Category Archives: commands

Attorney General Gonzales: “…Tougher Penalties On Content Pirates.”

This is great…

Attorney General Gonzales wants to make this: “the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007″ a law and have tougher penalties on content pirates

I don’t like to keep banging the same drum over and over again but it seems that this seems like it’s a ‘favor’ for the MPAA and the RIAA.

In a press release from the Department of Justice, it says the bill was presented before “before members of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce Coalition Against Counterfeiting and Piracy
.”

What? Why now?

This bill is first and foremost crazy.

It wants to “criminalize attempted copyright crimes”–what does attempted mean here?

“…who attempt to commit a crime but do not complete it are as morally culpable as those who succeed in doing so.”

What? “morally”? So copyright is now a moral issue?

“Current intellectual property forfeiture laws lack uniformity, both in the items subject to civil forfeiture and the procedures for criminal forfeiture.”

You know what that means?  That means that intellectual property laws are vague so let’s make them more vague so more people will go to jail.

Oh it also states that they can take anything that is involved with this venture of “piracy”–of copyright crimes.

“While current 17 U.S.C. 5 506(b) allows for civil forfeiture only of property ‘used in the manufacture of such infringing copies or phonorecords,’ subsection 4(b) of the Administration’s legislative proposal also would authorize forfeiture of ‘property. . . intended to be used’ in the commission of the offense, such as blank media or polycarbonate intended for use in producing counterfeit CDs and DVDs.”

Oh, this thing is definitely a favor for the MPAA and the RIAA–this thing has all the things they would want to do but didn’t do rampantly for fear of getting caught.

This thing adds: “Forfeiture and Restitution Remedies to the DMCA Criminal Provisions Consistent with Those Remedies Available for Other Intellectual Property Crimes.”

When you bring up the DMCA you bring up the MPAA and the RIAA because it’s their child.

Listen to this guy–he writes: “Although a violation of the DMCA does not require an underlying infringement of a copyright as an element
of the offense.” What? This is the same guy that said that the Constitution doesn’t give us the right to habeas corpus.

I can’t even believe this. I was writing a little while ago how in Sweden a prosecutor implied that BitTorrent Users were ‘terrorists’. It seems that Attorney General Gonzales is going to take the US to a new level and take us in that direction–he’s hasn’t said it but he’s wording it in the way that would imply…well, look under the section entitled: “Authority for Voice Intercepts in Investigations of Criminal Trademark and Copyright Offenses”

Yes, you read right voice intercepts–wiretaps he writes: “Law enforcement officers should have access to the full range of lawful investigative tools when they investigate intellectual property crimes. Currently, a Federal court may issue an order authorizing the use of a voice intercept (otherwise known as a ‘wiretap’) in the investigations of a host of Federal crimes; copyright and trademark counterfeiting crimes are not among them. This is unacceptable.”

Hahahaha, this guy is talking about courts and wiretaps–what does he care about courts and warrants? Anyways he calls the fact that they can’t wiretap unacceptable. So now you can have your phone wiretapped because you’re a terrorist and/or because you attempt/commit copyright ‘infringement’. Seeing that the defintion of terrorism is whatever the Government wants it to be that means now everybody can be wiretapped now.

Heh, we haven’t even gotten to the bill yet–this is still the introduction letter.

But listen to how Gonzales introduced the bill, “These crimes, as we all know, also have a direct impact on our economy, costing victims millions of dollars and, if left unchecked, diminishing entrepreneurship.” (emphasis mine)

Tell me that doesn’t sound like something that the MPAA and the RIAA would say. He says “as we all know…a direct impact on our economy…victims millions of dollars…diminishing entrepreneurship.” Really–they always say these thing but never say how and when they do and give stats they are tainted because it’s not true.

Some comments from people:

Nope no corruption here… Not until you see Copyright violators getting more jail time than murderers and rapists… oh wait I think they already do (well the rapists at least).

Bah, when copyright is infringed, corporations lose money, and when corporations lose money, the terrorists win!
Why do you hate Freedom so much?

Heh, that sounds like the 6 Step Program.

More comments:

I wonder which definition General Gonzales is using when he states “hoping to ensure that any ‘ill-gotten gains’ are forfeited”. Is he using the traditional definition where you pay restitution based on proven damages, or is he using the “War on Drugs” definition where all of your personal property is forfeit to the government for sharing a single MP3 file?

 Yes, make the punishment harder, so they have a harder punishment than rapists, pedophiles, and murders? -rolleyes-
Corruption at the Justice Department. The laws are to protect the citizens. The citizens do not want strong copyright punishments. That is what the big media corporations want.

So yeah I hope you’ve gotten an idea about how crazy this thing is–this is certainly not something that should be addressed as it has been unless there are alliances with the MPAA and the RIAA.

Advertisements

Al Qaeda Has ‘Job’ Applications?

What? They have ‘job’ applications?

Al Qaeda has ‘job’ applications?

