
US entertainment industry to Congress: make it legal for us to deploy rootkits - Suraj-Sun
http://boingboing.net/2013/05/26/us-entertainment-industry-to-c.html
======
beloch
What qualities do people look for when buying movies and music?

1\. The content they want.

2\. Quality (i.e. resolution, bitrate, etc.)

3\. Reliability (it actually plays)

4\. Low annoyance (no ads, warnings, etc.)

5\. Safety (guaranteed freedom from malware, etc.)

The movie and music industries haven't done a perfect job of delivering #1-4.
Region coding means the content users want is frequently _only_ available
through pirate channels. Lower quality releases (DVD vs Bluray) are also often
all that is available in some regions. Bluray is not reliable if users don't
keep their hardware/software up to date. Nearly all DVD's and bluray discs on
the market are utterly infested with annoying advertisements and warning
screens.

#5 was the one thing that legally purchased media had an undeniable edge in
over pirated media. If users lose trust in the safety of legally purchased
media they will be driven to piracy in unprecedented numbers.

It is tempting to give RIAA and MPAA the rope to hang themselves with, sit
back, and laugh. However, let's not forget that every piece of code they write
and every root-kit they successfully deploy will soon be taken advantage of by
black-hats, quite probably in ways that will cause damage to systems
completely unrelated to media playback of any sort. The only way I can see to
let the MPAA/RIAA proceed is to require them to post a significant bond (in
the billions) to pay for damages their rootkits will cause. Managing how
damages are going to be awarded is going to be a legal nightmare though, since
this will not affect only U.S. systems and citizens. If the U.S. permits this,
I sincerely hope other nations hold the U.S. government responsible for
damages, so the U.S. had better make sure Hollywood is ready to foot the bill.

~~~
rednukleus
You left out one important point:

6\. Convenience.

I believe that the content industry is relying on a sufficient number of
people still finding it easier to buy a DVD/Bluray rather than pirate. For
technical people, pirating is already sometimes more convenient for reasons
that you stated.

There is also a

7\. Ethics

Some people do not find pirating ethical under any circumstances, and will
inconvenience themselves to avoid it.

~~~
Swizec
Some people also think using animal products isn't ethical and inconvenience
themselves to avoid it. But you probably don't want to build a mass market
business on that.

For the record, I don't pirate music anymore. Spotify has made pirating too
inconvenient.

~~~
namdnay
I'm not sure the comparison is just. Using animal products isn't illegal.

~~~
scotty79
I don't think ethics overlaps much with law.

~~~
namdnay
Seriously? Theft, Assault, Civil Liability etc.. I think there's a significant
overlap between Ethics and Law. Our systems of laws are based on the work of
philosophers studying ethics, of course there's a huge overlap

~~~
GhotiFish
people create laws to enforce ethics, but ethics and laws and law often don't
overlap because law gets tinkered with less than ethical people and one man's
justice is another man's horror.

~~~
namdnay
I agree with you, they definitely don't match exactly. But I was arguing that
they overlap: Some parts match, or at leats cover the same ground.

------
noonespecial
If "they" are both the planters of the rootkit (taking over the computer) and
the ones claiming to be wronged, looking for recompense, doesn't this create
an unreconcilable conflict of interest as well as a worthless chain of custody
for evidence of any wrongdoing? What would stop them from simply taking over
computers, planting evidence and profitting (extorting) hugely?

I would think that once my computer spends any length of time not under my
direct and exclusive control, I would no longer be solely liable for any
actions that may have been taken with it. There would be huge doubt, no?

~~~
nathan_long
This is an excellent point. "We can only get $X per song in damages? _Plant
100 songs on that computer_."

------
waterlesscloud
This is not going to go where they think it will go.

Right now their enemies are just pirates wanting to watch Game Of Thrones for
free. A business threat, certainly, but one they're generally handling well.

But start infecting people's computers, and a portion of them are going to
fight back. Then the entertainment industry has enemies actively trying to
destroy their systems.

A whole different level of conflict, and one which I am certain they are not
prepared for.

Never go for an escalation you don't need and will hurt you more than it hurts
them.

~~~
vidarh
If I ever find a rootkit on my system stemming from a company that thinks they
can do stuff like this, and it is legal, it is to a demonstration that the law
is not worthy of any respect any more, and that it is time for war. And given
the resource discrepancy, the only way of fighting back against companies like
this would be to cause vastly disproportionate amounts of damage. I'm sure
getting rootkits into _their_ networks wouldn't be all that hard.

