Feds Overstate Software Piracy's Link To Terrorism 448
Lucas123 writes "Attorney General Michael Mukasey claims that terrorists sell pirated software as a way to finance their operations, without presenting a shred of evidence for his case. He's doing it to push through a controversial piece of intellectual property legislation that would increase IP penalties, increase police power, set up a new agency to investigate IP theft, and more. 'Criminal syndicates, and in some cases even terrorist groups, view IP crime as a lucrative business, and see it as a low-risk way to fund other activities,' Mukasey told a crowd at the Tech Museum of Innovation last week."
Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Funny)
DO you think the type of person that requires help moving their computer from one room to another would be able to figure out how to work an FTP client, or what a "tracker" was?
This is why my sister always asks me for a copy of Photoshop for her birthday. She has no idea how to get it for free online.
SHHH!!!! Don't tell her I have been secretly slipping her copies of the GIMP all these years.
Kids, if you like a piece of software...BUY IT!
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
Dodgy bloke on the corner? No, he just has shitty DVD's.
That shifty looking geyser at the pub? Nope, All he has are the latest chart singles's and the last few Now! CDs.
My mates cousin nobby? Nah, he can chip my Xbox and sell me pirate games, but no Photoshop here.
I've seen pirated software at computer fairs a long time ago, in the days of dialup, but these days, no chance. The common way for someone who doesn't know where to get it online, is the old CD passed about, you only need 1 nerd to download it, then hte CD can go round dozen of thier mates.
the only pirate stuff I've ever seen actually sold anytime recently are console games sold to chavs with no PC. I've not seen anyone selling a pirate PC game or software since like 1996. Even back in the days of the Amiga, all the pirate stuff we had was copied off mates, either you bought the real one, or you copied a mate's real one, no-one bought a copy, all the dodgy market stalls sold fuzzy-pictured VHS, never computer games or software.
Seriously, do you know any shop, market stall, or random bloke at all who would sell you a pirate copy of photoshop, or any other PC software?
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Informative)
You may not even know if software you are buying is pirated. A few years back a friend lent me a cd folder full of games. All of them had the game logos on the cds, and most of them had full colour booklets with them. I ended up asking my friend how much he had spent on the games in the folder, and replied: hardly anything, they are all pirated. He bought them somewhere in Asia. They take piracy a bit more seriously over there, you don't just get a blank cd with the games name scribbled on it in felt pen, you get a full colour box, authentic looking cd, the works.
The bigger problem for game companies than people downloading torrents, is illegal factories which are producing pirated versions of games (and other types of software) which can be sold at lost cost, are hard to tell apart from the real deal. Many people who buy these games are unaware that they even have an illegal copy.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Funny)
I'll second that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Did I really just say that? I've been here to long.
Re: (Score:2)
Most are sheep, and believe the garbage fed to them by the media.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you can make a reasonable, unfounded, and simply ignorant link to terrorists on any basis, it is perfectly alright to circumvent the constitution.
I think if the constitution needs to be trampled on to stop terrorists, then we are lucky to have this emboldened administration down on all fours playing twister on it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The US Government hasn't even yet provided much in the way of credible evidence to backup their 9/11 conspiracy theory. So it would be expecting a lot to expect them to provide any evidence for anything more recent than about 7 years ago.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Its not just republicans, democrats are guilty too. In fact, I would go as far as to say that conservatives (not necessarily republicans) are the lesser of two evils. I don't see the democrats supporting free software any more then republicans. I don't see democrats striking down draconian laws such as the DMCA. Now they have supported some needed things such as the toning-down of the patriot act because 85% of it wasn't needed 6
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
I call bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, the current administration is guilty of that crap.
What about the last administration and it's wagging the dog wars in Somalia and Kosovo - where there was NO US interest at all let alone oil interests? When groups [findarticles.com] opposed to the administration suddenly found themselves audited [findarticles.com] by the IRS? Where hundreds of FBI files on political opponents turned up in the White House (can you say Nixon?)
The parent poster was right. The democrats will violate your rights just as quick as the Republicans. They will just feed you a story you can swallow, instead of one the Republicans can swallow.
Re:I call bullshit (Score:4, Funny)
This may be true but you have to admit the Republicans are a lot better at it.
Re:I call bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)
This may be true but you have to admit the Republicans are a lot better at it.
Don't be so sure. If compare, say, Nixon vs. Clinton, or Bush vs. FDR, you would have to conclude that at least Democrats are better at getting away with it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
People "pirate" software to get it for free!
