote his "business" (politics).
I would simply notify the creator of the JS stuff and have them get charges brought up on violating their IP (use the DMCA since it is act 1st, think later).
Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
It certainly DOES damage his stance. I can't imagine he knew about the violation, which is a great argument against his idea. There are a lot of parents out there who don't particularly want their computers to explode, even if their kids are making unauthorized copies of intellectual property.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I live in utah (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention the fact that the seniority system in the senate pretty much means that if he isn't elected utah takes a hit as far as influence goes. Not that utah has a lot of influence, but he is the most influential utah politician in washington right now.
NoBody's Perfect. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this episode just verified that observation.
The scary thing is that because none of us are perfect, anyone with an axe to grind can mill through the most innant details of our personal lives and bring it to the public attention, that of our wife, boss, friends, co-workers, etc.., highly magnifying what they think we did wrong.
This could be quite a way for one to harass another.
Like, now Senator Hatch himself has gone onto public record as advocating destruction of other's private property.. what if instead of some government official talking about destruction of other's property, it was somebody else talking about it? Where are we going to draw the line between a "patriot" and a "terrorist"?
What is crime? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:4, Insightful)
Second, if you were to take that site down, you would take down every senator's site, including the sites of some good senators. Its isn't right to do that just because of one dumbass senator.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think if he REALLY understood the implications of what he was proposing, he'd cry himself to sleep at night in shame.
Think about what he was proposing:
1) Give companies the right to remotely destroy physical property.
2) There is no mention of any review process - think of what Microsoft would be capable of doing to any of its competitors[1] - legally destroy their infrastucture
3) Software piracy is so wide-spread that it could seriously destroy the U.S.'s economic backbone.
4) A public school where some of the kids after hours get together and play video games - would those computers be exempted? How many caveats and exemptions would there have to be?
5) Organizations like the BSA and the RIAA have sent violation notices falsely (finding OpenOffice available on FTP and mistaking it for MS Office, confusing a Professor's MP3 encoded lectures for copyrighted music). What's to prevent mistakes where people's work is destroyed? Personal files? Financial records?
The U.S.'s lawmakers these days are just too blind-stupid about technology. And it doesn't appear to be changing. Oh yeah, and they're too easily bought by lobbyists.
That is all.
[1] competitor, n. - anyone who produces software.
Well it does look a tad hypocritical (Score:4, Insightful)
Before a person in office criticizes an action, they should make pretty darn sure that they don't even have the appearance of being tainted by the act or anything close. Delegate the role. But check.
The bar is lower for nonpublic figures. Our words don't weigh as much in the public eye.
Now he'll have to be the brunt of embarrassing questions like "why should your computer not be destroyed?" It just weakens his stance.
It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himself (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, my opinion above is from a common sense perspective, rather than a legal one.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
More correctly, the senator's web designer didn't register *copyrighted* software. Free or paid for, is the copyright owner's choice. The cost is not the issue.
It damages his *incredibly fanatical* stance against copyright infringement, because he was all "holier-than-thou" and now it's been pointed his fly was open the whole time.
Set your own house in order, before chastising other people, would seem to be the relevant... thingy.
Re:I live in utah (Score:5, Insightful)
God we need term limits!
Wait, I know the answer to this one... (Score:5, Insightful)
> "patriot" and a "terrorist"?
A patriot is a terrorist who's on our side; a terrorist is a patriot who's on their side
Got any more?
Re:Even better... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:MPU (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:1, Insightful)
Apparently you missed that part.
Re:And... (Score:1, Insightful)
Well I'm sure people thought the same thing of the PATRIOT ACT
Re:there's a much easier way to do it (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I do (Score:5, Insightful)
Its stealing. Plain and simple. If someone creates a piece of software its a service. Would you like it if I made you paint my house and not pay you?
Bla bla bla only businesses can afford the software. That is true but what about supporting free alternatives?
Is it really fair that corporations pay hundreds of billions worldwide for software licensing why you don't?
The good news is OSS exists on Windows too.
I even paid $300 for my copy of Windows2k when I only made 7.50 an hour. I know you guys maybe laughing at me but if you do not use free alternatives your supporting Microsoft and all the other crazy proprietary software makers.
