Proposed Peer-To-Peer Law Sparks Animosity 168
coondoggie writes "The Federal Trade Commission and Distributed Computing Industry Association locked horns over a proposed law that would govern how peer-to-peer networking technology would be used and regulated. Before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, the Federal Trade Commission expressed its doubts about companies protecting sensitive consumer information (PDF) or sensitive data over P2P internet file-sharing networks. It doesn't help the P2P cause that the technology continues to pop up in bad practices. Recently a company that monitors peer-to-peer networks said it found classified information about the systems used onboard the president's helicopter in a shared folder on a computer in Iran, after a file containing the data was accidentally leaked on a peer-to-peer network last summer. Meanwhile the DCIA said any laws would likely be ineffective and stifle the business opportunities P2P can generate."
An article on CNet points out that the wording of the bill would make it apply to just about everything related to communications on the internet.
YAY! (Score:3, Insightful)
Time to get (overly?) skeptical... (Score:5, Insightful)
Recently a company that monitors peer-to-peer networks said it found classified information about the systems used onboard the president's helicopter in a shared folder on a computer in Iran, after a file containing the data was accidentally leaked on a peer-to-peer network last summer. Meanwhile the DCIA said any laws would likely be ineffective and stifle the business opportunities P2P can generate."
How do we know that this government employee didn't purposefully 'leak' the documents online or plant them at an Iranian I.P. address so that the government could have an excuse to pass an archaic and oppressive internet law?
An article on CNet points out that the wording of the bill would make it apply to just about everything related to communications on the internet.
One person, a government worker, leaks a document, and now we must all pay.
If a government worker drunk drives should we all lose our licenses and cars?
Why does it seem (Score:2, Insightful)
ZOMG!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Those Iranians, Arabs, and Terrorists use P2P networks! Lets regulate or ban them. ZOMG, they use television too. Lets ban TV networks. Oh noes, they use cars and roads too... Well, walking is good for you. Damn, they use elections too. We don't want to be like 'them' so no more elections. How much more ignorant are reporters and politicians going to get?
Oh no, they use television to broadcast government propaganda. No more .... wait, they copied that from us, so that's ok.
I'm waiting for the first idiot legislator to suggest that foreign governments and terrorists are using Linux so it too must be banned.
P2P is not the problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's people, not software that are the problem. Software is a tool and is neither good or bad. The people using it on the other hand...
Not to start anything, but this is why I am generally amused by the term "Computer Ethics". Computers are simply a tool; there might as well be something called "Blender Ethics". The real issue is simply "Ethics", which I fear some are lacking.
Re:ZOMG!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
ZOMG, they use television too.
It's true. Both sides use CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Al Jazeera, etc heavily. And yet there is no new laws proposed to regulate CNN. Probably because it's less anonymous but also because it's considered "the press" and the phrase "government regulating the press" in America is worse than insulting your favorite sports team.
You know, it would be an interesting strategy to turn the bittorrent protocol into a means of disseminating news and blogs as well as large files. I mean they're just smaller files but could have huge legal implications for regulations of it. It would be nice to see (and make sense bandwidth wise) CNN distributing their video content with embedded advertisements in torrents. How popular would they be? I'm not sure. But it would give P2P advocates a case to cry foul when the government tries to regulate the software & protocol.
I guess "Now I can't share DVDs" just doesn't sound as patriotic as "The government is controlling and censoring a new press outlet and must be stopped."
Re:Time to get (overly?) skeptical... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a government worker drunk drives should we all lose our licenses and cars?
The annoying thing is by making those documents available on p2p, the worker was already breaking countless laws and regulations. There are existing protections in place for this type of thing but rather than rely on the fact that he could be fined/fired/arrested/barred from future government work and if he was a contractor his company was also fined/penalized against future contract bids, the solution is to make yet another law standing in the way of legitimate use of p2p.
The typical outcome of regulation is (Score:2, Insightful)
Not the fault of P2P per se (Score:5, Insightful)
Any security breaches are not the fault of P2P per se. Why was there a computer with classified documents where the user was allowed to install software and connect directly to the Internet? The user could have installed Apache and made the entire hard drive accessible through HTTP at that point.
