[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.
- From: Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 08:10:11 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <20011016093912.A9766@lemuria.org>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Tom wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 11:08:44PM -0400, John Dempsey wrote:
> > > 1.) about RIAA wanting to have permission to hack people's computers
> >
> > I have a lot of MP3 files. I've got huge piles of CD's from which I
> > migrated the media. (I worked at a record company and they had a lot of
> > rejected artist promo disks.) How would the RIAA differentiate these from
> > illegally-aquired content? And do they want to be exempt from
> > responsibility for mistakes? What if they destroy my property? Are they
> > then "terrorists", or are they exempt from prosecution?
>
> that's what they are trying. they do *not* attempt to get a right to
> hack your machine (they believe they already have that right). they
> *do* try to get exemption from prosecution for "collateral damages"
> they might cause.
>
Now we know who REALLY made Nimda and Code Red? ;)
I have over 100 CDs worth of mp3 files, and I have the origional CDs too
in 98% of the cases. Somehow I am not that worried about them hacking
into my NFS over SSH server with no public IP - but the fast they can
think they have the right to do so, and without consequence is a bit
disturbing. But if they have the right, I assume anyone does - or are
they somehow special? I mean I could go around randomly attacking
computers, and claim it was because I thought someone was distributing
that mp3 of me singing in the shower.
-- noah silva