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."
If you think that's bad... (Score:5, Funny)
He's the Dread Pirate Robberts! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:He's the Dread Pirate Robberts! (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks, and to make sure no one ever get lost in the future...
In stories about India the 3 or 4 +5 Funny 'Apu' jokes are in reference to the Simpsons character who owns the local Quik-E Mart.
In stories about OSS bugs the 3 or 4 +5 Funny jokes that proclaim 'Use the source!', those are about Star Wars. Remember, Obi Wan said 'Use the Force!' to Luke.
In stories that reference a story on a server that has been crushed by hordes of /. readers the 20 or
30 +5 Funny jokes about a large scale DDOS attack
are a reference to the 'Slashdot effect'.
Re:If you think that's bad... (Score:5, Funny)
Click on this [senate.gov] and then click on "MyUtahSearch.com" on the right hand side.
(Not safe for work)
Re:If you think that's bad... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:If you think that's bad... (Score:4, Funny)
(Oh got to thank the register for this).
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
MPU (Score:5, Insightful)
Mr. Hatch to Mr. Web Decorator (Score:5, Funny)
YOU ARE SO FIRED!
(had to do it)
Re:Mr. Hatch to Mr. Web Decorator (Score:3, Funny)
If we wants to be consistent, they get two warnings, and then are blown to dust.
Re:MPU (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
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).
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Funny)
What color is the sky on your planet?
Re:Sensationalism... (Score:4, Funny)
His idea to be able to remotely destroy or disable somebody's computer is idiotic.
I know I'm flogging a dead horse here, but isn't time we got politicians with a clue?
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.
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:5, Funny)
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.
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:Sensationalism... (Score:5, Informative)
This does damage his stance against copyright violaters as this makes him look very hipocritical. Software piracy is nothing more than copyright violation just as trading music and movies is.
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.
there's a much easier way to do it (Score:3, Informative)
Please! (Score:4, Insightful)
American Heritage 2000 (dictionary.com) (Score:4, Informative)
n.
1.
1. One who robs at sea or plunders the land from the sea without commission from a sovereign nation.
2. A ship used for this purpose.
2. One who preys on others; a plunderer.
3. One who makes use of or reproduces the work of another without authorization.
4. One that operates an unlicensed, illegal television or radio station.
What's your point?
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:Thank you. (Score:3, Funny)
I do (Score:4, Interesting)
I do not install unlicensed software in production environments. My personal computer is different, but I still conform to the license requirements or remove the software.
You're talking to sysadmins here -- you'll find relatively few pirates in the bunch. You might rethink your accusations in light of your audience.
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?
And... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd like to see how Hatch's constituents react when they find out he's the one who authored the law that let the music company destroy their computer because little Johnny wanted to hear the latest trendy music hit.
And yes, I understand that no such bill would ever make it anywhere, but for a high-ranking Senator to even suggest such an idea is absolutely unforgiveable. There's no excuse for violating imaginary property rights, but there is an excuse for willfully destroying the physical property of someone? I don't know whether he's really serious about such an idea, but assuming for a moment that there's a bit of sanity left in his noggin, I think he needs to choose his words more wisely. The fact is, this simply cannot work out well for him, and will only provide fuel for his critics and those who would like to take his seat.
Quite frankly, the man has no concept of what he's talking about, and needs to sit down, shut up, and listen to what others have to say for a change.
I perfer to get my porn from him personally (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I perfer to get my porn from him personally (Score:5, Funny)
Even better... (Score:3, Interesting)
[Thanks to The Turd Report [kuro5hin.org] for pointing this out on K5.]
k.
Re:Even better... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Even better... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Even better... (Score:4, Funny)
I thought it searched Utah pretty well and reveal quite a lot of it!
Re:Even better... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Even better... (Score:5, Funny)
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"?
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:Yeah, but SCO code is non-migratory... (Score:3, Funny)
We're gonna need more space if this is the start of a trend.
A LOT more space.
A politician who's a hypocrite? (Score:3, Funny)
While it is quite funny is see our politibots when they get caught in their hyrpocrisy, I hope I wasn't the only one who wasn't surprised to read this.
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:It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himsel (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway go here http://www.bsa.org/usa/report/ and report Orrin for piracy.
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: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.