The great thing about WindowsXP product activation for example is it is helping linux.
I can not expect to not pay for software that is non free and at the same time demand a paycheck from my boss. Is it really fair?
Hatch has painted a very large bullseye on himself (Score:2, Insightful)
This reminds me of all the adulterous legislators who impeached Clinton.
That's the thing about being a hypocrite... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill Bennet cannot credibly author a "Book of Virtues" in adult and children's editions, make $25,000 a speech daily, and then point out that most people gamble and private lives are nobody's business.
Rhonda Storms could not credibly call for the dismantling of Hillsborough Countie's Public Access stations for supposed IP abuses (after losing for years to overcome first amendment responses to her efforts to censor what she deemed offensive programming), requiring that all producers undertake IP sensitivity training, and then defend her unlicensed synchronized parody of the Beach Boys' tune "Help Me Rhonda" in an election commercial as a reasonable oversight.
Likewise, Orin Hatch cannot insist that a few infringements of a few tunes are evil enough to justify a government official's call for destruction of personal property without due process and simultaneously argue that he should be forgiven for not studying a licensing agreement.
Re:It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himsel (Score:5, Insightful)
Who's the owner of the site ? Hatch or the webmonkey ?
His name is all over the place, it is HIS website, so he should be held accountable of what's found on it. I remember hearing something like "ignorance is not a valid defense".
If I was going to put my name on something I did not write, I'd damn well make sure my legal team audits each and every bit of it to insure I wouldnt get myself in hot water over it.
This man is a self-proclaimed copyright professional. I guess he should have known better.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
1. There is no hypocrisy or irony here, as desperate as some people are to find it.
2. Senator Hatch's suggestion was remarkably clueless.
I'm not one to criticize Hatch undeservedly... As an occational professional musician himself, Senator Hatch has often come down on the White-Hat side of music rights issues, taking the recording industry to task on the Senate floor for restricting fair use. There is a great deal to admire in his accomplishments over the years, and while he was a distant 5th place in the GOP presidential primaries last time around, I would have been far happier with him as our current president than with GWB.
That said, he exhibited stunning thick-headedness in his assertion that frying the computers of those who are using Kazaa to illegally trade music and software was a good idea revealed him to be so poorly-informed that it makes me wonder if he spoke to his advisers about this idea at all before publicly airing it. It was a stupid, stupid idea, and Senator Hatch should be ashamed that he ever uttered it.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
A working implementation is not practical. (Score:2, Insightful)
This is similar to those horrid things that the RIAA is trying to produce, and they are clearly getting not too far, like their new "restricted" audio format, and a block switch for portable MP3 players.
It would be extremely difficult to place a hardware kill switch on commodity computers, as that would require going through all computer/motherboard manufacturers, and unless those without these "kill switches" are made illegal, then the manufacturers who comply are likely to be made extremely unpopular. Even if this scenario was to happen, what's preventing people from finding out what kind of packet that this thing uses, and then using this information to either block these "kill requests" or sending them to other people's computers?
In a software solution, that would be even more of a problem, as even in heavily restricted platforms like XP, the company behind it, Microsoft, still exercises only minimial control over the user's computer, and nothing's there to stop them from modifying parts of the OS to prevent it from recognizing the kill signal.
Protocols on the internet only work when they are open, and this particular protocol to "destroy" people's computers is quite closed. If this is to take place, it would be only a matter of time when malicious users could use it to destroy the computers of other people.
Want change? Take it to the REAL authorities!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, ABC/Disney, and ALL of the others seem to be based on pure viceral knee-jerk reporting. If you want to see Sen. Hatch get in trouble, sic the reporters on him.
Seriously. The media is living on exploitation, either their own or others. Exploit them to the best of your abilities, and watch things explode.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm cynical about politics, but I'm not that cynical. Senator Hatch's web site is not commercial in any meaningful sense; he is not engaging in commerce via his site. If he had an online store with Orrin Hatch baseball caps and bumper stickers, it'd be another story -- but he doesn't. As a Senator, Hatch has a legitimate duty to be accessible to his constituents, and his web site serves that non-commercial purpose.
