10 ms·

Online Pirates Have No Constitutional Right to Internet Access, BMG Says

66 points by mnm1 9y ago

LeoPanthera 9y ago
This is the same BMG that thought installing a rootkit on everyone's computers was a good idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...
- kakarot 9y ago
  Ah the good old days, when phoning home about your users' listening habits was considered faux pas.
  - ryanmarsh 9y ago
    It wasn't just telemetry. It was a software installation unauthorized by the user. I shouldn't have to explain this on HN.
    - honestoHeminway 9y ago
      Its moment like this you notice how far we have fallen
      - techer 9y ago
        Or how far we've bent over. Apologies if this isn't appropriate.
    - kakarot 9y ago
      Good, because you don't have to, as I am very familiar with the entire debacle. I was talking about a single aspect of the rootkit. Try to be less assumptive, friend.
    - JoshMnem 9y ago
      One can't authorize something that one isn't aware of. Users wouldn't install many common apps if they really understood what the systems were doing. For example, most people don't really understand that they are being digitally fingerprinted in multiple ways and tracked without their knowledge.
cryptonerd2212 9y ago
Seems like a good excuse to exclusively pirate BMG content in protest. Some really popular labels do recording under them. http://www.bmg.com/us/recording.html http://www.bmg.com/us/recording.html - labels http://www.bmg.com/us/music.html http://www.bmg.com/us/music.html - artists
- virmundi 9y ago
  Or just give up on them or the entire music industry. That's what I've done. Pretty much did the same for movies. I don't want to pay their prices with their rules. Rather than steal, I just don't consume. Most of the music I listen to is either through a legal streaming service like Amazon or Pandora (which is probably 10 songs a month total) or legal video playback on Youtube through Vevo even from smaller labels like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxLA1NX9gxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxLA1NX9gxY.
  - kakarot 9y ago
    Unfortunately, some of us consider listening to music to be a big part of who we are, and 10 songs a month is akin to suicide. With newer labels, it's much easier to stream from bandcamp, etc. but with older music it can be hard to find what you want, in the quality and quantity you desire, while staying above piracy. I find it very hard to tell a poor person that they do not get to listen to as much music as me, or of the same quality (streaming is still sub-320kbps) because they were not born into a richer family.
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      Where does that end? Do you expect them to have a right to the same high end speakers/headphones that you have? To the same sound-treated room? I understand piracy more when it's literally impossible to make a legal purchase of something; I get it. When it's merely a matter of spending less money, I have a lot less sympathy for the copyright infringers.
      - thanksgiving 9y ago
hoodoof 9y ago
BMG is right of course. The Founding Fathers foresaw exactly this sort of situation and made sure the constitution was worded to exclude such pirates from diminishing the profits of BMG. Further, I'm pretty sure the constitution goes further and is quite explicit that such pirates really should have their citizenship stripped or be sent to the electric chair. Those Founding Fathers - they knew what was what.
- geggam 9y ago
  See there is an underlying issue here that seems to be neglected. When you transform your work into a mathematical equation and then tell people they cant solve the equation without giving you money... well... Your business model is fundamentally broken.
  - averagewall 9y ago
    No. When you transform your work into physical objects and leave them on the side of the street then tell people they can't take them without giving you money ... Both cases depend on property rights and law enforcement to function at all. Property rights, both physical and IP are arbitrary human inventions.
trafficlight 9y ago
BMG has no constitutional right to stay in business, either.
- zipwitch 9y ago
  And there you've hit the nail on the head. Too many people running currently powerful/profitable businesses think they have a right to have their business model be profitable.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- pasbesoin 9y ago
  And, in as much as it's my legal sales revenue that's paying for their bullshit, I'm all the more inclined to stop paying and look for other means of access. Fuck you, BMG.
kakarot 9y ago
"The First Amendment does not guarantee Cox’s subscribers the right to use Cox’s internet service to steal music any more than it prevents Cox from terminating subscribers who violate Cox’s policies or fail to pay their bills" Okay, so where does it guarantee copyright holders the right to dictate my ability to use a utility that is now widely regarded as a basic human right by the international community? [0] [0] http://gizmodo.com/internet-access-is-now-a-basic-human-right-1783081865 http://gizmodo.com/internet-access-is-now-a-basic-human-righ...
- duncan_bayne 9y ago
  Right here: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?cycle=ALL https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?cycle=ALL I think you'll find that's what has been used instead of the Constitution in the US for some time.
  - andreyf 9y ago
    Renaissance Technologies? That's not a list I would have expected them to be on...
- evilDagmar 9y ago
  I'd like to take a moment to point out that the actual Copyright Act which BMG et al. are so freely waving about has a section that explicitly states that after a certain amount of time, these products are supposed to go into the public domain. I'm not sure I can really respect their claims when it's clear from their behaviour (DRM, perpetually lobbying to extend the time periods, etc) that they themselves have no intention of heeding the Copyright Act. ...because something can't go to the public domain if no one has useable copies of anything .
ruytlm 9y ago
When you think of this in terms of the internet being a utility, it highlights how ridiculous this actually is: "We want you to disconnect the pirates' electricity, because they used that to power the computers they used to download the content!"
emodendroket 9y ago
Great. I was hoping there was some other class of minor crime we could cut people off from society for committing and it looks like this one fits the bill.
moonka 9y ago
Once you decide to pick and choose who gets which constitutional rights, it makes it a lot easier to strip them away completely.
- X86BSD 9y ago
  This is what blows my mind. If someone can strip you of a "right", then it's not a right it's a privilege. We have RIGHTS in this country not privileges.
  - averagewall 9y ago
    Are you saying that being allowed to stay alive is a privilege, not a right because the death penalty is used to take that away from people? I can't think of a more fundamental right than life, so it sounds like your statement contradicts itself - you have no rights in your country.
  - Powerofmene 9y ago
    It seems to me we are confusing words....rights and privileges are being confused with entitlements. The Code of Federal Regulations has very few entitlements, Medicare at the age of 65 and a Free Appropriate Public Education are two entitlements and there are a few select others. All others "rights or privileges" as discussed here require meeting specific criteria.....voting is a privilege afforded to those who register and the federal law allows states to prohibit Convicted felons or the mentally incompetent the right to vote. Most states have placed these restrictions on voting in their state constitution. Life is a privilege that a jury and the courts can remove in many states just as freedom is a privilege not a right. An entitlement cannot be taken from you but suffice it to say entitlements are few in number in the US. As a reformed public servant who spent many many hours in the CFR, I assure you that you can count on one hand those entitlements.
- xupybd 9y ago
  I'm against BMG here, but don't we do this with criminals? Sending people to prison is revoking their right to freedom. If you're convicted of a violent crime, you lose the right to arms. I think there is a case to be made that some people need to have their rights restricted to prevent them from violating the rights of others. But this is not one of those cases.
anotheryou 9y ago
And next we ban fare dogers from acessing traffic infrastructure like rails, roads and sidewalks. And can we ban thiefs from buying or otherwise accessing food? Oh and repeated offenders for that music piracy, can we cut off their ears?