~~~
lightknight
If I ever find a rootkit on my system, that OS gets binned permanently, no
questions asked. I have a zero tolerance policy for who's system my computer
is: it's mine. Not the US's, not Law Enforcement's, not the MPAA's, not MS's.
If it achieves sentience, fine, it can be it's own; until then, any OS which
fails to understand this arrangement (that a secure OS means that only I and
system services (Windows Update, various package managers and their delegates)
install software...third parties are not allowed), will be binned. If I can't
trust my machine to have my singular best interests at heart, I cannot work
with it; multiple tethers, trojan rootkits, superseding accounts with
permissions higher than my own...these run contrary to my designs, and make it
difficult, in the very least, to know when a problem is being caused by them,
or by me. Plus I despise being spied on; if I'm going to put on a show, I'm
going to get paid for it (no freebies).

I am more and more disturbed with the way OSs are going in general. They
are...slowly removing usefulness from themselves, making it hard for admins to
work with them, and adding on crap, like Windows Store...which is not needed.
It's starting to feel like the computers I work with are...owned by someone
else...which means I will start caring for them a lot less. The least of
things which currently bothers me are the cross-threading errors which seem to
appear in Windows 7...why have these not been fixed?

~~~
likeclockwork
This is a big part of the reason I moved entirely over to Linux and don't even
have a token windows box anymore. When I absolutely need to run a windows app
(Photoshop, or some MS Office crap that doesn't render properly in
LibreOffice) I run (licensed) Windows 7 in a VM, where it is contained and
constrained.

All the windows only applications I used to use for fun and hobbies (games,
music apps) I've either found Linux replacements for (I basically buy the
Humble Bundle whenever it looks good), or I simply do without. I would buy
Linux applications for these functions if they were available AND the
applications were sane, cross-platform developers sometimes try to treat your
Linux box like its an MS box (wanting to put files all over the place etc)
which is unacceptable.

We simply cannot trust MS or Apple. At least in the Linux community there is a
strong culture of transparency, privacy, security, and freedom.

------
munin
"...there are increasing calls for creating a more permissive environment for
active network defense that allows companies not only to stabilize a situation
but to take further steps, including actively retrieving stolen information,
altering it within the intruder’s networks, or even destroying the information
within an unauthorized network."

this is actually way worse than the headline indicates. the crazy bastards
want the legal authority to actively exploit other peoples computers and "take
back" information from it. they want the ability to re-write the world.

it would be pretty frightening that digital media companies were unaware that
you couldn't "retrieve stolen information" from computer systems, except no
other company seems to know that this is actually impossible so it's just kind
of de regueur.

I want to say that this will of course go nowhere because the legislatures
support of far weaker measures (like CISPA) is lukewarm, but then again this
is the group that brought us the DMCA. it would be especially ironic if the
MPAA was more empowered to use computer hacking to protect popular music from
theft, than technology and national defense companies trying to protect
national defense information and private consumer information.

~~~
knome
Ha. Black ICE.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Elect...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Electronics)

------
kunai
I'm sick and tired of being in such a lazy-ass, apathetic society that
possesses zero regard to freedom.

Stallman may be a nut, but when you think long and hard about what he says,
and think about SOPA, PIPA, and this lobby, in horror, your face twists in
fear and you watch, helplessly, as your fellow citizens bend over backwards
and let the government have their way.

I don't even know what to do anymore. Nobody will lobby _against_ Hollywood;
people already gobble up TMZ and are too obsessed with celebrity pseudo-
culture and movies and pop music that they won't do it.

We need more activists. And without them, we are fucked.

~~~
obviouslygreen
And your answer is _Stallman_?

Yes, he _is_ a nut. In the sense of "no one will ever take him seriously,
especially anyone involved in mainstream decision-making, who has ever read
anything he has written," which is in this case the most relevant metric.
Stallman is never going to be any help here, nor is anyone like him, because
any "normal" person -- that is, one that other people won't ignore out of hand
-- _will_ ignore _him_ out of hand. This includes politicians, to whom said
"normal" people are the all-important majority.

"We need more activists" is bullshit. You think we need more activists? More
of those outliers that get lampooned in _every_ media outlet for railing
against the status quo? Because that's what activists are to most people: Nuts
and/or malcontents.

Of course, my real problem with this statement is exactly the same reason I'm
not making it. You think we don't have enough activists? GO BE ONE. If you
think they can do any good and you believe that "we are fucked" without them,
stop posting on HN, get off your ass, and DO SOMETHING.

Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining
about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You can gripe all you
want that people aren't doing anything, but as soon as you start telling
people what they SHOULD be doing, either you'd better be doing it yourself or
you'll have to excuse those of us -- everyone -- who will not take you
seriously.

In the event that you actually are interested in backing up your hollow
rhetoric: The only way to work this system is from the inside. So start
campaigning, or start schmoozing, because while real change is essentially
impossible, the only way to mitigate damage is by convincing the relevant
politicians that it's in their best interests to do so.