You can't "bring someone up on charges" merely for violating copyright: Copyright infringement is a civil matter, not a crime. The DMCA blurs this distinction, by making it a crime to circumvent copyright protection, but nonetheless you can't arrest the gentleman from Utah [sic] for infringing someone's copyright.
A big part of the RIAA's tactics in this debate is to make you think file sharing is a crime. They want to embed in your consciousness that "listening to music that someone else purchased" is morally equivalent to "boarding a ship and stealing the cargo." Playing fast and loose with language is part of that effort: If you subconsciously accept that intangible ideas are "property" which can be "stolen," and that "pirates" are "stealing intellectual property" when they download copyrighted materials, then the battle is already half lost.
I'm more than happy to see a hypocrite get his comeuppance -- if Sen. Hatch thinks copyright infringement should be punished with vigilante justice, then I'll warm up the tar and feathers -- but the original poster is right to point out that "pirate" is unjustified hyperbole, and that using pirate analogies to discuss these issues only makes it harder to defend our rights.
Oh the irony.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hatch is on the Senate Judiciary committee
Hatch is strongly in favor of extending the length covered by copyright holders.
Obviously he doesn't thing copyright laws apply to him...
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:5, Insightful)
Even better, if Hatch's suggested remedy of remote destruction of computers violating IP was legal, the owner of the script in question would be entitled to DESTROY THE US SENATE.GOV SERVER.
Re:It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himsel (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, that sure sounds like the kind of guy I want making decisions about IP and technology.
Quick, somebody call the BSA! (Score:4, Insightful)
http://www.bsa.org/usa/report/report.php
1-888
Lets see how Mr. Hatch likes his computers destroyed.
An Old Radar Detector Law... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I seem to recall they stopped this practice, since a judge somewhere determined that this was depriving the defendant of "due process."
So-- how could the use of computer-destroying technology be legally sanctioned? There is no due process. Sure, the technology could be used, but officially, the perpetrator would be subject to fines, legal damages, and/or jail time, just like any other virus-writing script-kiddie.
Orrin Hatch is really just advocating vigilanteism, which is an abandonment of the whole legal system. What's next? Should I start waving a pistol at everybody who cuts me off, or torching the car of that guy down the street who plays his stereo too loud?
Let's take it one step further. Let's have it so that we not only destroy the music pirate's computer, but we overload his power supply, cause a fire, and burn down his house, and hopefully all his neighbors' houses, too, since they probably were in on it as well...
Re:It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himsel (Score:3, Insightful)
If my daughter downloads songs on my machine, will Hatch NOT blow mine up?
It's his site; it's his responsibility.
Re:Wait, I know the answer to this one... (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:Please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Otherwise we just sound silly, claiming that Dimitry was not a pirate, but Orrin Hatch suddenly is. Please don't be so inconsistent. Pirate is a pirate. A person guilty of copyright infringement is a person guilty of copyright infringement.
And Dmitry was not guilty of copyright infringement. The charges were dropped, and his employer was found not guilty.
Re:What is crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even better... (Score:2, Insightful)
No, that's the kind of mistake that will end his webmaster's employment, that's all.
First, the webmaster uses unlicensed software, resulting in a media black eye (you really didn't think Orrin himself installed the software, did you!!?!).
Now the genius has outdone himself with a direct link to a porn site on a congressional site. Bravo. One more web designer looking for work.
Re:MPU (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's my question...what about all the other senators? I wonder who does his web hosting? It's on senate.gov, and while the server may be virtual, it's possible that every other sentaor has his website hosted on the same box. So, Orrin's web designer fucks up, and every senator gets his website destroyed. Great plan, Orrin.
I'm the sysadmin for a university research lab. We've got a few servers for home directories, and about 50 users. I can't keep track of every piece of copyrighted material somebody might copy and put on my server. So, because one user screws up and downloads "Baby Got Back" without sending the requisite $0.45 to whatever homeless shelter Sir Mixalot hangs his hat at these days, and 50 graduate students lose their theses. GREAT PLAN ORRIN.
who to trust? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Wired article brought a few important points to mind.
Re:3 and 9? (Score:2, Insightful)
Violating other countries' computers. (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean... just imagine this scenario: a government employee in China (maybe Russia/France or whatever country) is downloading bootlegged music off the Internet. Granted that the guy might be violating U.S copyright law (though technically he is not, because he is not in U.S), but that doesn't give the U.S government the right to sabotage other countries' computers (especially government computers).
