25 ms·

US entertainment industry to Congress: make it legal for us to deploy rootkits

608 points by Suraj-Sun 13y ago

ericcumbee 13y ago
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."
- dylz 13y ago
  Is it bad that the first thing that stood out to me was the mismatched quotation marks?
  - ericcumbee 13y ago
    textmate spoils me
  - swatkat 13y ago
    Off topic: http://xkcd.com/859/ http://xkcd.com/859/
    - klez 13y ago
      Thanks for ruining my day.
- fatjokes 13y ago
  So what's worse? When it's driven by people thirsty for power, or people thirsty for money?
  - SoftwareMaven 13y ago
    Is there a difference? Isn't money just a means to power?
  - ericcumbee 13y ago
    Equally for both you open the door for this one thing, it's hard not to open it for everything else.
- touristtam 13y ago
  Funny how all the countries listed here have a strong central government (too say the least), and the MPAA wants to replicate this balance of power in a more liberal context (ie in the hand of an economic agent). United Corporation of America, anyone?
- wnight 13y ago
  Let's let this proceed, then take anyone who supported it or voted for it and send them to the listed countries. When do we treat this sort of nonsense as a threat, ala the Boston rapper. If I announced a business model of selling something for $0.99, but claiming its real value was $150K and then using the millions of dollars of "damages" to justify rooting through your computer, I'd have the police called on me. So why doesn't this extend to the real criminals in our society? I doubt they'll get this, but they need to be kicked for even asking. That's actually the fundamental problem in democracy - the assumption that everything is up for grabs if you win some popularity contest, and that there are no limits on how often you can ask. If I asked if I could do something horrible to you, you'd say no and move on. If I ask your government I just keep doing it until fatigue or human error on your part lets me win. Lobbyists are a rootkit against democracy.
greenyoda 13y ago
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 13y ago
  Unless Microsoft signs the rootkits purposefully.
  - venomsnake 13y ago
    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 13y ago
      Last time I checked MS was still in business. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal&oldid=549679760 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_prot...
      - venomsnake 13y ago
        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 13y ago
        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.
jaxbot 13y ago
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...
- jayfuerstenberg 13y ago
  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.
smegel 13y ago
So downloading copyrighted content makes you a "hacker" now?
- ihsw 13y ago
  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).
  - KNoureen 13y ago
    > campaign donors I would dare to say this could be a contributing factor to the state of politics and law. Essentially, laws and regulations are bought by the highest bidder. I think many agree with me that neither religion or money should have influence on direction of politics. For the anonymity on legislation; No. Legislation, political- and judicial processes IMHO be 100% transparent.
  - mcintyre1994 13y ago
    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.
TheBiv 13y ago
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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...
- doktrin 13y ago
  Yes, they might as well have thrown "... for the good of mankind..." in for good measure. On another note, thanks for linking to the source material.
  - coldcode 13y ago
    And ... won't someone please think of the children
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  The dinosaurs running the entertainment industry wouldn't know innovation if it smacked them in the face.
  - TeMPOraL 13y ago
    They are not idiots, at least not all of them. The're mostly the real-life example of Upton Sinclair's quote. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
- onemorepassword 13y ago
  > "illegal theft of intellectual property" Say what? Such bizarre phrases make me seriously doubt the intelligence and education of the people who wrote this.
maeon3 13y ago
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.
- shmerl 13y ago
  It would automatically be illegal to break this spyware (i.e. to defend against it) the moment the spyware itself becomes legal. Since breaking DRM is forbidden by DMCA. DMCA/1201 should be really repealed, as well as any such new idiocy pushed by the DRM lobby.
- kintamanimatt 13y ago
  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!
  - eru 13y ago
    But they don't have all the same bug.
    - kintamanimatt 13y ago
      Of course not. But it's easy to maintain a list of public bugs for different kernel versions and also a list of 0day bugs that may have been found, and then exploit the appropriate privilege escalation bug depending on the kernel version.
  - beedogs 13y ago
    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 13y ago
kunai 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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.
  - 13y ago
munin 13y ago
"...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 13y ago
  Ha. Black ICE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Electronics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Elect...
- yuhong 13y ago
  Well, DMCA was back in 1998.
- TheCondor 13y ago
  Would that require disclosure? A problem now which is more frightening (I can secure my network from the media companies, not worried about that one bit) is the remarkable number of companies with known security problem that won't and don't disclose it. Going on the offensive should be illegal unless they can disclose damages which justify it and then their customers can sue. I don't see this happening in a healthy world, defense will get much much better much more quickly if it was to be legal though, ultimately it would involve violence though.
wereHamster 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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.
shmerl 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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 13y ago
    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).
waterlesscloud 13y ago
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.
- munin 13y ago
  > Then the entertainment industry has enemies actively trying to destroy their systems. so to be fair this is actually where we are today, if you remember the efforts of anonymous and sony, etc...
  - pyre 13y ago
    To be fair: 1) Anonymous/Lulzsec aren't necessarily a best-of-the-best of the 'hacker world.' Do they want to raise the ire of even more skilled people? 2) Anonymous/Lulzsec are/were in it mostly for the publicity, and 'cheap thrills.' I'm sure that they could have done a lot more damage had they been focused on being as malicious as possible.
    - fixxer 13y ago
      > mostly for the publicity, and 'cheap thrills. You mean... for the lulz?
      - pyre 13y ago
        I purposely expanded 'for the lulz' into something a bit more succinct.
        pauljburke 13y ago
        You actually expanded it into something that by definition is less succinct.
Zigurd 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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.
betterunix 13y ago
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.
- darxius 13y ago
  > blackhats to take down their systems I'm pretty sure something like this would get the greys and whites involved too.
- kunai 13y ago
  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.
mikelat 13y ago
It'll be just like the Kazaa days! The_Avengers_2_Earths_Mightiest_Heroes.mp4.exe
seandhi 13y ago