~~~
markdown
Stallman isn't an activist for the end user, he's an activist for the
activists.

> Yes, he is a nut.

Eccentric is what he is. Must be fun living in a black and white world.

~~~
fixxer
I'm kind of shocked by the extremist label. I don't think Richard Stallman is
a nut at all. Eccentric, sure, but only for the unfortunate reality that it is
rare for most people to stick with a principle over decades.

EDIT: ok, that foot eating thing is weird.

~~~
btilly
As much as I appreciate Stallman, videos like
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ> show him as eccentric for reasons
that go well beyond sticking to principle.

------
TheBiv
I tried to be rational and then I got to the second paragraph of their own
brief:

"The second and even more pernicious effect is that illegal theft of
intellectual property is undermining both the means and the incentive for
entrepreneurs to innovate, which will slow the development of new inventions
and industries that can further expand the world economy and continue to raise
the prosperity and quality of life for everyone. Unless current trends are
reversed, there is a risk of stifling innovation, with adverse consequences
for both developed and still developing countries."

Source:
[http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...](http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf)

~~~
onemorepassword
> "illegal theft of intellectual property"

Say what?

Such bizarre phrases make me seriously doubt the intelligence and education of
the people who wrote this.

~~~
TeMPOraL
They are not stupid. This isn't a mistake. It's Dark Arts. They're trying
(quite successfully) to attach the word "theft" to copyright infringement, so
that people discuss it in terms of moral intuitions about stealing. 'cause if
it is called "stealing" then it must be evil, right?

~~~
mcintyre1994
And they've been doing so for a long time. "You wouldn't steal a car" etc.
were all about equating piracy with stealing from a shop or whatever.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Exactly. Funny though, now the obvious answer to "you wouldn't download a car"
is "of course I would, just give me a big enough 3D printer!".

------
ericcumbee
Because every country strives to be more like Syria.

"MPAA told Congress that they wanted SOPA and knew it would work because it
was the same tactic used by governments in "China, Iran, the UAE, Armenia,
Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Burma, Syria, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan, and Vietnam."

~~~
fatjokes
So what's worse? When it's driven by people thirsty for power, or people
thirsty for money?

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Is there a difference? Isn't money just a means to power?

------
seandhi
This has little to do with the entertainment industry. This is dealing with
intellectual property such as research and development.

They are trying to protect U.S. companies from having their R&D stolen and
used by foreign companies, calling for sanctions via the FTC and by amending
the espionage act to go after those who steal trade secrets, for example. The
whole paper is on protecting the innovations developed in this country from
being copied by foreign entities without repercussions, and when viewed in
this light, the proposals are not that crazy.

I recommend reading the paper directly, as the BoingBoing link completely
misrepresents it.

[http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...](http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf)

~~~
smsm42
The proposals that allow select private companies to deploy destructive
software which would land other people in jail very quickly _is_ that crazy.
Notion that it is somehow OK to kidnap my property because somebody thinks I
owe them some money _is_ that crazy. We have courts and due process for that.
We can see how they are abused by copyright trolls (see Prenda Law case, for
example, but there are many more). I can't even describe how much more abuse
will be invited if cyber-criminal tactics would be made legal for them. It is
_that_ crazy and more, and no amount of moral panic about supposed foreign
spies who steal all our R&D can justify any of it.

~~~
socillion
Quotes from page 80:

"Informed deliberations over whether corporations and individuals should be
legally able to conduct threat-based deterrence operations against network
intrusion, without doing undue harm to an attacker or to innocent third
parties, ought to be undertaken."

"he Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and law
enforcement agencies should have the legal authority to use threat-based
deterrence systems that operate at network speed against unauthorized
intrusions into national security and critical infrastructure networks."

Apart from the proposal that starts "In the future..." and ends "The
Commission is not ready to endorse this recommendation", that's as crazy as it
gets.

\-------------

edit: after reading the boingboing article I see it's about 20 words and two
out of context paragraphs.

The first paragraph specifically states that "such measures do not violate
existing laws on the use of the Internet." It is simply recommending this as a
measure to protect corporate IP, not as something that should be changed.

The second paragraph is immediately followed by noting that such actions are
currently illegal, and then recommending deliberation on whether it should be
made legal.

~~~
smsm42
I'm not a lawyer but I suspect locking somebody's computer up does violate the
laws, as it is an unauthorized access to a computer system and a property
damage.

>>> that's as crazy as it gets.

Not really. If you read recommendations on page 81, it does not explicitly
endorses, but consistently hints at the law as inadequate in areas where it
prohibits discussed offensive techniques. See "second" and "finally" parts
where it does not explicitly says the mentioned tactics should be allowed but
again strongly hints the changes in the law should be made, and implies
allowing such methods are those changes.

------
cognivore
>> But start infecting people's computers, and a portion of them are going to
fight back. <<

I already fought back. I don't watch movies, nor TV. No cable, no Netflix, no
movie theaters, no nothing. Fsck 'em.

You want to do the same? Stop watching their lowest common denominator tripe
and read a book or make something up for yourself. When they have no money
they'll go away. And what will we have lost? Wasted hours sitting in front of
their junk.