So do yourselves a favor and kick this joker out before he causes an international incident which might spark off another war.
Just for the record, I AM NOT AMERICAN.
Re:I live in utah (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Want another highlight? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, I have to look at it 3 ways:
Either
1) His political/technical advisors told him to say this, in which case he ought to fire their asses, because they don't know jack squat;
or
2) This is his real opinion, and he's simply been following his advisors opinions about what he should say before this;
or
3) He really made a fool of himself with an idiotic comment; and you know, if I made a comment like that in front of my peers, I would get flamed too.
So, what should I believe? Eh?
The man is a UNITED STATES SENATOR. He has a responsibility to the people he represents. If he cannot fulfill that, than WTF is he doing there?
"Don't get angry because somebody stated a strong opinion that doesn't mesh with the rest of the country's watered-down political speech. "
This comment just doesn't make sense in the context of what you were trying to say...at least, I don't understand it...
Not flaming, just wondering what the hell you were trying to say.
Now, I'll agree that he should not necessarily be considered for the 10WorstAnything just because of that comment. HOWEVER - Where does the truth lie? Eh? Do you know him, personally? Voting records mean NOTHING.
SB
Re:I called his office to complain (Score:2, Insightful)
STOP THE PRESSES!
You wanted contrition? From a SENATOR? They are far more equal than you, citizen. Get back in your hole.
Re:Want another highlight? (Score:3, Insightful)
This comment just doesn't make sense in the context of what you were trying to say...at least, I don't understand it...
What I meant was that Americans have come to expect very bland, boring speech from their politicians. When a politician says something like: "I'm all for good stuff, and I'm against bad stuff" we cheer like monkeys. Sen. Hatch broke this mold for a second and actually stated a strong personal opinion, and he gets nailed for it. I'll bet if you were to have an honest talk with any national representative in private you would find that they hold a very strong opinion on something--but because of the way our political system works, they have to water their opinions down for the masses.
Now, I'll agree that he should not necessarily be considered for the 10WorstAnything just because of that comment. HOWEVER - Where does the truth lie? Eh? Do you know him, personally? Voting records mean NOTHING.
You're right; his voting record is probably equal parts personal philosophy and campaign donations. I don't know exactly where the truth lies here, but I do know that it's not found in any single quote. All I'm saying is that if you want to hate Sen. Hatch, that's fine, but find a real reason to do it. This is getting as bad as people who hated Dan Quayle because he couldn't spell potato (potatoe!) or because Bill Clinton smoked weed once. Nobody is defined in any single instant.
Re:I live in utah (Score:2, Insightful)
My point is simply that you cannot separate cleanly religion and politics in Utah. They coexist.
Just to fill you in, though, Young had a kind of secret police that kept people in line, and assassinated people who were out of step. Dissent really wasn't an option.
It's an interesting read, and Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about as well it in his novel "The Valley of Fear."
Re:Wait, I know the answer to this one... (Score:3, Insightful)
Two words: Cluster Bombs
They only cover one side of ANY copyright issue. (Score:1, Insightful)
or in the newspaper?
or at my office water cooler discussion?
Out of people I know who don't get their news online,
I have met absolutly zero people informed about that issue, or this issue, or the DMCA. To name a few.
I've asked many musicians about it too.
of the ones I've asked, I'd say the majority is totally oblivious.
Somewhere a media industry executive places his fingertips together and mutters: "Excellent"
Re:As a republican let me say this: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not join another party. Politics in the US and here in Oz and dominanted by two parties only because people lack the courage to vote for minor parties (thats just my thought but they don't vote for them for some reason). THey arn't all kooks and special interest parties. I don't like either of the big parties in th US or in Oz. They are all taking it up the arse from big business.
Problem with Implementing Proposed Law (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know what the legal situation is eactly in the US, but in the UK anyone who creates a work that can be copyrighted, automatically gets the copyright assigned to them (i.e. they do not need to write (c) 2003 Joe Blow or register their work anywhere etc.). I imagine that much the same is true in the US.
