Comments on: Idiots Linking to HD-DVD Crack Code Fund Terrorism

By: Jaloopa

Jaloopa — Wed, 23 May 2007 15:09:54 +0000

If it isn’t widely known how to copy a DVD then the organized criminals (and possibly “terrorists”) who work out how to, or find someone who can, will be able to make a lot of money as they are the only ones who can do the pirating. If the key is widely known then anybody (potentially) could copy a DVD, andso won’t buy their pirate copies off the big organizations. So distributing the key, or ripping apps, torrents or any other way to get pirated films directly into the hands of the end user _hinders_ terrorists if anything.

By: Balrog_Bob

Balrog_Bob — Fri, 11 May 2007 08:18:34 +0000

Personally I feel that intellectual property as a whole is utterly useless, as IP based lawsuits waste both taxpayer money and valuable court time. That and it is impossible to protect _anything_ from being copied. We can copy animals and people (though illegal, like piracy), as well as cast molds of desirable objects. Now, electronic goods have no physical existence, therefore should not have a form of “protection” applied to them, as “stealing” them is impossible. Theft is the removal of property from the possession of others. The “theft” of intellectual property is actually the copying of intellectual property. The mass piracy simply has nothing to do with this issue. The public release of this random string of Hexadecimal letters will have no impact on the sale of illegally manufactured dvds, as they have had the code for up to 2 months prior to public knowledge. 2 final points; 1. Piracy, as we now understand it, is a cleaver marketing ploy by corporate entities as well as law bodies to make the unauthorized (as i refuse to accept the illegality of it) copying of IP seem much worse than it is. It works, to a point. The first thing anyone thinks when they hear the word “pirate”, is cutthroat, murder, plunderer, duelist, and rouge, all of which evoke a negative connotation. 2. This string IS a random one, by the involved companies own admission, and this will have minimal impact anyway, as their _lovely_ DRM scheme accounts for the possible assertion of the decryption keys.
In closing, there is more, and at the same time, much _less_ to this issue as most would have you believe. I offer my respect for having the presence of mind to calmly and coolly argue and research you point.
Balrog_Bob, Pirate.

By: kroq

kroq — Tue, 08 May 2007 16:16:06 +0000

Tim: I agree insofar as 9/11 was a relatively small deal - it just seemed big to Americans who aren’t used to dealing with that kind of stuff every day. Still, I think the opposite liberal knee-jerk reaction to automatically dismiss terrorism (and I’m way left-wing) is also problematic.

Shawn: you make a good argument regarding the fault issue - if they are dumb enough to encrypt everything in a way that can and will be broken, well, they really can’t complain too much. At the same time, however, there seems to me to be a fine line. After all, if you figured out someone’s ATM code, you wouldn’t broadcast it (if you were a nice, decent guy anyway) - you’d tell that person so they could change it.

I think what bugs me about it is just the casual way in which people seem to disregard the other side of the argument. To be perfectly frank: I know I don’t know the ins and outs of this issue. Frankly, I might even swap sides if I were %100 informed about all arguments for both sides. I posted this originally because (1) I was a bit disgusted with how excited everyone was getting about spreading the crack and (2) I wanted to keep peoples’ minds opens to both side of the issue.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Tue, 08 May 2007 01:09:32 +0000

Fair enough… By my own admission, my argument is a bit alarmist, too, for good reason. My problem with your argument was that, by linking HD-DVD encryption keys to terrorism, this became a matter of national security and it is clearly not. On the missile key argument, yes, it might be a bit irresponsible to not pursue other avenues prior to releasing missile code. I’d liken it to something similar to how information security industry unofficially handles software flaws… Notify the vendor, give them time to fix the problem, then, if they refuse to fix the problem, release. Sure, I agree, missile codes are a bit different than another buffer overflow in Windows, but the point is the same. Hell, I work for a fairly major IT vendor who deals with stuff like this all the time. But, even when someone releases a vulnerability without notifying us, as angry as it makes me, the fault still lies with us… Especially if we knew about the issue beforehand and failed to fix it in a timely manner. So, should I exercise better judgment in releasing things like missile launch codes publicly? Sure, you could make that argument. But the root of the problem is trying to make others responsible for a system that is terribly flawed to begin with.