Ultimately the entire Internet is peer-to-peer. All these "P2P" applications do is make it easier for the peers to find each other.
Re:Time to get (overly?) skeptical... (Score:5, Insightful)
The leaking of a government file is only the excuse. The real goal is to eliminate ignorance by the user of what the software does for purposes of prosecution of the user for sharing copyrighted works.
I.e. this is meant to inform all users of P2P software of their overt actions in making available files so that the RIAA has a stronger case.
Ban Element 8! (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a well established scientific fact that 100% of terrorists use a readily available, totally unregulated oxidizing agent to maintain their very existence here on God's green Earth!
This extremely destructive agent has been used in nuclear missile propulsion systems, high explosive devices, and is a leading cause of infrastructure collapse!
Known as 'Element 8' This substance must be banned! Our wise and benevolent leaders have been combining Element 8 with simple carbon atoms in order to render it harmless and reduce its availability to the terrorists. These valiant efforts are opposed by environmental activists who are merely duped by our socialist enemies!
Write to your Congressman and Senator today and have them join the fight to ban 'Element 8', before it is used to destroy us all!
</sarcasm>
Re:P2P is not the problem. (Score:3, Insightful)
The real issue is simply "Ethics", which I fear some are lacking.
It does reveal (in some aspects) the childishness of our society. We have to be so explicit in the "dos and don'ts" and aren't left to our own to think what our actions might really entail. We are left with a "Four legs good, Two legs bad" impression of our world without the understanding of what that really means.
I would try education before legislation.
Re:After Looking at the CNET article (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, someone who actually read an article and figured out it's (a) not much of a regulation and (b) about software, not networks.
Whether or not you need to be warned each time depends on the interpretation of "initial activation" in "immediately prior to initial activation of a file sharing function of such program..."
Otherwise, yes. For already-sane P2P clients, this adds minor annoyance, and nothing else. It does, as someone pointed out, seriously injure the "I didn't know I was sharing it" defense for child pornography and copyright infringement.
Re:It's True (Score:2, Insightful)
You know whats funny about the whole situation is if they didn't want them on the internet they wouldn't make it there if they had a good security team in place.
The Internet is the P2P system (Score:4, Insightful)
Please remember that the architecture of the Internet makes it the world's first P2P system; albeit with a lousy user interface.
All regulation of P2P systems and what you can do with them or not logically must apply to the Internet as a whole, because there is
no fundamental functional difference between a fancy P2P system and the raw Internet.
This is why all legislation targeted specifically at P2P systems is both misguided and extremely dangerous to the future of the net as a whole.
Re:Intent good, impossible to legislate (Score:3, Insightful)
Who decides what "p2p apps" to ban and which to approve? Furthermore, what criteria do they judge them on?
There is increasingly a separation between the actual applications (the clients), and the protocol itself, case in point: there are dozens of bittorrent clients. Do only sleazy malware clients get banned, or do entire protocols? What exactly makes a protocol "bad"? Why should anyone be in the business of telling me what sort of software I can write and run myself?
Another dumf*ck law brought to you by.. (Score:3, Insightful)
The slackjawed,walleyed, bucktoothed, illiterate, inbreds that brought you "The war on drugs" "gun control" the DMCA and all the draconian shit supposedly to "save the children" and make sex offenders out of teenage boys who make the mistake of screwing teenage girls.
Re:P2P is not the problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't agree that it is childish. It's the way our society was created and is the halmark of freedom and liberty. You see, we operate under the assumption of we can until something with authority says we can't. Now morals, like this impressed by religions, fraternity groups (eagles, elks, boy scouts) civil societies (bar associations, trade groups/unions) and so on are all relative instead of absolute now.
It used to be a system of absolute morality in which it was a given of what was expected and how we treated each other as well as expected to be treated. but in out enlighten society, it's all about relative morality now. This took us from a solid how will my actions effect others to a how will my actions effect me. With that shift has come a shift the stuff that you seem to think makes us childish now.
I would try education before legislation too but without a shift back to absolute morality to some degree, it will be more or less an exercise in futility.