~~~
visarga
I am much better entertained reading and writing on reddit and here. I don't
open TV any more. Rarely go to movies. I probably only watch 5 or 10 Hollywood
productions per year any more.

Fuck'em. They don't deserve our attention. I prefer a free culture of exchange
to a centralized culture of consumption.

------
greenyoda
Are they also going to push for laws that mandate that all anti-virus software
must ignore their rootkits?

And with secure boot in Windows 8, it will be harder for rootkits to remain
undetected by hiding in the boot loader. Will the entertainment industry push
for laws that force operating system vendors to provide back-doors for the
official malware?

~~~
oakwhiz
Unless Microsoft signs the rootkits purposefully.

~~~
venomsnake
No way ... MS can buy Hollywood with pocket change. Also the moment they sign
something like that - no more business with enterprises and national
governments. The integrity of windows and office is imperative for them.

~~~
JanneVee
Last time I checked MS was still in business.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_prot...](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal&oldid=549679760)

~~~
venomsnake
This was done without MS active involvement. Microsoft signing a piece of code
in wild that can subvert their own secure boot ... is something else entirely.

~~~
JanneVee
The point is that any company can sign a rootkit (for the price of $99) to run
on windows machines with our without SecureBoot. The best MS can do is to
revoke certificates of rogue companies but by then the damage could be done.

------
beedogs
The copyright cartel these days is indistinguishable from the pirates they
lobby against. In fact, I think I trust the pirates more lately.

~~~
akama
I do trust pirates more. I get the media I want in whatever format that I want
it. I get it on time, several minutes after it airs. There is no DRM on it so
I can use it with my home theater setup without any complications even when my
internet goes offline. All I want is a site that lets me pay a reasonable
amount of money for a television show or movie and download it in whatever
format I want with no DRM. I want to give the creators and the actors money,
but I refuse to do it in a way that harms me, or my access to the material I
bought for doing so. That is not going to happen anytime soon, so for now I
continue to trust the pirates more.

------
betterunix
Frankly, this might be the sort of kick in the ass people need to start
writing more secure software. Who wants their software to be known as the
MPAA's attack vector?

On the other hand, I suspect that the MPAA would be in for a world of hurt if
they did this. They would not only be dealing with file sharing, but also a
coordinated campaign by blackhats to take down their systems, boycotts
organized by the EFF and the like, lawsuits from companies whose employees
brought rootkit infected machines on the corporate network, etc.

~~~
kunai
Forget black hat; any sane person would organize attacks against the MPAA.

I know Anonymous is one of the prime offenders in this area, but I wouldn't be
surprised if many on Reddit organized and attacked the MPAA's systems.

------
wereHamster
From the report:

> there are increasing calls for [...] that allows companies [...] actively
> retrieving stolen information

They are still living in the last century, and think that if somebody steals
something from them they can take it back. They have yet to grasp what this
'digital media' is.

~~~
bobsoap
They grasp it alright, but they haven't figured out how to monetize it
properly yet, especially compared to their established physical business
model, which already has all the infrastructure in place, and they are trying
to exploit to the very end.

------
venomsnake
1\. Self publish a book 2\. Wreck havoc in world's critical infrastructure
while exempt from responsibility because there might be infringement going on.
3\. Enjoy your brave new world.

------
jaxbot
See also:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal)

~~~
jayfuerstenberg
I boycotted SONY because of this and have been free of their products for 6
years.

Now it seems that more companies want to learn a lesson the hard way.

------
mikegagnon
When I read those excerpts from this report, I assumed it was written by some
extremist lobbying group that doesn't have any real power. Then I read this
statement from Congressman Mike Rogers (Chair of CHPSCI, House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence):

“It is already clear to me that this report is going to make a very important
contribution to the discussion about the grave danger that IP theft poses to
our economic well-being. In particular, all should carefully read what the
report has to say about Chinese economic espionage. I heartily agree that
Congress and the Administration need to act quickly to help American companies
defend the hard work and innovation that is the life-blood of our economy.
That must begin with getting cyber information sharing legislation signed into
law."

[https://intelligence.house.gov/press-release/chairman-
rogers...](https://intelligence.house.gov/press-release/chairman-rogers-
statement-report-commission-theft-american-intellectual-property)

The report and Congressman's statement came out on the same day.