Thanks for the debate!

Shawn

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 07 May 2007 19:06:52 +0000

Hmm, I don’t really think publishing an already known key will really have that big an impact on anything other than personal piracy. Piracy on the levels we’re talking about aren’t hindered by normal DRM technology.

As for terrorism, it’s going to be a problem for a long time, piracy funded or not. Really all this terrorist rhetoric is getting old. These people have been around for decades doing the same shit they’re doing now. It’s not as big a problem as you think. I’m still waiting for a significant attack to be pulled off. That 911 stuff was amature at best. No matter how much funding they get, they’re still nothing more than pissed off people who ultimately mean very little in the grand scheme of things. Let them have their silly jihads or whatever else, because when it comes down the line, we’ve got the big cock, not them.

By: DJ Zach

DJ Zach — Mon, 07 May 2007 10:17:11 +0000

Wow your all so Edumacated. In the time it took me to read all that I burned 3 copies of Children of men. I’m saving up for a nuclear device. And by the way in the 8 months I spent killing the bastards the only bootlegs I got from jackie Iraqi was booze and fruits I can’t pronounce.

By: kroq

kroq — Sun, 06 May 2007 22:11:37 +0000

Talk about a flawed argument: you’d publish the missile key codes ‘in the public interet’? So what if some terrorist saw those codes and used them before the military realized it? It is ‘in the public interest’ to risk an all-out nuclear war? I’d love to know how that works. Why not just announce that you’ve found the codes to let people know they have been cracked? Publishing the codes specifically in that analogy has no public benefit I can see that can’t be accomplished by simply publishing the *fact* that you *have* the codes.

As for your second argument: no, you’re pushing that way to far Shawn, sorry. Go ahead, look around on the internet (use some of the links provided or do searches on your own). In Great Britain especially (as well as other parts of the world) terrorists and organized criminals are increasingly *specifically* in the pirated DVD market. Now, I will admit that code cracks like this are likely not the top method USED by these groups to pirate DVDs. Nonetheless, if you keep that fact in mind (the fact that this illicit industry is on the rise among fund-raising terrorists) I think you have to at least look at this overt flaunting of the decryption key in a new light.

The point I will concede is that the headline itself is a bit alarmist. Yes, I am guilty as charged - amidst all of the one-sided non-debated issue in question I was trying to get my minority viewpoint heard, so I sensationalized the headline to get peoples’ attention. I find it actually rather sad that it took such effort to raise awareness of a relatively obvious ‘other side’ to an issue everyone seems to think is only related to free speech.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Sun, 06 May 2007 13:04:42 +0000

This argument is a tad alarmist and a bit flawed, I’m afraid. Let’s use your example of a “missile key”. My concern in this situation would be that our missile system could be compromised by simply knowing a few numbers. Would I publish them knowing that? Absolutely. It is in the public interest to know that the security surrounding our most dangerous weapons can be so easily defeated.

I’m not really into file-sharing at all. I haven’t downloaded music from a p2p network since the old Napster days. I end up buying all my music from iTunes simply because it’s easier and more convenient. That being said, trying to copyright a number is preposterous. Linking it to terrorism is even more so… You’re simply using the argument that _anything_ that can be done to make money could be done to support terrorism. If a WalMart employee saves his money and then uses it to buy weapons for al Qaeda or whoever wishes us harm, is WalMart then linked to terrorism? Ridiculous.

By: kroq

kroq — Wed, 02 May 2007 22:34:37 +0000

Hilarious, but good point: you can either (1) buy a pirated copy and support terrorism/organized crime or (2) circumvent the system and cheat artists out of their original creative works. It’s a lose-lose situation!

By: JOhn

JOhn — Wed, 02 May 2007 21:21:38 +0000

This is stupid. How is downloading a key so that I can pirate dvd’s myself helping out terrorists? If anything it takes away form there business. Why buy a pirated copy when I can make one myself.