So, in order for the antihacking laws to be properly circumvented, thus allowing a copyright holder to blow up the computer of anyone breaching their copyright, then everyone who holds a copyright must be made exempt from those antihacking laws.
This will be anyone who has written a story, painted a picture, put up a website, etc. -- i.e. pretty much every US citizen. So, the law would allow anyone to distroy anyone else's computer.
Unless of course, by "compyright holder", what is really meant is "the music and film industries".
This really is a stupid law.
Re:Overblown incident (Score:2, Insightful)
Nice ad hominem. Still doesn't change the fact that Hatch is a hypocrite. The failure to properly license the software is legally his responsibility--if employers could shove responsibility off to contractors, don't you think we would all be contractors? I'm sure if I had a contractor who failed to obtain a license for a piece of software he used on my site, the BSA would be so far up my ass I could taste Brylcreem.
short sightedness (Score:2, Insightful)
If so, then what about those computers in the government which may contain terabytes of important information, and maybe one single illegal file? Does that one single file give the copyright owner the right to destroy all that information?
What would stop the next senator (extremist or just looking for the political spotlight) from taking that next step?
Here's a scenario, Someone at, say the FBI has access to their mainframe, and while doing their job they like to listen to music, so they have Mp3s on their PC. Well one day they are told they are getting a new PC, and happily transfer all their personal data onto the mainframe so it can be copied to their new PC later.
Say they like to listen to Metalica, and one of the files they had was an old file originally illegally traded through Napster or Kazaa or such.
Does Metalica now have the right to destroy the FBI mainframe, and doing so destroy any data contained therein about criminals and terrorists?
Doing so would directly jeopardize the safety of millions upon millions of people.
What about software that was created using illegally gained SDKs? Should that software be destroyed as well?
Sorry Jimmy, I know your in middle of your kidney dialysis, but the firmware for this machine was written using an illegal download of a copyrighted compiler. Oh and by the way, your dad's pacemaker? the firmware for that was written using the Notepad of an illegally pirated copy of Microsoft Windows 3.1. It's going to have to be nuked.
You can say good bye to your dad now. Yep bye bye....bye bye!
You mom? oh she's on a flight here...
oh shit...the navigational software on that plane...
I think Orin should be enlightened to the ramifications of opening this Pandora's box.
What would then stop a terrorist from alleging that the vital computers he fried contained his copyrighted material?
The sad truth being.. (Score:2, Insightful)
I think, as most groups are doing these days, that free software advocates should be lobbying congress and that a grasp on technology should be an issue in any election campaign. The US senate is the big time, not some triple A farm team - lets treat it as such.
He doesn't get a defense (Score:1, Insightful)
He's Got Some Problems...but.... (Score:2, Insightful)
The first thing I thought when I read this is "Why would Senator Hatch be the pirate?". I wasn't aware that any Senators designed their own websites. The fact is, they don't. It is kind of ironic that Mr. Hatche's own website has a pirated script...in light of his recent proposals on piracy prevention. BUT I think that he is not a pirate, he is actually a victim of piracy in this occassion.
He paid a company a lot of money to design his website, and like so many others...he got screwed. It is not uncommon for paid web designers to lift other people's designs, use pirated software, or even steal scripts entirely. It happens every day, the responsible party is the company that stole it, not the unknowing customer.
The headline and the possible irony may have drawn a lot of posts, but outside of a chance for unhappy Utahans (I just coined a phrase
Sure, his philosophy on how to deal with computer piracy is extreme, and even scary. We can rest knowing that such legislation would never make it through the Senate, House, President...or hold up in Courts. It violates every constitutional right that protects individual property.
Speaking of property though, maybe if we'd stop defending Kazaa and filesharing...and admit that 99% of its users pirate software and music, we wouldn't need this legislation. It is users (myself included) that keep it a float.
Clif
Re:Even better... (Score:3, Insightful)
His website. His responsibility.
It is that simple.
Re:I live in utah (Score:1, Insightful)
Especially if you completely fail to understand the American political system.
The reason is simple... (Score:3, Insightful)
The real problem (Score:3, Insightful)
On a side note, with this becoming more and more common, is there any kind of plan for a tag in the future? Seems like the right thing to do.
Unfortunately, this won't change his mind (Score:3, Insightful)