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:It's the webmaster's fault, not the Sen. himsel (Score:4, Interesting)
Fine, but that, IMO, is directly analogous to the idea of destroying a computer because it has been used for piracy. Consider the modern computing environment where multiple users may (and do) use one machine for a variety of purposes. Tell me, should all users of the machine suffer if one of them downloads music illegally? If all users on that one machine may be legally targetted because of the actions of one user on the same machine (which is basically Hatch's position) then surely he should be held accountable for someone else's work on his Web site. I mean, it's his site, not mine, not yours and certainly not his Webmaster's.
This only goes to show further how out-of-touch and un-informed Hatch really is about computers. He should be making no laws governing their usage until he can build his own fucking web site.
Funny, but.... (Score:4, Funny)
I imagine that tommorow a sysadmin and a webdesigner will be out of a job. And that sucks in today's market.
I mean, really, you think an old senator put a website together by himself? WITH javascript!
Hmmmm (Score:5, Informative)
1. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
2. What ever happened to getting a warrant?
3. What ever happened to a fair trial in front of a jury of peers?
4. What ever happened to the government running the police, instead of the corporations.
5. What ever happens when someone at a record label royally screws up and fries the hard drive of someone with legiminate copies of MP3's (say of my band or ripped legally from CD's I own)?
Re:Hmmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap
" The senator, a composer who earned $18,000 last year in song writing royalties, acknowledged Congress would have to enact an exemption for copyright owners from liability for damaging computers"
Apparently nothing. It will really suck when your new $60,000 Sun Server gets hosed because someone put a copy of the latest backstreet boys music on it.
Remember Napster? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was amazed, but not surprised. That's not the sort of position one would have expected from the likes of Orrin Hatch, but clearly is ex-assistant was having significant influence on him in Napster's favor. How ironic, yet also unsurprising, that in the wake of Napster's demise, Hatch has pretty much gone 180 degrees from his previous stance.
Report Hatch for Piracy at BSA's site. (Score:4, Funny)
In all fairness.... (Score:5, Informative)
For them to change the licensing terms retroactively ( "EVERY copy of our JavaScript menu needs to be licensed" [milonic.co.uk] - are they really insiting that older copies that were downloaded with it was advertised as free now be paid for and/or registered?) seems very shady to me.
Re:In all fairness.... (Score:5, Informative)
If you still had version 3.0 downloaded and licensed to you for free under the previous terms, it would be doubtful if they could retroactively change the licensing terms, but in this case they're offering new software under new licensing terms, and even if you had a license to a previous version of that software that doesn't give you any rights to the new version.
They may have fixed the source code... (Score:3, Informative)
But a quick look at the Google Cache [google.com] will let you see the original, licence-violating version.
---
Jedimom.com [jedimom.com], leon's getting larger.
Tell me again... (Score:3, Funny)
I called his office to complain (Score:3, Informative)
"Senator Hatch's website was created via a third party who was responsible for the problem. The problem has now been corrected."
Those aren't the exact words but they effectively expressed his staffer's opinion.
But what really got me was the fact that the staffer refused to provide Senator Hatch's take on the matter and really seemed quite nonchalant about the whole affair.
I mentioned that I felt that Senator Hatch bears ultimate responsiblity for what is on his website and that I felt like he should own up to it.
Or to, at the very minimum, help pay the litigation costs of the person whose copyrighted material was stolen so that they could sue the crap out of the "third party web designer".
Once again I basically got a shrug type reaction from the staffer.
Those people don't have a clue!
If you want to make a difference, call Hatch's office, complain, then call your Senator's office and request that they punish him. If it's long distance for you then it will be a few bucks for each call but it will be money well spent.
As one of his constituents... (Score:5, Interesting)
This time around constitutes an exception. Everybody makes stupid mistakes once in a while, and I hope Hatch manages to pull a course correction on this issue pretty soon.
Attn Jensend - No, this is NOT an exception..... (Score:4, Interesting)
No, this time does not constitute an exception. Orrin was also the sponsor of another misguided piece of legislation that maybe you've heard of, the DMCA.
Orrin has taken over 175K so far just this year from the TV/Movies/Music lobby [opensecrets.org]
Orrin is one of the WORST congressmen this country has EVER had. Bought off like every other congressman but he apparently is not only paid off but stupid about the legislation that he introduces.
Now jensend, as a constituent I suggest that you get informed on these issues that your idiot congressman makes the rest of the country suffer for.
Shuddder... (Score:5, Interesting)
ROCK THE VOTE!
Hes in congress, of course hes not honest (Score:5, Interesting)
If anyone gets to talk to a Senator, this is a very good thing to bring up. According to standard copyright rates, they all owe more in royalties than most of them will ever see and some of these guys play with the national debt.