Re:I call bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't even really a left/right thing (well, the right as an actual cultural force, if not as the political expression of conservatism, is closer to the cultural of nationalist values and bellicosity, but..) It's what the Republicans have chosen to exploit for political capital. I attribute it to Rove's neo-conservatism, not to the historical Republican party. But them's still the facts on the ground. (And Rove, Rumsfeld, etc all share origins in the Nixon administration's realignment of the Republican party.)
Re:I call bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I call bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
You really know nothing about the conservative movement you think you are part of.
Re:I call bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
Somalia and Kosovo?
Somalia and Kosovo?
After the last seven years, all you have to say is fucking Somalia and Kosovo?
Yeah, all administrations wag the dog.
The Bush administration wagged the whole fucking planet.
Please.
Re:I call bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
True, ALL governments are merely thugs who passed power down to their buddies (Clinton and Bush the elder vacation together, when they're not on TV)... but the peons who uphold said governments seem to think that a whole bunch of FALLIBLE MORTALS can rule over a bunch of FALLIBLE MORTALS who seemingly are more fallible and cannot be trusted to run their own lives.
You people amuse me beyond any measure. All who clamor government is necessary seem to think that governments provide justice, peace, honesty or some other measure of virtue. They must've missed the courts that rarely side with the truth, courts that rule against their own laws (even that so called "law of the land") courts that require you to have massive cash flow to even keep up with the case, nevermind actually win... am I missing anything?
And you all PAY for this, vote for this, and have even come under the impression that these thugs have your best interests in mind.
Wow. Just... wow.
Re:I call bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
You speak as if you're above us all. You talk like the elite claim to disdain.
Sanctimonious prick.
It seems clear, it's about power. (Score:5, Interesting)
This looks to me, to be a move by the current head of the fbi to either attack the internet, or control it.
First we saw wikileaks get shut down by the courts, something completely unheard of, but it happened.
Then we see the story of the illegal hyperlinks and fbi stings.
Now we have the story of the fbi claiming that the terrorists are also software pirates.
I'm waiting for them to say the terrorists run linux and post on Slashdot. Also combine this with the battle over network neutrality.
Can someone piece together the big picture? Am I seeing a conspiracy where there is no conspiracy? Is this just about the fbi trying to increase it's power? Is this part of a strategy to attack the net? What exactly is going on?
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
Not so cut and dried as that. The economy is in pretty bad shape and in order to prevent a major depression in the US and potentially the world, all the politicians are aware that they have to ensure that the economy has some positive momentum not only for their re-election but for the country as a whole.
This started long before the House Market fell apart. This started back when China opened it's doors for economic growth. All the transferable bottom income jobs moved out of the US, leaving us with skilled labor, hi-tech, business management, and hair dressers (you can't out-source a haircut just yet.). But we as a nation failed to recognize that most people who is somewhere south of $50,000 a year is in jeopardy of permanently loosing there job same as the telegraph operator. The probability of job loss is inversely proportional to the salary.
As these jobs left the US, the economy naturally has to decline because there is less work and less salary being generated and so less economic momentum. But most people who lost their jobs didn't advance their capabilities into a new position, they just got another job of the same type. And that left them extremely vulnerable.
The jobs that remained in the US at the low end of the economic scale either can't be out-sourced (service jobs) or are not competing on a global scale (niche market in US) or in some way local to the US.
Now we introduce the terrorists and confidence declines. Economic momentum is like collecting Yu-Gi-Oh cards. They are valuable and long as people believe they are. But once confidence dropped there started a ripple effect of companies decreasing their orders and consumers canceling or lessening their non-vital services (hair dressers, manicures, lawn service, computer upgrades).
And now we starting hitting the housing market because people who expected a raise/advance in career didn't get it and through salary compression they started to lose the ability to fund their loans. And with the ARM coming due, they were wiped out.
Add to that the fact that most of the people who are losing their homes are not from a generation where 3% growth in a company is considered pretty decent. 1990 to 2001 represents a time of unusual economic growth and when we can no longer sustain 10-50% growth but only 5% it's considered a failure. But from 1900 to 1980 5% would have been considered good to great. The people who were moving into the McMansions had no clue how the world economy has historically operated and made a critical mistake. Personally I think it's their own fault and to bail them out is a crime in itself. But we have to keep the economic momentum.