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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...
- adrusi 13y ago
  Thank you for pointing this out. I was looking for which specific entertainment firms to blame, and found "The National Bureau of Asian Research" instead.
- knowaveragejoe 13y ago
  So, rootkits are okay then...?
  - seandhi 13y ago
    Rootkits are a thing. They're neither good nor bad. That value is supplied subjectively within different contexts, no? Would I want the RIAA/MPAA to install rootkits in media files that are distributed to customers? Absolutely not. Would I want the ability to install rootkits in engineering schematics and documentation that are never intended to be distributed outside of my organization and are only activated in cases where data theft has occurred? Absolutely.
    - smsm42 13y ago
      I would also want the ability to shoot anybody I dislike at will, but make it so no one else would have this ability. But fortunately for our civilization, it is not rules by what I like. That's why if you suspect somebody stole a car from you, you can not just make it blow up - you have to call the police. If you suspect somebody stole a software from you, should you be allowed to blow up their computer? In the same vein, definitely not. In the light of abundant copyright abuse we are witnessing now, I am astonished to see anybody even considers this idea to be sane.
tnuc 13y ago
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.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- vetinari 13y ago
  AFAIK, Sony is still there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit
mikegagnon 13y ago
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-statement-report-commission-theft-american-intellectual-property https://intelligence.house.gov/press-release/chairman-rogers... The report and Congressman's statement came out on the same day.
- regularfry 13y ago
  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 13y ago
    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 http://www.manatt.com/KristiRogers.aspx
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
beedogs 13y ago
The copyright cartel these days is indistinguishable from the pirates they lobby against. In fact, I think I trust the pirates more lately.
- akama 13y ago
  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.
cognivore 13y ago
>> 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 13y ago
  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.
rdl 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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.
fatjokes 13y ago
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.
beloch 13y ago
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.
- shmerl 13y ago
  #5 Safety (guaranteed freedom from malware, etc.)... was the one thing that legally purchased media had an undeniable edge in over pirated media. Disagreed. Sony rootkit was on the legally purchased media. DRM on streaming services can do all kind of stuff without users consent. DRM built into hardware with cameras can do even weirder stuff (just note the crazy DRM idea patented by Microsoft regarding detecting the people in the room). Since DRM is a black box, you never know what it can do. There is completely no reason to trust that it will respect your privacy and rights. Therefore DRMed media has no edge over pirated media at all. Safety requires transparency (for the user), as well as trust in the used technology. DRM by its very definition is non trustworthy and non transparent, it's the antithesis of that. It's totally opaque precisely because it attempts to hide something from the user. Because ironically, DRM proponents don't trust the user! User is treated as potential criminal by default. How can users in situation when they aren't trusted, trust the DRM vendor in return? They can not, and they should not! Trust can be only mutual. I.e. DRM always implies something shady and risky. DRM proponents should be treated as potential criminals by default in return. And what do such criminals usually hide in their code? Malware.
noonespecial 13y ago
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?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- tantalor 13y ago
  Aye, that's why real law enforcement have an oath of honor and are held to the standard of the constitution. Here they are asking to authorize vigilantism.
- nathan_long 13y ago
  This is an excellent point. "We can only get $X per song in damages? Plant 100 songs on that computer."
DigitalSea 13y ago
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 13y ago
  "...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.
pyvek 13y ago
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 13y ago
  Given some of the rest of the logic behind this whole thing that one did not stand out as particularly idiotic.
eikenberry 13y ago
US people to Congress: make it legal for us to share what we love
lightknight 13y ago
Hey, look, it's time for me to try linux again...
venomsnake 13y ago
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.
Semaphor 13y ago
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.
ck2 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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 13y ago
    Or burn down your house for an immature laugh while ruining your life.
    - akama 13y ago
      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.
mtgx 13y ago
Next up: HTML5/browser-based rootkit? You never know with W3C these days.
- pestaa 13y ago
  This was really unwarranted and unnecessarily provocative.
  - alan_cx 13y ago
    DRM in HTML5 makes the comment not just warranted, but a statement of the obvious. If that is provocative, then I say provoke.
diminoten 13y ago
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.
nathan_long 13y ago
In other news, convenience store owners want the right to track down people they suspect of vandalizing their bathrooms and burn their houses down.
cLeEOGPw 13y ago
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.
da_n 13y ago
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.
leke 13y ago
I'm just worried that this has already happened and they are waiting for it to be legal before they flip the switch.
coffeeaddicted 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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.
Digit-Al 13y ago
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 :|
walshemj 13y ago
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.
jck 13y ago
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?
justanother 13y ago
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.
uptown 13y ago
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-fsecure-drm.html http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/110110-sonybmg-rootkit...
hendrik-xdest 13y ago
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.
asdfasdfgfd 13y ago
if the camera catches a naked 8 year old, who will go to prison for taking a pedophile picture that the administrator will see?
alan_cx 13y ago
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.
dguido 13y ago
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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...
chiph 13y ago
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.
cavilling_elite 13y ago
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?
ds9 13y ago
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.
fkdjs 13y ago
http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p... > 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.
bpatrianakos 13y ago
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?
jokoon 13y ago
yeah, like computers are used only to watch movies and listen to music.
iknight 13y ago
Co-Chaired by Jon Hunstman Jr. FTW! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr.
pasbesoin 13y ago
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.