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.
Politicians, watch out for unemployed IT people (Score:5, Interesting)
You know what they say: An idle IT person will hack into the devil's workshop.
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...
Kettle? (Score:3, Funny)
Is the US Senate Liable? (Score:4, Interesting)
"Many businesses, both large and small, face serious legal risks because
of software piracy. Under the law, a company can be held liable
for its employeesâ(TM) actions. If an employee is installing unauthorized
software copies on company computers or acquiring illegal software
through the Internet, the company can be sued for copyright
infringement. This is true even if the companyâ(TM)s management was
unaware of the employeeâ(TM)s actions."
who to trust? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Wired article brought a few important points to mind.
Death Penalty (Score:3, Interesting)
Hatch reportedly said that. Ok, so what if destroying a pirate's computer doesn't do the trick? What if they get another computer and pirate more?
Maybe we should execute them... and if we do that, we should do it on national television to set an example.
Now that I have made some fun of the absurd overreaction to copyright violation, I ask this: how many congress people should be fired, or worse for knowingly doing things for personal gain, at the cost of the US people? That's theft of tax money. It's fraud, etc.
Point is, we all know the politicians are effectively paid by corporations to make certain decisions. We also know that we, the public, can't afford to compete with businesses to buy off politicians. I won't rant too much, but we've needed true campaign finance reform for ages. Corporations can't vote, so they shouldn't be able to manipulate government decisions. And we know many of them don't begin to pay the taxes they're theoretically supposed to pay. Yet I do pay my taxes, and when I screwed up one year, I ended up owing a bunch. I'm paying that off.
It comes down to this: our politicians are either ignorant about technology (this is almost universally true), or they are in bed with the corporations who are paying for their re-election campaigns. It's both, of course.
There are a few exceptions, but for the most part, to be able to compete during campaign time, you have to accept as much money from any source who will give it to you. That's the way it works.
I just don't know what more to say about this. It all seems futile. I do think justice, real justice, will be served one way or another. The people in positions of power who abuse those positions usually know what they are doing. They'll remember their deeds on their death beds, and perhaps they'll feel rotted. What a way to die...
What about his CD cover? (Score:5, Informative)
Check out this link: http://www.hatchmusic.com/songs.html [hatchmusic.com]
See the second CD from the bottom of the page, "Many Different Roads"? I thought the cover art looked awfully familiar. Turns out I have a copy of that rose picture on my hard drive from years ago. It's all over the web, and can be found via Google image search [google.com].
I don't know the history of that particular image or who owns the copyright to it, but I can't help but wonder if the good senator bothered to find out...
Charges Withdrawn by Javascript Developer (Score:4, Informative)
"We have received many emails regarding the implementation of our software and Milonic are pleased to announce that there are no longer any licensing issues with reference to the above [Orin Hatch] website..."
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.
Re:I live in utah (Score:5, Insightful)
God we need term limits!
Re:I live in utah (Score:5, Funny)
Term limits (Score:5, Interesting)
Term limits would hurt politicians that are good as well as those that are scum.
That is the beauty of a democratic system. We get the opportunity to throw out the crummy tyrants and try to elect good tyrants.
Re:I live in utah (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that he already has a ton of power and pull in Washington where seniority rules. He's chairman of the most esteemed committee in Washington, and has blessing from the Church.
The only person that has a shot to beat him is someone like Rocky Anderson, Salt Lake's Mayor, (also featured on Insomniac tonight) and they would make him out to be the next coming of the devil. After all, he's for (shock) environmental concern, and civil liberties! Utah is a recessive state. Or at least for now...
Face it, Utah politics is as complacent as it gets, and probably why Orrin can say this kind of silliness and get away with it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I live in utah (Score:4, Interesting)
The Canopy Group, a Utah firm with investments in dozens of companies owns the controlling interest in SCO. That's right, SCO.
Do you consider Hatch's proclamation coincidental to the Copyright issues Canopy has brought up against IBM and Linux as SCO's alter ego? This is a classic special interest lobby created to move public interest in a daring direction.
This senator has some interesting harmonics in his small world.
Historically, incumbents in the US Senate rarely lose an election, regardless of what they do.
A special investigator found evidence proving Senator Robert Packwood of Oregon in violation of campaign finance. The investigation yielded a scandal as Packwood's address book yielded names and address of his many mistresses.
Still, he resigned. No one voted him out.