With outsourcing, global competition, and the transfer of our lower work forces to other skills, we as a nation will be hard pressed to realize 5% growth over a continuous basis for some years to come.
And with that, we are very careful of the economic impacts we have with political decisions. Changing the economy by 3% against a nominal growth of 15% is nothing, but now we are risking 3% +/- 3% and that's too close to the edge. It's going to be a very difficult 20 years.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)
And which of the parties' presidential candidates is beating the drum of war and playing the security-panic card? I think that would, again, be the Republicans.
Re:You forgot the word "Yet" (Score:5, Interesting)
Douglas Kmiec's basis for supporting Obama is an interesting one, as well, because it seems he is one of the few people who actually has been listening to what Obama has been saying and watching what he has been doing. Obama is a Democrat who tells the underclass to stop relying on the state, being particularly critical of the culture of dependence that has harmed the African American poor over the past several decades. This doesn't make Obama a conservative. He's not. But then, who is? Certainly not McCain.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Which Congress passed the law? Which President was burning his political capital for too many other things to risk a fight with Congress by using his veto?
Not that I'm saying he didn't support it, I'm saying you do have to look at who passed the law *first* because the veto is not an option most Presidents just wield willy-nilly. Yes, Bush signed USAPATRIOT, but I mostly blame Congress who passed the law without even reading, much less debating, the fucking thing.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
So long as politicians can be un-elected by such accusations, the problem will continue.
Maybe we need a new slogan:
Won't anyone think of the Citizens??!
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)
Then maybe you need to open you damned eyes and read quite a bit more.
Maybe you should go back to the 80s when Mr. Gore allowed his wife and her friends in the PMRC to have special senate hearings aimed at *BANNING* or censoring certain artists they deemed too explicit. Mr. Gore was more than willing to let his wife have her moraliztic diatribe at your expense, to attempt to restrict and control your freedom of choice.
Corporate State or Nanny State, this is what you are voting for.
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Informative)
Also, for the record, they were never advocating "*BANNING*" (bolded, asterisked, all-caps, or otherwise) anything. It was mostly a bunch of silly visibility-reduction tactics (that would, of course, only increase the sales of the targeted albums via heightened cachet...) and, of course, the parental-advisory stickers we see to this day (that the industry adopted before the hearings were even held).
Believe me, I never had any love for the PMRC, but out-and-out misinformation isn't going to help anything -- except an attempt to smear Al Gore. And that's not at all what you were trying to do...right?
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
Regime change was the official policy of the Clinton Administration.
And ya might want to read this [cfr.org]. Gore's statements about Iraq in the wake of 9/11. The money shot: "As far as I am concerned, a final reckoning with that government should be on the table".
I do think Gore would have been better at forming a broader coalition. Democrats are better at making back-room deals, knowing how the grease the wheels. It comes from their dedication to the culture of bureaucracy.
The Iraqis have an opportunity to join modern nations with a functioning democracy - they are moving closer to being a modern democracy like Turkey every day. Still a long way away, but clearly a better situation that having Saddam or one of his psychopathic sons in charge, likely for the next half-century.
But I guess all you care about is your own green grass.
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
pass the cool-aid and the crack when you're done with it man.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And ya might want to read this. Gore's statements about Iraq in the wake of 9/11. The money shot: "As far as I am concerned, a final reckoning with that government should be on the table".
Oh please. And stopping genocide in Darfur, and wherever it occurs, is the official policy of the U.N. There's a big difference between an official policy of "regime change" and devoting a huge portion of your military to invading. Bush has said the nuc
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Like the burning of the Reichstag, 9/11 (yeah, Saddam did it and so did you, for all we know), and a hundred other false flags and set-ups.
"In politics, nothing happens by accident." - Roosevelt
Wait, excuse moi? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wait, excuse moi? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Interesting)
They settled for something very similar to George Bush's strategy of "Pre-emptive Attack" and attacked a naval base on an island in an illegally stolen territory within the American Regional Empire. Their strike was an obvious contingency, so the valuable ships (spanky new aircraft carriers) were all sent out to sea, leaving behind (mostly) relatively older battleships and cruisers.
For more facts on this, I would recommend Daniel Yergin's "The Prize". [amazon.com]
You are not insightful. You are more of an ignorant troll.