66 points by mnm1 9y ago

This is the same BMG that thought installing a rootkit on everyone's computers was a good idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...

kakarot 9y ago
Ah the good old days, when phoning home about your users' listening habits was considered faux pas.
- ryanmarsh 9y ago
  It wasn't just telemetry. It was a software installation unauthorized by the user. I shouldn't have to explain this on HN.
  - honestoHeminway 9y ago
    Its moment like this you notice how far we have fallen
    - techer 9y ago
      Or how far we've bent over. Apologies if this isn't appropriate.
  - kakarot 9y ago
    Good, because you don't have to, as I am very familiar with the entire debacle. I was talking about a single aspect of the rootkit. Try to be less assumptive, friend.
  - JoshMnem 9y ago
    One can't authorize something that one isn't aware of. Users wouldn't install many common apps if they really understood what the systems were doing. For example, most people don't really understand that they are being digitally fingerprinted in multiple ways and tracked without their knowledge.

cryptonerd2212 9y ago

Seems like a good excuse to exclusively pirate BMG content in protest. Some really popular labels do recording under them. http://www.bmg.com/us/recording.html http://www.bmg.com/us/recording.html - labels http://www.bmg.com/us/music.html http://www.bmg.com/us/music.html - artists

virmundi 9y ago
Or just give up on them or the entire music industry. That's what I've done. Pretty much did the same for movies. I don't want to pay their prices with their rules. Rather than steal, I just don't consume. Most of the music I listen to is either through a legal streaming service like Amazon or Pandora (which is probably 10 songs a month total) or legal video playback on Youtube through Vevo even from smaller labels like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxLA1NX9gxY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxLA1NX9gxY.
- kakarot 9y ago
  Unfortunately, some of us consider listening to music to be a big part of who we are, and 10 songs a month is akin to suicide. With newer labels, it's much easier to stream from bandcamp, etc. but with older music it can be hard to find what you want, in the quality and quantity you desire, while staying above piracy. I find it very hard to tell a poor person that they do not get to listen to as much music as me, or of the same quality (streaming is still sub-320kbps) because they were not born into a richer family.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Where does that end? Do you expect them to have a right to the same high end speakers/headphones that you have? To the same sound-treated room? I understand piracy more when it's literally impossible to make a legal purchase of something; I get it. When it's merely a matter of spending less money, I have a lot less sympathy for the copyright infringers.
    - thanksgiving 9y ago

hoodoof 9y ago

BMG is right of course. The Founding Fathers foresaw exactly this sort of situation and made sure the constitution was worded to exclude such pirates from diminishing the profits of BMG. Further, I'm pretty sure the constitution goes further and is quite explicit that such pirates really should have their citizenship stripped or be sent to the electric chair. Those Founding Fathers - they knew what was what.