608 points by Suraj-Sun 13y ago

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."

dylz 13y ago
Is it bad that the first thing that stood out to me was the mismatched quotation marks?
- ericcumbee 13y ago
  textmate spoils me
- swatkat 13y ago
  Off topic: http://xkcd.com/859/ http://xkcd.com/859/
  - klez 13y ago
    Thanks for ruining my day.
fatjokes 13y ago
So what's worse? When it's driven by people thirsty for power, or people thirsty for money?
- SoftwareMaven 13y ago
  Is there a difference? Isn't money just a means to power?
- ericcumbee 13y ago
  Equally for both you open the door for this one thing, it's hard not to open it for everything else.
touristtam 13y ago
Funny how all the countries listed here have a strong central government (too say the least), and the MPAA wants to replicate this balance of power in a more liberal context (ie in the hand of an economic agent). United Corporation of America, anyone?
wnight 13y ago
Let's let this proceed, then take anyone who supported it or voted for it and send them to the listed countries. When do we treat this sort of nonsense as a threat, ala the Boston rapper. If I announced a business model of selling something for $0.99, but claiming its real value was $150K and then using the millions of dollars of "damages" to justify rooting through your computer, I'd have the police called on me. So why doesn't this extend to the real criminals in our society? I doubt they'll get this, but they need to be kicked for even asking. That's actually the fundamental problem in democracy - the assumption that everything is up for grabs if you win some popularity contest, and that there are no limits on how often you can ask. If I asked if I could do something horrible to you, you'd say no and move on. If I ask your government I just keep doing it until fatigue or human error on your part lets me win. Lobbyists are a rootkit against democracy.

greenyoda 13y ago

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 13y ago
Unless Microsoft signs the rootkits purposefully.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  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 13y ago
    Last time I checked MS was still in business. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal&oldid=549679760 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sony_BMG_copy_prot...
    - venomsnake 13y ago
      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 13y ago
        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.

jaxbot 13y ago

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...

jayfuerstenberg 13y ago
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.

smegel 13y ago

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

ihsw 13y ago
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).
- KNoureen 13y ago
  > campaign donors I would dare to say this could be a contributing factor to the state of politics and law. Essentially, laws and regulations are bought by the highest bidder. I think many agree with me that neither religion or money should have influence on direction of politics. For the anonymity on legislation; No. Legislation, political- and judicial processes IMHO be 100% transparent.
- mcintyre1994 13y ago
  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.