RS
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, "bootheel" is a bit too strong. Indonesians did not hate the Dutch as much as the lands conquered by Britain tended to hate the British. The Dutch, while still a colonial force, didn't treat the Indonesians dismissively and many Dutch actually rather liked Indonesia and took on a lot of Indonesian customs. Hell, after the first Dutch ship landed in Bali, half the crew refused to leave. Now, of course, they have to deal with those damned Australians :-p
Re:Well duh (Score:4, Insightful)
"Genuine" Windows Vista... (Score:5, Funny)
Putting the "death" back in BSOD.
Warning, buzzword overload ! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No shame (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No shame (Score:5, Insightful)
And to answer your question, next the government will claim terrorists are raising funds through an elaborate cheese laundering operation. First stealing US Gov. Cheese, then selling it on the black market at fantastic profit margins. Everyone, please turn in your local Dairy Farmer (he's undoubtedly in on the operation)!
Re:No shame (Score:5, Informative)
The total spend on illegal drugs in the US alone is over $1 trillion!. This money goes to organized crime, gangsters, crooked police and politicians, and to terrorists.
Have a look at Afghanistan, which is currently supplying a large percentage of the world's heroin trade. The funds are then used to fight the US, NATO and other allies in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Just another cost of the "war on drugs". Current US drug policies, which are also forced on the rest of the world, are widely recognized to be counter-productive. And why? The side-effects of heroin are constipation and the risk of overdose. Overdose is a problem caused by erratic potencies, which is a result of illegality.
However certain people make a lot of money from the war on drugs. Thus the policy does not change.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Did he just imply that the child porn was copy written? The whole speech was on IP laws. And what do mobsters have to do with anything or the russians. Think it might be possible hes trying to link mafia, russians and CP, things people dont like in the states to piracy? Come on, russians maybe but the mob and CP is
Well then (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice joke. As with most good jokes you actually present a solution to the accused "problem".
If what he said is true there is a certain way to ensure that the terrorists do not make any money on infringing copyright. And this solution would also ensure that there is never a market for illegal copies of copyrighted works. Piracy (as the music industry is defining it) will destroy the market of the terrorists, and anybody else trying to make money off illegally copying copyright protected works.
The solutio
Try again, I'm afraid (Score:3, Insightful)
Utter lies (Score:5, Insightful)
It is absolutely despicable that we've become so fat and complacent, that we allow our government to pull these sorts of stunts. Looking at the proposed legislation, one should note that IP infringement might be punished more severely than rape, if these laws are to become real. Actually, we should see the whole thing as a rape... the rape of our Constitution, and every value that made our society ever so slightly better than the regimes we like to fight so much.
Re:Utter lies (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do you think campaign financing reform is drastically needed, but will never happen? When the government puts the needs of corporations before the needs of its citizens, it's already way too late. Hope you have your bug-out package and bribe money to get a coyote to pass you through the border...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I like buying software from terrorists... (Score:5, Funny)
Duh (Score:2, Insightful)
oh, how convenient (Score:5, Insightful)
Smoke locally grown pot (as most pot in the US is): you're supporting the terrorists!
Download your music through a peer to peer network: you're supporting the terrorists!
Pirate your software: you're supporting the terrorists!
It's the red scare [wikipedia.org] all over again, but with a different enemy, isn't it? "Don't forget to go spend all your money on things you don't need and can't afford. If you don't spend more than you make and support our corporate buddies, you clearly want the terrorists to win."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And that's relevant to the parent posts' point how, exactly?
I know more than one person who will smoke weed, but won't smoke opium because it actually does support terrorists, at least somewhat...
The fact that you have a personal objection to other people's drug of choice doesn't necessarily mean those people are supporting terrorists. I suppose a straw man argument is better than an outright fabrication, but you're dangerously close to the claims of the A.G.
Re:oh, how ironic (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, though the whole reason you got the response is you were replying to a post that only mention MJ -- and MJ has been specifically target as somehow funding terrorism -- with what was essentially a non sequitor about opium.
But since we're on the subject, there's two funny parts about this opium in Afghanistan thing:
1) While they were actively trying to stomp it out while in power, now that they're trying to fund an
Oh no I'm confused!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Pot, Kettle (Score:2)
Tired of all this 'terrorism' rhetoric. (Score:2)
Re:Tired of all this 'terrorism' rhetoric. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the government really isn't afraid of terrorists, but making sure the citizens are allows them to expand their budgets, clamp down harder on John Q Citizen's movements and basic Constitutionally-recognised freedoms, and allows it to ignore international conventions to the point where the US has already been declared an outlaw nation. Geedubya has already told us the 'War on Terror' will last over a hundred years. That's 100 years of increased taxation, failing economy, and increased repression strictly for the gain of the politicians and their corporate masters. Our money is nearly worthless now, and it's just going to get worse as the government keeps pouring money down the Iraq/Iran/Middle East rathole. Welcome to our wonderful 21st Century, and don't forget to pray.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are a little bit right (Score:5, Interesting)
No, i'm not talking about grabbing the latest RLS off of Usenet, or racing it across FTPs. I'm talking about large scale DVD pressing facilities that are selling to the guy who is, in turn, selling to people on the street corner. Groups get to release high quality stuff, the Mob gets their source for a DVD. Its very simple.