~~~
regularfry
The cognitive dissonance involved in playing up the "Chinese economic
espionage" threat while simultaneously supporting a move to legally make
everyone's computers _less secure_ is astounding.

~~~
kyboren
When put in context, this is hardly surprising. His wife was recently the CEO
and vice chairman of Aegis, LLC, and is now a high-powered lobbyist for Manatt
[1].

Straight from her biography: ... _she focused on_ business development and
_new-market-entry_ relationship building for Aegis LLC and the worldwide Aegis
Group, drawing on her established global network of relationships _with key
stakeholders in U.S. federal civilian, defense and intelligence agencies,
foreign governments and leading private sector companies_ to pursue and secure
new business opportunities in Latin and South America, the Caribbean, the
Middle East and Africa, and to land U.S. defense and intelligence contracts.
[Ibid] (emphasis mine).

She presumably still has equity in Aegis Group.

Playing up the Chinese espionage threat plays well with her key stakeholder
relationships, and making everyone less secure certainly opens up new market
opportunities and brings more visibility to defense services.

Rogers' agenda is just to influence the legislative process to line his own
pockets. Business as usual in Washington.

[1]: <http://www.manatt.com/KristiRogers.aspx>

------
ck2
Why should the entertainment industry get special treatment?

Local, state, federal police, IRS should install rootkits to monitor all
transactions and activity, turn on audio and video capture from webcams.

Of course it's absurd and would destroy consumer trust of any device connected
to the internet.

~~~
daniel-cussen
This is why I'm really hesitant about the Internet of Things. Can you imagine
if some hacker got ahold of my toaster? He could burn my toast!

~~~
ck2
Or burn down your house for an immature laugh while ruining your life.

~~~
akama
Ehhh, it would be ok as long as I still got my toast and coffee. I'm really
grumpy in the morning without toast and coffee.

------
Zigurd
The movie and music publishing businesses are tiny compared to the telecom
industry. It amazes me that they are able to get such proposals taken
seriously.

This is beyond wacky in light of serious security threats from both organized
crime and foreign governments. The same machines they want to root to check on
your music and movies are used for serious work in industry and government.

~~~
mahyarm
And the general tech industry on top of that. I'm surprised there hasn't been
a canada-style tax on media that 'legalizes' such downloading.

------
da_n
This does not surprise me. I currently am legally entitled to watch several
dozen movies, and quite a few TV shows on iTunes, I suppose I've spent about
£500 over the years. Here's the problem. I cannot transfer any of these
legally purchased movies or TV shows to other platforms, I am held ransom
inside a platform-specific eco-system apparently forever. I am a willing
customer, I want to reward creators, but in return I am treated like a
criminal by the entertainment industry. If there is one thing which is clear
it is that the entertainment industry hate their customers.

------
fkdjs
[http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...](http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf)

> The Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property > With U.S.
> companies suffering losses and American workers losing jobs

Jobs. Translation: this is a PR piece.

> The Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and law
> enforcement agencies should have the legal authority to use threat-based
> deterrence systems that operate at network speed against unauthorized
> intrusions into national security and critical infrastructure networks

Huh? This includes national security now? Are they deliberately blurring the
lines between pirating and national security? Why I think so.

> Informed deliberations over whether corporations and individuals should be
> legally able to conduct threat-based deterrence operations against network
> intrusion, without doing undue harm to an attacker or to innocent third
> parties, ought to be undertaken.

They want to legalize Sony's rootkit, but they want to do it right. Rootkits
in the wild cannot be tamed, don't even go there.

> if counterattacks against hackers were legal, there are many techniques that
> companies could employ that would cause severe damage to the capability of
> those conducting IP theft.

You do something that the system thinks is pirating and your computer blows
up. What could go wrong.

> ...The Commission is not ready to endorse this recommendation because of the
> larger questions of collateral damage caused by computer attacks

Ahh I see, they're reasonable after all! IOW, they want to make their rootkit
legalization idea sound sane.

> Recommend to Congress and the administration that U.S. funding to the World
> Health Organization (WHO) program budget in whole or in part be withheld

At this point I want to punch someone in the face.

I can't read anymore.

------
justanother
At a past address, neighbors would leave a bundle of fresh green coconuts, and
a few DVDs to back up, at my front stairs. This worked well; They'd get their
DVDs backed up (hey, I didn't ask questions), I'd get my coconut water fix.

At my current address, I have access to my own coconut bundles by the dozen,
but I still have to wonder, if this came to pass, imagine how many coconuts
would I get for 'unlocking' and recovering the computers they would leave at
my door due to MPAA 'stabilizing' their situations!

Put another way, like DVDCSS, this is just another minor annoyance to the
technically inclined, and only serves to penalize the less-computer-literate,
and enrich the people who do favors for them.

------
shmerl
DRM lobby must have started smoking some heavy stuff. It's not enough that
they insist that breaking DRM is illegal, now they want to make spyware DRM to
be legal. True intentions revealed. The next - they must be deploying the
Watchbirds.