TheBiv 13y ago

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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...

doktrin 13y ago
Yes, they might as well have thrown "... for the good of mankind..." in for good measure. On another note, thanks for linking to the source material.
- coldcode 13y ago
  And ... won't someone please think of the children
w1ntermute 13y ago
The dinosaurs running the entertainment industry wouldn't know innovation if it smacked them in the face.
- TeMPOraL 13y ago
  They are not idiots, at least not all of them. The're mostly the real-life example of Upton Sinclair's quote. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
onemorepassword 13y ago
> "illegal theft of intellectual property" Say what? Such bizarre phrases make me seriously doubt the intelligence and education of the people who wrote this.

maeon3 13y ago

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.

shmerl 13y ago
It would automatically be illegal to break this spyware (i.e. to defend against it) the moment the spyware itself becomes legal. Since breaking DRM is forbidden by DMCA. DMCA/1201 should be really repealed, as well as any such new idiocy pushed by the DRM lobby.
kintamanimatt 13y ago
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!
- eru 13y ago
  But they don't have all the same bug.
  - kintamanimatt 13y ago
    Of course not. But it's easy to maintain a list of public bugs for different kernel versions and also a list of 0day bugs that may have been found, and then exploit the appropriate privilege escalation bug depending on the kernel version.
- beedogs 13y ago
  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 13y ago

kunai 13y ago

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 13y ago
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.
- 13y ago

munin 13y ago

"...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 13y ago
Ha. Black ICE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Electronics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_Countermeasures_Elect...
yuhong 13y ago
Well, DMCA was back in 1998.
TheCondor 13y ago
Would that require disclosure? A problem now which is more frightening (I can secure my network from the media companies, not worried about that one bit) is the remarkable number of companies with known security problem that won't and don't disclose it. Going on the offensive should be illegal unless they can disclose damages which justify it and then their customers can sue. I don't see this happening in a healthy world, defense will get much much better much more quickly if it was to be legal though, ultimately it would involve violence though.

wereHamster 13y ago

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 13y ago
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.

shmerl 13y ago

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 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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).

waterlesscloud 13y ago

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.

munin 13y ago
> Then the entertainment industry has enemies actively trying to destroy their systems. so to be fair this is actually where we are today, if you remember the efforts of anonymous and sony, etc...
- pyre 13y ago
  To be fair: 1) Anonymous/Lulzsec aren't necessarily a best-of-the-best of the 'hacker world.' Do they want to raise the ire of even more skilled people? 2) Anonymous/Lulzsec are/were in it mostly for the publicity, and 'cheap thrills.' I'm sure that they could have done a lot more damage had they been focused on being as malicious as possible.
  - fixxer 13y ago
    > mostly for the publicity, and 'cheap thrills. You mean... for the lulz?
    - pyre 13y ago
      I purposely expanded 'for the lulz' into something a bit more succinct.
      - pauljburke 13y ago
        You actually expanded it into something that by definition is less succinct.

Zigurd 13y ago

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 13y ago
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.

betterunix 13y ago

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.

darxius 13y ago
> blackhats to take down their systems I'm pretty sure something like this would get the greys and whites involved too.
kunai 13y ago
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.

mikelat 13y ago

It'll be just like the Kazaa days! The_Avengers_2_Earths_Mightiest_Heroes.mp4.exe

seandhi 13y ago

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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...