Or did you all really think that guys were risking serious jail time and throwing down thousands on Telecine machines because it was "fun"?
Now, i don't know much about the warez scene, but I would imagine that its a very similar situation.
Organized crime != terrorism. But a lot of the really large scale operations are certainly not being run by a rogue group of 16 year olds.
Republican Legacy (Score:5, Insightful)
But I can't, because that would be a lie.
If they REALLY want to go after terrorists ... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's, what? Hundreds of billions a year in direct theft and extortion of people's and companies' hard-earned cash, plus more multibillions in anti-malware products, damage to data, equipment, and network infrastructure, costs to overbuild the net to handle the bogus traffic, lost revenue due to DDoSing, etc. Not to mention the ongoing construction and debugging of a technology that can be used for even more nefarious purposes - including espionage and sabotage.
This isn't the only lie Mukasey's told (Score:5, Informative)
Moving on to Mukasey specifically, this little fib isn't the only time he's tried to distort reality. Just a few days ago, he stated [sfgate.com] there had been "a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went."
The interesting thing about this comment is that it's impossible to know whether it's true. This supposed call was not referred to after 9/11, nor during the 9/11 Commission hearings, nor at any other time until last Thursday.
However, even if we give them the benefit of the doubt, his arguments that draw on this statement are lies. This is because he made this comment in support of increased surveillance, and also to support the despicable circumvention of the justice system with regard to telecom companies.
The lie is that "we knew about this call but we weren't able to do anything because only with this new, super-powered law can we do that". The surveillance laws at the time he says this call took place absolutely allowed the government to listen in on it. They didn't even need a warrant, as even under the older FISA law, warrants were not needed for calls that comes into the US from outside it.
He lied again when he voiced support for putting telecom companies above the law. Even though Mukasey was a federal judge, he claimed that the telco lawsuits would let the whole world know how our intelligence organizations operate.
Fellow Slashdotters, I hope you join me in saying: what the fuck?! We can't continue to let these clowns get away with shit like this. I admit I've been as lazy as most "concerned citizens" in the US seem to be lately, but seriously, I cannot allow my democracy to be flushed down the toilet by a bunch of arrogant fucks who think they can get away with whatever they want.
Re:Gotta correct that bold part (Score:4, Interesting)
They didn't even need a warrant, as even under the older FISA law, warrants were not needed for calls that comes into the US from outside it.
Yes they were. FISA explicitly spells out when a warrant is not required, and it is only when it is believed that no "U.S. Person" is a party to the call. A "U.S. person" basically means a U.S. citizen no matter where they are, or a non-citizen who is legally within the U.S. So that means any call with one end in the U.S. (where it isn't known the party in the u.s. is here illegally), or even a call that takes place entirely in a foreign country that includes a U.S. citizen, requires a warrant.
However that said, the argument that they needed a new law is BS because here is what they could have done perfectly legally: Tap the call in question immediately, and then any time within the next three days showed up before the FISA court to ask for a retro-active warrant. And as FISA's record clearly shows, if they had any reason at all to believe the call was suspect, FISA would have granted the warrant.
In other words, and this is important because it applies to all the recent surveilance too: The only reason not to get a warrant is if they had no reason at all to believe that the call is of any interest, not one tiny scrap of hearsay to suggest that it's a terrorist call. It means that as far as they knew, it was no different than the billions of other calls made daily.
So remember, whenever they say they need a new law to let them listen in on certain phone calls, that law would ONLY allow them the new power to listen to calls that are, as far as they could possibly tell, COMPLETELY INNOCENT.
sneak-and-peek (Score:4, Informative)
for the last 2 yrs or so, they have been sending out letters saying there is an 'annual apartment inspection' and that I have to let the landlord in.
the thing is, I've read as much as I can about calif civil codes and there is NO provision for 'annual inspections'. hmmmmm.
so today when the maintenance guy came by (he was 'checking' every single apartment for god knows what) I told him NO!. I refuse.
