-=PCTechTalk=- Re: Deleted Mail
- From: "Buddy Love" <elijahx@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 14:08:05 -0500 (US Eastern Standard Time)
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=0D
Find News on: =0D
=0D
Search: Top Stories=0D
=0D
Entertainment =0D
Technology=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
To print: Click here or Select File and then Print from your browser's me=
nu=0D
--------------------------------------------------------------=0D
This story was printed from ZDNN,=0D
located at http://zdnet.com.com/2001-11-0.=0D
--------------------------------------------------------------=0D
Could Hollywood hack your PC?=0D
By Declan McCullagh =0D
Special to ZDNet News=0D
July 24, 2002, 4:25 AM PT=0D
URL: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-945976.html =0D
WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment industry propo=
sal
that=0D
would authorize copyright holders to disable PCs used for illicit file
trading. =0D
A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort to
date by record labels and=0D
movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer networks that they view as an
increasingly dire threat to their=0D
bottom line. =0D
Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., the
measure would permit=0D
copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked electronic hacking if they
have a "reasonable basis" to=0D
believe that piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce t=
he
10-page bill this week. =0D
The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture Associat=
ion
of America and the=0D
Recording Industry Association of America from all state and federal laws=
if
they disable, block or=0D
otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network." =0D
Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the permiss=
ion
of the U.S.=0D
attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a suit could be filed only =
if
the actual monetary loss was=0D
more than $250. =0D
According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete detai=
ls
about the "specific=0D
technologies the copyright holder intends to use to impair" the normal
operation of the peer-to-peer=0D
network. Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to t=
he
public. =0D
The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, worms,
denial-of-service attacks, or=0D
domain name hijacking, would be permissible. It does say that a
copyright-hacker should not delete=0D
files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to sue i=
f
files are accidentally erased. =0D
Because Congress only has about five work weeks left before it is schedul=
ed
to adjourn for the year,=0D
the outlook for the draft bill is uncertain. =0D
But because its sponsors include top Republican and Democratic committee
chairmen, it could=0D
receive a warm welcome in the House of Representatives at a hearing
tentatively scheduled for this=0D
fall. Coble is the chairman of the House subcommittee on intellectual
property, and Berman is the top=0D
Democrat on the panel. =0D
Berman wrote in an opinion article this month that "currently, copyright
owners are unable to use some=0D
useful technological tools to deal with P2P piracy because they face
potential, if unintended, liability=0D
under a variety of state and federal laws." =0D
"It's a good bill," Gene Smith, a spokeswoman for Berman, said on Monday.=
=20
It's always hard to=0D
defend theft and piracy--this bill just puts into the hands of the copyri=
ght
owners technologies that are=0D
already being used by the pirates." =0D
Smith said the purpose of the draft bill was to "fight fire with fire, fi=
ght
technology with technology." =0D
Jessica Litman, a professor at Wayne State University who specializes in
copyright law, said the draft=0D
bill improperly encourages "vigilante justice." =0D
"I think it's wildly overreaching," Litman said. "Copyright owners are in
essence asking Congress to=0D
say that peer-to-peer file trading is such a scourge, is so bad, that
stopping it is more important than=0D
enforcing any other laws that federal or state governments may have passe=
d
on computer security,=0D
privacy, fraud and so forth." =0D
Litman said that even if a copyright holder accidentally deleted a home
video titled "Snow White," the=0D
owner of that PC could be out of luck. "Unless I can show economic harm, =
I
can't even be=0D
compensated," Litman said. "Even if I want to be compensated, I have to j=
ump
through procedural=0D
hoops." =0D
The film and music industries already are developing tools to use against
rogue file swapping, though=0D
they've remained mum on the details. The RIAA says its members have the
right to use any "lawful=0D
and appropriate self-help measure." =0D
Fritz Attaway, the MPAA's senior vice president for government relations,
endorsed Berman's=0D
approach on Monday, stressing that law-abiding Internet users should not =
be
concerned. =0D
"No one in the motion picture industry has any interest in invading your
computer or doing anything=0D
malicious with your files," Attaway said. "The idea is to make unauthoriz=