The power base of a US Senator self perpetuates. During elections, they will be working on a major initiative or project. They will head a major committee. The voters will not vote them out. The state could be conservative and the Senator a liberal and he'll still win.
Senator Hatch has a self perpetuating power base and a very loyal constituency in a state where religion rules.
He's like the basketball player Karl Malone, he'll never retire.
Here's the danger: This guy has the ability to influence state, federal and local legislation.
And he is not demonstrated support for open source.
In our world, he's a butt-head. In the world of the uninformed, he's as right as right can be.
Utah politics is not more complacent or different than any other state.
It is however the power base of software firms and big, big dollars that are not our friends.
Re:I live in utah (Score:4, Interesting)
Some other posters have claimed that this power is actually pretty trivial. Let me make this as abundantly clear as I possibly can.
WRONG.
I have witnessed personally that simply being Mormon gives you opportunities that one should clearly not have the right to. I recently saw every single hiring rule of the _corporation_ I work for, broken, to hire someone massively underqualified for a UNIX (not Linux) admin position. I had to show this guy how to use the 'ls' and 'cd' commands AFTER he was given this position. He also did not interview for this position. How can this happen you ask?
CEO of corporation needs blessing of several committees that Hatch sits on, hence, a huge percentage of uppers in this company, just magically happen to be mormon, including the VP 3 levels above the person in question, who bypassed all of the HR rules and regulations, elected not to make underqualifed person submit to a standard interview, and gave them the job.
Yes, it's discrimiation. there are labor laws against this. And there is a huge law on the books, that prevents Orrin Hatch from playing religious favorites legally. Little thing called the the First Amendment.
To anyone who lives in UT, vote this small minded bastard out of office, NOW. Get his paid-off ass back into the 'Temple' where it belongs. Preachers have no business in politics.
Yes, I'm posting this anonymously for obvious reason, I actually have excellent Karma, go figure.
Re:yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:yeah... (Score:3, Interesting)
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:Shiver me timbers! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:5, Funny)
The "My Utah Search" graphic here [senate.gov] links to a porn site. This is beautiful.
Re:Shiver me timbers! - Mod up (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:3)
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:3, Funny)
The finest porn of Utah -- recommended by Sen. Hatch.
S
Re:Shiver me timbers! (Score:5, Informative)
Grab it while you can!
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.
Fire off a letter. It will do more good. (Score:5, Interesting)
I just got done writing him a letter and submitting it through his site.
Here it is:
Dear Sir,
Having read your recent proposition that copyright holders be able to "destroy" the computers of those who download their works without permission I am frankly appalled. I understand that as a copyright holder yourself this might be a hot topic for you but please do not let your emotions overcome common sense.
As a profesional Systems Administrator, I understand the problem of unlicenced downloading. It is a plauge on the bandwith of the systems I administer. However, your proposed solution is one of the worst I have ever heard suggested. Copyright does not take precedence over private property laws. Second this would cause untold financial damage to buisnesses, educational institutions, and government agencies who's machiens were used by employees to download music. In the case of medical, or military computers it could even cause loss of life.
Since your website was recently discovered to be running unlicenced software this campaign of yours is rather hypocritical.
I strongly suggest that you drop this idea immediatly as unrealistic. I suggest instead that you pursue reducing the length of copyrights and/or making it much easier for material to go into the public domain. This would allow for a much greater amount of material to be LEGALLY downloaded. People prefer to do the right and honest thing, as well as avoid possible crimes and their consequences. If they have more legal options for downloads many will choose the legal choice rather than the immoral one - thus allowing artists seeking to make a just profit from their recent works, while fulfilling the original intent of copyright - to provide a limited short term monopoly on creative works as an incentive for more material to be released and the public domain be nurtured.
Respectfully,
-name ommited from slashdot-
You can Stop the Letters !!! (Score:5, Funny)
1-800-P I R A C Y... You've got a friend @ the BSA !
Want another highlight? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Want another highlight? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent should not be flamebait. The site he points out has existed for quite a while, and points out a lot of inconsistencies (which are also demonstrated by Democrats, Libertarians, and lots of other people in the political world).
We all know what idiots politicians can be. Flamebait? I think not. Interesting might work better. Besides, doesn't Hatch deserve a nomination for his recent idiocy? I don't care what your affiliation is, suggesting that corporations be allowed to destroy people's computers is the lowest of the low.
SB
Re:yes, he is a pirate (Score:5, Informative)
Whatchew talkin' bout, Willis? Butte is in Montana...
Re:What is crime? (Score:5, Insightful)