I then asked what they were looking for and he blew me off saying that since I won't let him in, I won't get to know! sheesh!
a few yrs ago there was an 'idea' by asscroft (may extreme shit be upon him) to create something called TIPS:
http://www.havenworks.com/gov/operation-tips/ [havenworks.com]
and today during a web search, I came across this link:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/brimmer1.html [antiwar.com]
which also pointed to this TIPS thing.
I'm curious, any other
clearly this is a sneak-n-peek but just not done directly by cops. they get our own citizens to rat on each other.
the TIPS thing was supposed to be cancelled in 2002 or so. you don't really believe it was cancelled do you? it just went more underground.
I mention this because the current administration is running a-foul of the law of the land and he's trying to write his own 'king' ticket. they know that by getting citizens to spy on each other, that will keep the climate of fear alive.
anyway, hopefully hearing about TIPS and the 'annual apartment inspections' (that are quite illegal by my reading of section 1954 of the calif civil code. any lawyers here want to comment on that?) will get you clued in and aware of what is really going on in our country.
if the apartment manager wants to 'see your place' they should have an URGENT and real reason and not just to 'check for code violations'.
the story they used on me was they wanted to 'check outlets, the carpet, the balcony, general condition and plumbing around the apartment'. sure sounds like a FISHING EXPEDITION to me. what do you think?
I told them no and they wrote 'refused' on my form. how much you want to bet this ends up in some DC filing cabinet next to my name?
wonderful country we now have, here
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(seriously).
I'm in norcal. bay area.
I don't like the sound of this intimidation game (of theirs).
I'm protesting because I think its a bad precedent to ALLOW these unauthorized phishing expeditions. and if that is enough to get me 'in trouble' then I think we all have a lot to worry about, in the long run.
again, this seems to be a very new thing - the last year or two, only. before that, I think I had a good 10 years or more (in the same place) of undisturbed 'quiet enjoyment' (ev
They're breaking the law! Quick - pass more laws! (Score:3, Insightful)
I've noticed a trend in modern politics that the answer to problems with people breaking the law is to pass more laws. Instead of, you know, trying to enforce the laws we already have. Of course, the new laws never seem to hit their nominal 'target' but instead hit other targets. In this case, isn't *selling* pirated copyrighted materials already a *criminal* offense? I was always understanding that individual, not-for-profit copying was a civil matter, while commercial piracy was a criminal matter. Is that not the case?
More great 'leadership' from our do-nothing government.
Re:They're breaking the law! Quick - pass more law (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I don't like politicians.
More laws=More criminals (Score:3, Insightful)
The only benefit of having more laws is that you have more criminals.
Terrorists manipulate senators to pass bad laws (Score:3, Insightful)
As a bonus, fixing this would get the background reasoning for senate decisions investigated and put out in the open where it should be.
Vik
Uhh... (Score:3, Interesting)
Oil (Score:4, Insightful)
In other news Timothy McVeigh sold bumper stickers and so the Feds have launched a task force to crack down on bumper sticker trademark slogan piracy.
There's a shock (Score:4, Insightful)
Real terrorism (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is people wanting to feel honest (Score:3, Interesting)
Basically the organized criminals have discovered what the RIAA and MPAA never seem to work out, which is to say that people will pay for the ability to feel legitimate in their purchases.
Sure the legal justification is shaky at best(and in some places purchasing stolen goods can get you jail time), and the funds are going to people who are likely more morally repugnant than the record industry, but people pay it.
Wait wait wait (Score:3, Funny)
People PAY for pirated software? LOL. Glad I'm not funding terrorism, because I don't pay.
It's all bullshit anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news, oil linked to terrorism (Score:3, Insightful)
Better play it safe (Score:3, Insightful)
Seeing how I certainly wouldn't want to fund such scum, and how it is impossible for a casual consumer to tell counterweight goods from genuine ones, I suppose this means that I'll have to download all of my IP stuff from BitTorrent from now on. Yes, I know, it might hurt the creators; but if you pay anyone, the money might find its way to the hands of terrorists, and we wouldn't want that, now would we ?
If you don't warez, the terrorists win ! Think of the children and keep those torrents seeding !
Re: (Score:2)
Windows? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A more serious matter is paid sperm donors! yes some paid sperm donors are similarly Muslims, some of the Muslims are going to donated the money, some of which will knowingly or unkno