ed
file sharing sufficiently=0D
inconvenient or at least unsuccessful." =0D
The MPAA and RIAA did not respond to requests for comment on Tuesday. =0D
The Electronic Frontier Foundation condemned the draft bill as a sop to
Hollywood and the recording=0D
industry. =0D
Digital lockdown?=0D
"This is part of a greater strategy that's being implemented by the
entertainment industry to lock up=0D
and control digital information in general," said Robin Gross, an EFF sta=
ff
attorney. "The rights that=0D
we've enjoyed in the analog space are now being taken away from us becaus=
e
we're entering a=0D
digital realm" =0D
Gross said she was concerned by the broad grant of immunity to copyright
holders who become=0D
computer intruders. "When they screw up, they don't want you to be able t=
o
get some sort of retribution=0D
from them," she said. =0D
Other sponsors listed on the draft bill include key legislators such as R=
eps
John Conyers of Michigan,=0D
the top Democrat on the full Judiciary committee, Lamar Smith, R-Texas, t=
he
chairman of a crime=0D
subcommittee, and Robert Wexler, D-Fla. Currently there is no companion
legislation in the Senate. =0D
The next step for the draft bill is the House Judiciary subcommittee on
intellectual property. A=0D
representative for Coble said earlier this month to expect a hearing
starting in September, when=0D
Congress returns from its August recess. =0D
Berman announced plans for the legislation during a speech to a Washingto=
n
trade association last=0D
month. He represents California's San Fernando Valley, adjacent to Los
Angeles and Hollywood's=0D
cluster of entertainment companies. =0D
Coble and Berman have jointly written a second draft bill that could shar=
ply
limit Americans' rights=0D
relating to copying music, taping TV shows, or transferring files through
the Internet. But they have said=0D
they do not necessarily endorse the plan's details. =0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
"These thoughts are like a Gun in My Mouth"=0D
Tantrum of the muse=0D
God created the Cat so man would have the pleasure of caressing the lion=0D
=0D
-------Original Message-------=0D
=0D
From: pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=0D
Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 02:00:46 PM=0D
To: pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=0D
Subject: -=3DPCTechTalk=3D- Re: Deleted Mail=0D
=0D
I only asked this question once. I couldn't understand why it was sent
through again. I am also getting some of the=0D
other messages twice.=0D
=0D
I think when I subscribed I subscribed for this forum in outlook epresss
@telepak.net also not knowing what I was=0D
doing I think I also subscribed to the same forum @yahoo.com. I guess I n=
eed
to go to Yahoo and unscribe.=0D
I was afraid if I did it would unsubscribe both places. So you can see I
sure am stupid when it comes to computers.=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
> Juanita,=0D
>=0D
> First, I don't use Outlook so I can't help you. I think you asked the s=
ame
question earlier today and Brenda=0D
said she'd look for you.=0D
>=0D
> BTW, have you gone back to the Freelists site and looked for the
information? There are archives of all the posts=0D
there. Brenda's thread was quite lengthy but you should find all you need
there.=0D
>=0D
> Regards from the=0D
> "Keyboard Cowboy",=0D
> Master NetLord=0D
> ,,,,,=0D
> =D4=BF=D4=AC=0D
> Cincinnati, Ohio=0D
> Scottsdale, Arizona=0D
> =AB::::=BB=A4=AB::::=BB=A4=A4=AB::::=BB=A4=AB::::=BB=0D
> Tuesday=0D
> 07/23/2002=0D
> 10:32:30 PM=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 09:56:31 -0500, Juanita Kimble wrote:=0D
> >=0D
> >Would someone please tell me what to type in to find my deleted=0D
> >mail, that I have deleted from outlook express.Windows 98.=0D
> >I kept up with Brendas thread but I made so many note on one sheet=0D
> >of papper, I can't make heads or tails out of them now.=0D
> >=0D
> >Juanita=0D
> >=0D
> >=0D
> >To unsub or change your email settings:=0D
> >//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk=0D
> >=0D
> >To access our Archives:=0D
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/=0D
> >//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/=0D
> >=0D
> >To unsub or change your email settings:=0D
> >//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk=0D
> >=0D
> >To access our Archives:=0D
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/=0D
> >//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/=0D
>=0D
>=0D
> To unsub or change your email settings:=0D
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk=0D
>=0D
> To access our Archives:=0D
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/=0D
> //www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/=0D
=0D
To unsub or change your email settings:=0D
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk=0D
=0D
To access our Archives:=0D
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/=0D
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/=0D
=2E
To unsub or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
Other related posts:
