MPAA Blocked Identity Theft Law, Because They Need To Be Able To Spy On People

from the how-nice-of-them dept

Fri, Dec 1st 2006 8:50am — Mike Masnick

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

21 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 8:58am

a shame..
But now we know that californias legislators are indeed bought and paid for by the entertainment industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- just_me, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:20am
  
  Re: a shame..
  But now we know that californias legislators are indeed bought and paid for by the entertainment industry.
  I think that's been obvious for a long time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:22am
    
    Re: Re: a shame..
    This reminds me of southpark's "I am above the law!"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 9:30am

wow, that's scary. it's nice to know your 4th (is it 4th) amendment rights are protected, unless someone has more money than you.

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 chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:31am
  
  Re:
  wow, that's scary. it's nice to know your 4th (is it 4th) amendment rights are protected, unless someone has more money than you.
  The bill of rights went out the window a long time ago. Remember, the U.S. is now in a "state of war" that will probably never end and constitutional rights don't apply in times of war.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Get it straight., 1 Dec 2006 @ 12:11pm
  
  Re:
  Not agreeing with what the MPAA is doing and they shouldn't have permission to do it. But it wouldn't be entrapment if the police did this either. If the police do this without a warrant to conduct an investigation it would be considered unreasonable search and seizure. Entrapment is when you trick someone into committing a criminal act and then arrest them for it. There are very few times that you cannot claim entrapment and that is during narcotics operations where they attempt to make purchases. The logic behind this (which has been upheld in the supreme court) is that the individual who is providing the narcotics already has access to illegal narcotics with an intent to sell and therefor has already committed a crime. I know this is off topic but I always see people throwing legal terminology out there when they have no idea what they are talking about so I thought I would set the record straight.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:04am

It's such as shame that they don't have to abide by the same rules and laws as the rest of the citizens do. It is illegal to access someone elses computer,network w/out the individual permission of the owner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:05am

Here's the hope:
...that this will propel MPAA practices out into the open and enough eyes will open to how wrong the MPAA is; that the desires of corporations do not trump civil rights.

Haw! Who am I fooling?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:09am
  
  Re: Here's the hope:
  Here's another 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 chronology ]
Daemon, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:06am

Payback?
Some one should do some serious "pretexting" on legislators and MPAA bosses - give them the taste of their own medicine? Somehow I found out that usually works the best - people don't understand explanations too well until they end up in other's shoes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:15am
  
  Re: Payback?
  Brilliant idea - someone should mobilize a team of activists to do some pretexting on the MPAA people. Just find out stuff about their family and whatnot, then send them a nice, anonymous note to let them know how easy it was to gather that information, largely due to their blocking of the law in California. Maybe even suggest to them what a less scrupulous person could do with that info.
  
  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 chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:19am
    
    Re: Re: Payback?
    It would be FAR more effective to take to pretexting those corrupt politicians and publicly exposing the results.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Daemon, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:21am
    
    Re: Re: Payback?
    Actually politicians would be a much better target - expose couple of shady deals (and I'm sure it is easy to find dirt on anyone, won't even have to look hard - honest politician? yeah right) - and I'll bet you anything the law will be pushed through in record time. Just make it very clear what was used to get this dirt.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:25am
    
    Re: Re: Payback?
    Brilliant idea - someone should mobilize a team of activists to do some pretexting on the MPAA people.
    Laws don't apply equally to everyone. What you suggest would probably get you arrested.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 10:33am

The people who work for the RIAA and MPAA are no different thatn any other slice of american culture. I'm quite sure that if you dig into their closets you'll find all sorts of skeletons; from child porn and molestation to domestic abuse to repeat DWI offenders. Hell, if you dig hard enough, you might (read: probably will) even find a couple of actual skeletons of those who were dumb enough to try this very thing. Trust me when I tell you that for every skeleton you find in their closets, they'll pay someone to find 10 in yours, even if they have to put them there themselves. Then, they'll pay that same person a LOT of money to get rid of the skeletons from their own closets. Of course, these people have already paid off everyone they need to pay to get their 14 y/o teenager's 5th DWI dropped/expunged/sealed so that no one will ever know. Meanwhile they're berating you for being a bad parent because your kid downloaded a couple of songs and a movie or two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Dec 2006 @ 11:00am
  
  Re:
  The people who work for the RIAA and MPAA...
  Dear Techdirt,
  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 chronology ]
  - Dosquatch, 1 Dec 2006 @ 12:37pm
    
    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 chronology ]
    - Sanguine Dream, 1 Dec 2006 @ 1:38pm
      
      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 chronology ]
Eric the Grey, 1 Dec 2006 @ 12:17pm

No longer for the people
I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

We are a nation for Big Business, of Big Business and the people take a back seat.

EtG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex Hagen, 1 Dec 2006 @ 1:49pm

Stupid stupid
You know, Mike has spent all this time recently listing reasons why the entertainment industry is wrong and mostly, in my opinion, failing to do so very well.

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 chronology ]
julissa, 28 Mar 2007 @ 6:13am

this is gay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]