“‘It’s a membership application — just the way you or I would fill out an application for a credit card company,’ said Jack Cloonan, former head of the FBI’s Osama bin Laden squad in New York and now an ABC News consultant, who reviewed the document. ‘They’re no different.'” (emphasis mine)

I’m expected to believe that Al Qaeda is no different than a credit card company–that filling an application is for them is like filling one out for a credit card company? What?

How backwards is this type of thinking?

Al Qaeda Applications? How conveinent is that? Is there a job hotline too? What’s Osama’s office extension huh?

ABC News has the section in the article:

“Applying to Al Qaeda Inc.”

They’re Incorporated now? Heh, they might be joking yes but then again the whole article seems like a joke too, as far as the applications.

These so called convenient ‘job’ applications from Al Qaeda are supposed to be key evidence for Jose Padilla?

The guy has been held since June 9th, 2002 as an enemy combatant under an order from President Bush that classified him as such and was sent to a military brig in South Carolina without any notice to his attorney or family–and without any criminal charges being formally made against him.

“So? He’s an alleged terrorist”

Exactly alleged, it’s innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.

The guy was held for years in military custody with no formal charges–it’s like hey, where’s habeas corpus?

Oh, and get this there’s also speculation that he’s the John Doe no. 2 of the Oklahoma City Bombing(?)

So anyways after some little background, going back to the article it continues:

“‘Al Qaeda were great record keepers,” said Cloonan. “When al Qaeda was conceived of there were articles of incorporation. It was a very top to bottom organization. There was an organizational chart. You had an employment contract. … You had the remnants of an insurance plan. You have a salary … as a single member of al Qaeda, you are paid $1,000 a month. As a married member, you get paid $1,500.

‘And believe it or not if you choose to leave the group you had a buyout package. And that buyout package was $2,400 and airline tickets to wherever you wanted to go.‘” (emphasis mine)

Wow, who else but me finds that far-fetched?

I don’t doubt the effectiveness of intelligence gathering but geez, if you know what the guy ate for breakfast knew who he talked to on the cellphone, knew what he read online, knew he took flight lessons, knew he was in Germany on so and so date, knew where he lived in Germany, knew his telephone number in Germany, and blah blah and you know this a day after the terrorist attack on the U.S.–you suck, you freakin’ suck–what the freak are you doing?

Why know all the hijackers name and have all this video and oh, wow his passport was found in the debris of the Ground Zero and this and that–you know all this crap and why? –for the prevention of future terrorist attacks? Yeah, well you suck, you know all this info about these guys like days after the fact–like you have a freakin’ timeline days after the attack yet you didn’t know about the attack? Yeah face it, you freakin’ suck.

Now going back to the article–these guys know the workings of Al Qaeda know the inner workings of it–how they deal with their ’employees’–they know all these things yet they don’t know the things they should know?

Yeah I dismiss the idea of Al Qaeda ‘job’ applications.

Believe it or not, uh-huh, right about that–buyout package–insurance…wow.

Microsoft Wants Royalties From Linux

235 is the number of patent violations that Mircosoft asserts that Linux is violating and the reasons which they are saying why it’s such high quality software–because it’s infringing on patents, which they want royalties for.

Uh-huh, I read this and I automatically recalled the ‘Tainted’ Piracy Stats of the MPAA–as the article has language and complaints much like the MPAA and the RIAA have made in regards to the so called ‘piracy‘.

So they are saying that Linux and the free software (it doesn’t go into too much detail what other free software besides Linux are) are high quality because of the infringement of 235 patents?

So their stuff sucks why?

It’s high quality because it’s open source first of all. Mircosoft is getting mad because they can’t code something as high quality as this and instead of seeking new ways to use this to their advantage they instead do as the MPAA and the RIAA–they want royalities…

but let’s be serious here–that’s not what they really want. What they want is the “lost revenue” as the MPAA and the RIAA always do. They will first whine about royalties and then when they have those they will want that “lost revenue” and when they don’t get it they will sue.

Why now? Why bring this infringement now and not back in September 17, 1991 when the first Linux kernel was introduced?

The answer is very simple and it’s even in the article:

“And as a mature company facing unfavorable market trends and fearsome competitors like Google (Charts, Fortune 500), Microsoft is pulling no punches: It wants royalties. If the company gets its way, free software won’t be free anymore.” (emphasis mine)

The reason is due to unfavorable market trends and fearsome competitors that they’re bring this infringement plea–and scapegoating free software, in particular Linux and alluding in some ways as it being the cause for the unfavorable market trends and fearsome competitors.

As I said before, much the same language as the MPAA and the RIAA–it’s like they went and took: “Scapegoating and Suing 101: What to Do When Your Product Sucks and the Alternative is Free and Online” by the MPAA and the RIAA.

Which goes a little something like this:

  1. Claim that you have been infringed upon
  2. State that you have lost revenue or the like
  3. Demand royalties
  4. Sue the companies, organization, or entity that is infringing
  5. Sue the individuals that use/distribute/host/promote the infringing products and/or byproducts.
  6. Repeat if desired

So basically this is what they are doing at least it seems they are going down that path. Yet they state:

“Microsoft counters that it is a matter of principle. ‘We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property,’ says Ballmer in an interview. FOSS patrons are going to have to ‘play by the same rules as the rest of the business,’ he insists. ‘What’s fair is fair.'”