~~~
Zigurd
Strong DRM means inherently weak security. DRM in your TPM means the weakest
link in your system security is the low bidder on an MPAA RFP.

~~~
shmerl
DRM by definition implies weakened security and privacy for the end user. DRM
was never about security, it was always about satisfying their bottomless
desire for control. DRM already has a history of using rootkits and etc. These
lunatics just want to make it legal in order to create another protective
legal wall around DRM (with current being DMCA).

------
coffeeaddicted
I suppose this is about demanding extremes to have lots of room to negotiate
in the inevitable following political negotiations. So they can be like - we
didn't request the shoot-pirates-on-sight thing, we even gave up on the idea
of rootkits, BUT we have to make stand on <insert real agenda>. Politicians
will by their nature try to make compromises. So if you start by demanding
what you really want you will lose it.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
This is why I sometimes defend the people who want to abolish copyright. I
don't think it would actually be optimal, but neither would it be a serious
catastrophe, and by making the argument and convincing people of the
plausibility of it you create a rational baseline from which to contextualize
the naked batshit insane power grabs of industry executives.

The trouble with all of this is that it's ruining politics. The way you
optimize social utility is for each side to negotiate in good faith and give
up the thing which is more valuable to the other side than it is to them. But
in a situation where each side has a veto on getting anything done, refusing
to compromise is an extremely effective strategy for exactly as long as it
takes the other side to mirror it, and then it becomes a high stakes game of
chicken where everybody goes over the cliff unless _both_ sides blink. Because
a screaming contest is ineffective, but one side utterly and repeatedly
capitulating to the other is even worse.

And that's the situation we're in until the extremists at the heads of these
companies give up on demanding absolute control over everything.

------
hendrik-xdest
This sounds like a Hollywood magic trick. Tarantino filmed a gruesome headshot
to distract censors to get his desired version of Pulp Fiction into cinemas.
This might very well be the same thing.

Before we blow-up this topic we probably should collect all the nasty parts
hidden in the document and fight-off all of them at once.

------
Semaphor
And still people buy stuff from RIAA labels and similar organisations. I buy
more music than all of my friends but I always check label and parent label
affiliations with any of those anti-consumer organisations. But as long as
people are usually buying everything without caring, they can do whatever they
want.

------
mikelat
It'll be just like the Kazaa days!

The_Avengers_2_Earths_Mightiest_Heroes.mp4.exe

------
DigitalSea
There is no way this will ever pass, this is the most ridiculous sounding
proposed legislation I have ever heard. You think SOPA is bad if something
like this were to ever be passed theoretically of course, you can bet the
world would be a sad, dark place to live in.

There are consequences to this kind of thing and many things to consider. I
mean imagine if hackers somehow managed to find a security exploit in the
malware the entertainment companies are forcefully installing on peoples
computers? Ransomware one minute, botnet the next.

~~~
keithpeter
_"...you can bet the world would be a sad, dark place to live in."_

I suspect $world = USA here. The chances of anything as daft as this happening
in Europe are small. Some European countries already have taxes on blank
media/contributions to copyright organisations. Australia and Canada had court
action against Sony last time this was tried.

UK politicians do persist in trying to pass legislation allowing monitoring
all communications in UK, but we all know how effective that will be.

------
eikenberry
US people to Congress: make it legal for us to share what we love

------
pasbesoin
All this requires money to accomplish. (Lobbying, development, bribes, etc.)

I, for one, have begun to make efforts to -- legally -- contribute as little
as possible to the bottom lines of these organizations.

Put it this way: I look at "Hollywood", and I see bunch of prima donnas
(admittedly, amidst a sea of workaday "nonames") who want to root my system.

I'm significantly less inclined to purchase their wares, every time I'm
reminded of this.

Then I go outside, and discover I've better things to do with my time, anyway.

------
fatjokes
I use only legitimate means to consume entertainment right now, but shit like
this really makes me wonder why I should let them use my money to take away my
freedoms.

------
smegel
So downloading copyrighted content makes you a "hacker" now?

~~~
ihsw
That's hardly the point, which is that they can get Congress to bend over
backwards for them. Since this piece of legislation is obviously absurd,
they'll attempt for something pared down but clearly authoritarian with
minimal (non-existent?) oversight.

At this point they're just flexing their muscle to see how much wiggle room
they've got. A small part of me wishes votes on legislation were anonymous so
our congress-critters would avoid the constraints of having to vote along
party lines (and notably their campaign donors' wrath).

~~~
mcintyre1994
I can see where you're coming from regarding anonymous voting on legislation,
but I'd definitely disagree. It's much more important in my opinion that our
representatives are transparent, or else how do we know whether we want them
to continue representing us?

It's true that campaign donors have too much influence over the success of
legislators, but maintaining a representative democracy is far too important
to lose in order to deal with that issue.

------
Digit-Al
I have heard that in Australia the word "rooting" is used to mean "f%%%%%%".
So it seems quite appropriate when Sony say they want to "root" your computer
:|

------
uptown
I haven't knowingly bought anything from Sony since their last rootkit
debacle. I'm sure there's been media from them that I've consumed - but I've
definitely avoided hardware purchases from them.

"Most people don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about
it?"

[http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/110110-sonybmg-
rootkit...](http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/110110-sonybmg-rootkit-
fsecure-drm.html)

------
nathan_long
In other news, convenience store owners want the right to track down people
they suspect of vandalizing their bathrooms and _burn their houses down_.

------
tnuc
It is perfectly legal for the entertainment industry to deploy rootkits.

What you decide to put on your computer is up to you. If someone wants to put
something in the software, the agreement is between you and them. So long as
they disclose what they are doing, it's not like anyone reads the those
agreement contracts on the internet.

A company that deploys rootkits, then survives class actions and angry
consumers? Not likely.

~~~
vetinari
AFAIK, Sony is still there: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit>

------
ds9
This sort of thing is an externality, like pollution: it compromise rights of
persons other than the companies' willing customers.

Suppose I don't have any Hollywood stuff on my PC, am I then immune from the
poison-ware? Can you easily recover costs if you are falsely accused? People
must remain unaffected unless they are successfully sued or convicted, in a
court with proper procedures and evidence.

------
lightknight
Hey, look, it's time for me to try linux again...

------
walshemj
Sound like the entertainment industry is suffering from a severe case of
walter mitty syndrome cased by to much watching of 24 they will be asking for
their investigators for the right to use enhanced interrogation techniques ala
Jack Bauer.

They will be dressing up in multicam and running round the woods pretending to
be devguru operators with paint guns next.

------
rdl
I kind of hope this happens, just to increase the demand for real security. In
the short term it would make things worse, but in the long run we'd end up
with market pressure to give individuals control over their own resources
(both protection from corporate control and from incompetent implementation).

~~~
vidarh
Sandbox everything, in effect. I already have a dozen or so different VM's for
different types of projects mostly because it's easier to reproduce
environments that way, but if there was even a remote chance of something like
this, I'd sandbox every untrusted app.

------
pyvek
From the paper - "Recommend that Congress and the administration impose a
tariff on all Chinese-origin imports, designed to raise 150% of all U.S.
losses from Chinese IP theft in the previous year, as estimated by the
secretary of commerce."

So... they want their people to pay for the crimes of others?

~~~
jacquesm
Given some of the rest of the logic behind this whole thing that one did not
stand out as particularly idiotic.

------
alan_cx
I know this is not really about games and Im not sure this is actually
related, but I'll offer it up in case.

Last night I went looking for info on the game Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon. I ended
up on several forums and discovered something I found interesting. Turns out
that the official legal version is plagued with various problems. But oddly,
it seems that people who downloaded the leaked version are having no reported
problems. I had a look at comments on various download sites, and yes there
were some problems, but not many and they were normally about getting the
cracked version to run, and these problems were quickly solved.

Now, while I accept that there would be an obvious difference between feedback
from downloaders and customers, I do wonder if this happens a lot. And if the
"pirates" are actually releasing versions of games, that actually work, while
the likes of UbiSoft and Steam are angering paying customers with reportedly
terrible support and poor product, why would any one in their right mind pay
up? On top of that, it would seem that people who used "illegal" copies
actually got quicker support that solved the problem from the users on the
download site its self. Again, I can see the arguments and flaws there, but on
the face of it, its madness.

What completely amazed me was the number of people saying they bought the
game, it didn't work, they got no useful support, so they downloaded and
played the pirate version.

If paying customers end up having problems, (say the root kit fails to install
because for example it doesn't like your NIC, so you cant play the disk,)
using other media, TV, Movies, etc, then they too would surely end up having
to get their media in other ways. Then, experience would teach them to
continue with other sources.

 _If_ this becomes any sort of trend, such businesses don't deserve to
survive.

------
cLeEOGPw
Why they just don't offer better service than pirates? If they made it easier
to buy than to download torrent, maybe people would actually use it. If I were
in their place I would make it payable with bitcoin transaction, which would
be as simple as downloading torrent.

------
dguido
This is completely off-topic. Where in the entire IP Commission report did
they mention anything about the entertainment industry?

[http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...](http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf)

------
diminoten
Are there any congressfolk actually buying this specific report?

I could release reports all day long about how incredibly beneficial it is to
eat my soufflé, but that doesn't mean congress is going to pass a "t0mcat
soufflé protection act of 2013" bill.

------
cavilling_elite
I think what worries me the most is reading between the lines. As in, "we've
already been doing this, it should work, please make it legal." Would be
interesting if the bill had retroactive legalese.

Additionally, can consumers claim DMCA violations?

------
jck
The only thing which explains things like this is that, somewhere in the
entertainment industry hierarchy, people feel that they are being severely
underpaid for their work. Which level do you think it is?

------
chiph
They're forgetting that their product is entertainment. It's something I like
to use as a diversion from hum-drum daily life, but I don't _require_ it. I
can quit any time.

------
iknight
Co-Chaired by Jon Hunstman Jr. FTW!

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr>.

------
leke
I'm just worried that this has already happened and they are waiting for it to
be legal before they flip the switch.

------
mtgx
Next up: HTML5/browser-based rootkit?

You never know with W3C these days.

~~~
pestaa
This was really unwarranted and unnecessarily provocative.

~~~
alan_cx
DRM in HTML5 makes the comment not just warranted, but a statement of the
obvious. If that is provocative, then I say provoke.

------
asdfasdfgfd
if the camera catches a naked 8 year old, who will go to prison for taking a
pedophile picture that the administrator will see?

------
jokoon
yeah, like computers are used only to watch movies and listen to music.

------
bpatrianakos
This is more FUD for the pro-piracy crowd to get their panties in a twist
over. The root kit is obviously an unrealistic idea though the network idea is
a bit more realistic but I seriously doubt either will go anywhere.

This is our fault though. We have these companies that sell us digital
recordings of media we want at a price they've chosen. We found a way to
circumvent the buying process and get it free. This is simply not okay. We can
debate how fair artists get treated, the price of media, and whether or not
distributing copyrighted materials online is technically stealing all day long
but in the end any rational person sees this is wrong.

So while we infringe on the copyright holders rights for years any time they
try to take steps to curb this behavior (which is on a scale way larger than
other types of black markets and impossible to ignore) we act shocked and
appalled as if we've dont nothing to instigate it. Each time they fail to curb
piracy they come back with an even more deplorable plan to stop it. In the end
we're all losing, both the media companies and the consumers.

I still can't understand why anyone would think piracy is okay. I've done it
myself but I know its wrong. Using reasons like region availability, pricing,
and the usual copyright complaints to justify it dont make sense. They're
usually all excuses for the person with "I should be able to get this on my
terms because, uhh, freedom" syndrome.

Sometimes the complaints are legitimate but still don't excuse piracy. We've
created this problem ourselves and the only way to stop it is to vote with our
wallets. Piracy does not count as voting with your wallet. To vote with your
wallet you have to be willing to live without the thing you desire or go to a
competitor until the seller starts giving the consumer what they want. A black
market is not a competitor and it undermines the goal of getting media
companies to start making it convenient to buy their product at a reasonable
price. Piracy just shows them we want what they've got but don't want to pay.
The only way to compete with piracy is to shut it down which is impossible and
leads us to crazy proposals like the one discussed here. But lets say HBO and
Shotime both aired Game of Thrones. If HBO sucks at distribution and pricing
consumers go to Shotime instead. HBO sees this and can't shut down Shotime so
the solution is to get better at pleasing consumers.

My point is that you can't compete with a black market and this constant arms
race to implement and circumvent anti-piracy measures will lead to a stalemate
where we all lose. If we quit both pirating media _and_ buying it, that would
start leading to changes in a positive direction (for those of us who aren't
just pirating to be cheap at least).

*Side note: unfortunately, getting media online has the potential to become VERY convenient but can never be as convenient as piracy as it'll always require a payment step but is that really so awful?

------
maeon3
Would it also then become illegal to program software that would defend
against such software rooting your machine and erasing things that goes
against its views of fairness?

I'd like see them try to root my Gentoo box.

~~~
kintamanimatt
Just about every Linux kernel version has had some root privilege escalation
bug. So long as they can get some executable software on your system (perhaps
not easy!) it's reasonable any such bug could be exploited, and voila, they
can install a rootkit!

~~~
beedogs
For an industry as fucking inept as the MPAA and the rest of the copyright
cartel, I'd be absolutely floored if they managed to break into a Linux
machine.

~~~
kintamanimatt
They have the money to pay people who can though!

~~~
tacticus
But not the competence to identify them

