MPAA Blocked Identity Theft Law, Because They Need To Be Able To Spy On People
from the how-nice-of-them dept
A few months back, of course, you'll recall the big scandal over HP's use of "pretexting" to spy on various people to figure out who leaked some information from the board of directors. Pretexting is a nice way of describing a basic form of social engineering identity theft. Basically, you call up a company pretending to be someone in order to get their information. It seems pretty clear it should be illegal, and while Patricia Dunn was eventually charged with crimes over the practice, there were plenty of questions as to whether or not California laws actually made pretexting illegal. This surprised many people, who then started trying to push through such laws, which haven't really gone very far. In fact, there were similar laws that politicians had tried to put in place earlier that had failed as well.A bunch of folks have submitted this morning that a Wired News investigation found out that the California law to make pretexting illegal had strong (nearly unanimous) support... until the MPAA killed it. Apparently, MPAA lobbyists explained to California politicians that they need to use this identity theft method to spy on file sharers. This isn't an idle threat either. The entertainment industry has a long history of doing pretty questionable surveillance activity. They've stalked the CEO of Kazaa and folks who worked on the Pirate Bay. They also were caught doing a pretty thorough private investigation of one accused file sharer's children, collecting all sorts of non-public information on them in order to scare the mother. And, now we know why it was legal for them to do so: they simply prevent any laws against it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
a shame..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
now, i'm not saying that the *aa should just leave pirace alone. but i am saying that there is a line (how welldefined, is yet to be determined) that should not be crossed. if cops do it, it's entrapment. if a private company does it, it's all fine and dandy peachy-keen. seriously.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Here's the hope:
Haw! Who am I fooling?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Payback?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Here's the hope:
...that this will propel the corruptness of our nations politicians out into the open and enough eyes will open to how our government is run by the entertainment industry.
HA! yeah, who are we fooling...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Payback?
Wouldn't it be killer to expose an MPAA guy having an affair or something? Track down some phone bills, hotel bills, something like that and burn them at their own game.
Troops, take the hill!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Payback?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: a shame..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Payback?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: a shame..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Payback?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
We demand the IP address from which the above offensive message was posted.
Signed,
Media And Film Industry Association (MAFIA)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No longer for the people
We are a nation for Big Business, of Big Business and the people take a back seat.
EtG
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Dear Techdirt,
We demand the IP address from which the above offensive message was posted.
Signed,
Media And Film Industry Association (MAFIA)
Yeah... pretty much. Aren't there some ani-racketeering charges that can be thrown their way by now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah... pretty much. Aren't there some ani-racketeering charges that can be thrown their way by now?
MPAA Exec: "Silly fool. We have already had the laws of racketeering rewritten so that we have full immunity from them."
Chris Rock made a very good point in one of his specials a few years ago. When someone makes a fortune on something (even if its unhealthy, illegal, and/or immoral) they will go back and change the law to protect their fortunes and to ensure that no one can do the same thing (think tobacco industry).
And I know this is off topic but why is it that every object known to man that can be bought in a store has a list of ingredients execpt for cigarrettes?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stupid stupid
But then a news item like this, on the other hand, does more to make me lose sympathy for them than all of those arguments combined. I swear they are their own worst enemy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]