First and foremost what “world” is he from?  “We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property…,” now I know he took, “Scapegoating and Suing 101: What to Do When Your Product Sucks and the Alternative is Free and Online

“…play by the same rules as the rest of the business…” What rules would those be? Oh, yeah no one gets more money than my company and if they do, we start the 6 step program. Uh, huh, I see that’s really fair–yeah.

They definitely took “Scapegoating and Suing 101: What to Do When Your Product Sucks and the Alternative is Free and Online” I’m sure of it.

So Mircosoft is doing the 6 Step Program, hmmm…

Well, you should go download Ubuntu Linux 

Free Paris Hilton? pt 2

After having asked to be set free

Paris has now said:

“After reading the media’s coverage of my court hearing, I feel the need to correct what I believe are misperceptions about me.”

Wait a second, Paris reads? …this implies that she read a newspaper, a magazine…

‘misperceptions’? Oh, wow it’s too late to correct those–those have have been there long before this incident happened.

“I absolutely realize how serious driving under the influence is.”

Then why would you asked to be set ‘free’ and call your punishment an injustice. She’s contradicting herself…

“I could not live with myself if anyone was injured or killed while I was driving while impaired. Clearly, no one should — no matter how slightly.”

Huh? She’s giving advice now? “No one shoud–no matter how slightly…” Hmm,

“I am ready to face the consequences of violating probation.”

Okay “Free Paris” people stop signing the petition. She’s going to go to jail–it seems.

No one is above the law. I surely am not.”

Hahahaha, uh-huh…

“I do not expect to be treated better than anyone else who violated probation. However, my hope is that I will not be treated worse”

Hmm, okay…sound–it seems sort of reasonable–but certainly not something that Paris would say but whatever.

So anyways there it is.

Part 2…

MPAA Says It Needs To Commit More Fraud

“…We need to pose as someone other than who we are to stop illegal downloading…”

That is fraud–and that’s illegal…

The bill,  SB1666, in California, “would have barred investigators from making ‘false, fictitious or fraudulent’ statements or representations to obtain private information about an individual, including telephone calling records, Social Security numbers and financial information. ”

But because of the trade association named the MPAA said, “…the bill would interfere with piracy investigations…the association ‘doesn’t want to hamstring investigators.'”

A much more narrow bill was  passed, “that bans the use of deceit to obtain telephone calling records, and nothing else. ”

Why?

Have people lost their minds?

Who bewitched these lawmakers into listening and doing the will and desires of the MPAA?!

“…the bill would interfere with piracy investigations…the association ‘doesn’t want to hamstring investigators.'”

You know what that means?

It means:

“The bill wouldn’t allow us to commit fraud to therefore extort consumers under the pretext that they are commiting ‘piracy’ and we don’t want to be under scrutiny by investigators because then that would mean we’d have to cripple them.”

It’s a threat.

The MPAA Says It Needs To Commit More Fraud

And the MPAA would lead people to believe that downloading media files off the internet is a ‘crime’ when in reality they’re commtting felonies.

The MPAA thinks it’s the government–it thinks it’s the FBI and Interpol

Someone put the board members of the MPAA on trial.

Free Speech–Revisted

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, whom might be a Presidential Candidate said that, “…the country will be forced to reexamine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism.”

What? Why?

“…to reduce terrorists’ ability to use the Internet and free speech to recruit and get out their message,” the article states.

So the Constitution is going to be revamped to “meet the threat of terrorism”?

…”meet the threat of terrorism” with more terrorism because everybody is a ‘terrorist’ right?

Everything that is done in today in government is seemed to be prefixed with “terrorism”–to stop it, to reduce it, to prevent, etc.

Anything that may be proposed may be the most blatant violation of a law, but it seems that when “terrorism” is brought in the picture it doesn’t matter…everybody but a select few people are not ‘terrorists’…everbody else is.

The ‘terrorists’ are always about to attack, release something, strike fear, etc.

But they never do…and when people begin to question or doubt…a terrorist is caught, or a bomb goes off, or a nation has WMDs, etc.

Makes you wonder who the real ‘terrorists’ are.

Here Comes The Judge…

A Federal Judge Ordered Vice President Cheney’s Visitor Logs to be opened

Somewhere along the lines I guess it was asked what for and what was it’s purpose…

Wait, wait–let me get this straight…

Oh, oh, so when someone in the ‘inner circle’ gets asked to ‘take one for the team’ it’s ‘invasion of privacy’, huh?

When it’s the American people it’s called ‘preventing terrorism’…

Really all this Federal Judge had to do is invoke ‘terrorism’ or ‘terrorist’ somewhere in his order and it would have been given to him–whatever it is he asked for and, and…a bag of chips.

Seriously, he should have read that ‘terrorism’ has now replaced please–whoa that sounded wrong.