geggam 9y ago
See there is an underlying issue here that seems to be neglected. When you transform your work into a mathematical equation and then tell people they cant solve the equation without giving you money... well... Your business model is fundamentally broken.
- averagewall 9y ago
  No. When you transform your work into physical objects and leave them on the side of the street then tell people they can't take them without giving you money ... Both cases depend on property rights and law enforcement to function at all. Property rights, both physical and IP are arbitrary human inventions.

trafficlight 9y ago

BMG has no constitutional right to stay in business, either.

zipwitch 9y ago
And there you've hit the nail on the head. Too many people running currently powerful/profitable businesses think they have a right to have their business model be profitable.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
pasbesoin 9y ago
And, in as much as it's my legal sales revenue that's paying for their bullshit, I'm all the more inclined to stop paying and look for other means of access. Fuck you, BMG.

kakarot 9y ago

"The First Amendment does not guarantee Cox’s subscribers the right to use Cox’s internet service to steal music any more than it prevents Cox from terminating subscribers who violate Cox’s policies or fail to pay their bills" Okay, so where does it guarantee copyright holders the right to dictate my ability to use a utility that is now widely regarded as a basic human right by the international community? [0] [0] http://gizmodo.com/internet-access-is-now-a-basic-human-right-1783081865 http://gizmodo.com/internet-access-is-now-a-basic-human-righ...

duncan_bayne 9y ago
Right here: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?cycle=ALL https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?cycle=ALL I think you'll find that's what has been used instead of the Constitution in the US for some time.
- andreyf 9y ago
  Renaissance Technologies? That's not a list I would have expected them to be on...
evilDagmar 9y ago
I'd like to take a moment to point out that the actual Copyright Act which BMG et al. are so freely waving about has a section that explicitly states that after a certain amount of time, these products are supposed to go into the public domain. I'm not sure I can really respect their claims when it's clear from their behaviour (DRM, perpetually lobbying to extend the time periods, etc) that they themselves have no intention of heeding the Copyright Act. ...because something can't go to the public domain if no one has useable copies of anything .

ruytlm 9y ago

When you think of this in terms of the internet being a utility, it highlights how ridiculous this actually is: "We want you to disconnect the pirates' electricity, because they used that to power the computers they used to download the content!"

emodendroket 9y ago

Great. I was hoping there was some other class of minor crime we could cut people off from society for committing and it looks like this one fits the bill.

moonka 9y ago

Once you decide to pick and choose who gets which constitutional rights, it makes it a lot easier to strip them away completely.

X86BSD 9y ago
This is what blows my mind. If someone can strip you of a "right", then it's not a right it's a privilege. We have RIGHTS in this country not privileges.
- averagewall 9y ago
  Are you saying that being allowed to stay alive is a privilege, not a right because the death penalty is used to take that away from people? I can't think of a more fundamental right than life, so it sounds like your statement contradicts itself - you have no rights in your country.
- Powerofmene 9y ago
  It seems to me we are confusing words....rights and privileges are being confused with entitlements. The Code of Federal Regulations has very few entitlements, Medicare at the age of 65 and a Free Appropriate Public Education are two entitlements and there are a few select others. All others "rights or privileges" as discussed here require meeting specific criteria.....voting is a privilege afforded to those who register and the federal law allows states to prohibit Convicted felons or the mentally incompetent the right to vote. Most states have placed these restrictions on voting in their state constitution. Life is a privilege that a jury and the courts can remove in many states just as freedom is a privilege not a right. An entitlement cannot be taken from you but suffice it to say entitlements are few in number in the US. As a reformed public servant who spent many many hours in the CFR, I assure you that you can count on one hand those entitlements.
xupybd 9y ago
I'm against BMG here, but don't we do this with criminals? Sending people to prison is revoking their right to freedom. If you're convicted of a violent crime, you lose the right to arms. I think there is a case to be made that some people need to have their rights restricted to prevent them from violating the rights of others. But this is not one of those cases.

anotheryou 9y ago

And next we ban fare dogers from acessing traffic infrastructure like rails, roads and sidewalks. And can we ban thiefs from buying or otherwise accessing food? Oh and repeated offenders for that music piracy, can we cut off their ears?