adrusi 13y ago
Thank you for pointing this out. I was looking for which specific entertainment firms to blame, and found "The National Bureau of Asian Research" instead.
knowaveragejoe 13y ago
So, rootkits are okay then...?
- seandhi 13y ago
  Rootkits are a thing. They're neither good nor bad. That value is supplied subjectively within different contexts, no? Would I want the RIAA/MPAA to install rootkits in media files that are distributed to customers? Absolutely not. Would I want the ability to install rootkits in engineering schematics and documentation that are never intended to be distributed outside of my organization and are only activated in cases where data theft has occurred? Absolutely.
  - smsm42 13y ago
    I would also want the ability to shoot anybody I dislike at will, but make it so no one else would have this ability. But fortunately for our civilization, it is not rules by what I like. That's why if you suspect somebody stole a car from you, you can not just make it blow up - you have to call the police. If you suspect somebody stole a software from you, should you be allowed to blow up their computer? In the same vein, definitely not. In the light of abundant copyright abuse we are witnessing now, I am astonished to see anybody even considers this idea to be sane.

tnuc 13y ago

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.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
vetinari 13y ago
AFAIK, Sony is still there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_rootkit

mikegagnon 13y ago

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-statement-report-commission-theft-american-intellectual-property https://intelligence.house.gov/press-release/chairman-rogers... The report and Congressman's statement came out on the same day.

regularfry 13y ago
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 13y ago
  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 http://www.manatt.com/KristiRogers.aspx

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

beedogs 13y ago

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

akama 13y ago
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.

cognivore 13y ago

>> 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 13y ago
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.

rdl 13y ago

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 13y ago
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.

fatjokes 13y ago

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.

beloch 13y ago

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.

shmerl 13y ago
#5 Safety (guaranteed freedom from malware, etc.)... was the one thing that legally purchased media had an undeniable edge in over pirated media. Disagreed. Sony rootkit was on the legally purchased media. DRM on streaming services can do all kind of stuff without users consent. DRM built into hardware with cameras can do even weirder stuff (just note the crazy DRM idea patented by Microsoft regarding detecting the people in the room). Since DRM is a black box, you never know what it can do. There is completely no reason to trust that it will respect your privacy and rights. Therefore DRMed media has no edge over pirated media at all. Safety requires transparency (for the user), as well as trust in the used technology. DRM by its very definition is non trustworthy and non transparent, it's the antithesis of that. It's totally opaque precisely because it attempts to hide something from the user. Because ironically, DRM proponents don't trust the user! User is treated as potential criminal by default. How can users in situation when they aren't trusted, trust the DRM vendor in return? They can not, and they should not! Trust can be only mutual. I.e. DRM always implies something shady and risky. DRM proponents should be treated as potential criminals by default in return. And what do such criminals usually hide in their code? Malware.

noonespecial 13y ago

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?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
tantalor 13y ago
Aye, that's why real law enforcement have an oath of honor and are held to the standard of the constitution. Here they are asking to authorize vigilantism.
nathan_long 13y ago
This is an excellent point. "We can only get $X per song in damages? Plant 100 songs on that computer."

DigitalSea 13y ago

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 13y ago
"...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.

pyvek 13y ago

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 13y ago
Given some of the rest of the logic behind this whole thing that one did not stand out as particularly idiotic.

eikenberry 13y ago

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

lightknight 13y ago

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

venomsnake 13y ago

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.

Semaphor 13y ago

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.

ck2 13y ago

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 13y ago
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 13y ago
  Or burn down your house for an immature laugh while ruining your life.
  - akama 13y ago
    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.

mtgx 13y ago

Next up: HTML5/browser-based rootkit? You never know with W3C these days.

pestaa 13y ago
This was really unwarranted and unnecessarily provocative.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  DRM in HTML5 makes the comment not just warranted, but a statement of the obvious. If that is provocative, then I say provoke.

diminoten 13y ago

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.

nathan_long 13y ago

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

cLeEOGPw 13y ago

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.

da_n 13y ago

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.

leke 13y ago

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

coffeeaddicted 13y ago

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 13y ago
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.

Digit-Al 13y ago

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 :|

walshemj 13y ago

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.

jck 13y ago

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?

justanother 13y ago

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.

uptown 13y ago

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

hendrik-xdest 13y ago

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.

asdfasdfgfd 13y ago

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

alan_cx 13y ago

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.

dguido 13y ago

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.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p...

chiph 13y ago

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.

cavilling_elite 13y ago

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?

ds9 13y ago

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.

fkdjs 13y ago

http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.pdf http://ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_052213.p... > 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.

bpatrianakos 13y ago

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?

jokoon 13y ago

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

iknight 13y ago

Co-Chaired by Jon Hunstman Jr. FTW! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr.

pasbesoin 13y ago

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.