Pirate Banned From Using Linux 698
dsinc writes "A guy who uploaded the latest Star Wars movie got arrested, pleaded guilty to 'conspiracy to commit copyright infringement' and 'criminal copyright infringement' and got jail and home confinement. As part of his home confinement, he agreed to install some tracking software on his computer. The problem is He's an Ubuntu Linux user and the gov't doesn't have any tracking software for Linux. So he's been told that he must use Windows for the term of his confinement. Looks like a case of cruel and unusual punishment to me"
So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
They probably offered him a deal to spend home time versus all jail time if he agreed to certain terms. They are not FORCING him to use windows, they are saying that if he wants the easy path of punishment, he has to abide by certain rules.
Also the requirement would only be for if he uses a computer at all. He's perfectly welcome to simply not use one at all.
All in all, he got off easy and just has to fullow the very simple rules in order to get the easy version of punishment.
Re:Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? Because he's a convict still serving his sentence (that's why he's under home confinement). If he doesn't like the terms of home confinement, he can always go back in the slammer and have even more restricted access.
Jail for movie piracy? WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Virtual machine (Score:5, Insightful)
People have made this comment on every single thread on this topic everywhere (Slashdot is the third site I've seen this story on), and it's still wrong and (frankly) nonsensical.
The requirement is that they run software that can monitor his computer activities. The complication is that the software is Windows-only so it won't run on his Linux system. Your suggestion accomplishes neither party's goal: It wouldn't let them monitor his computer activity, and it wouldn't let him run Linux as the OS on his machine (he'd have to run Windows, and then screw around, and then maybe run some Linux apps in a VM while still paying for a Windows license and dealing with Windows crap).
Why can he use a computer at all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, but he's done the jail time, and he's not complaining about the probation term at all.
Just because someone has committed a crime does not mean that the government gets to impose arbitrary terms on them without an explicit court ruling. It especially doesn't mean that the government should be mandating specific non-optimal technical choices that interfere the livelyhood of an expert in a technical field.
Mandating Windows to a computer expert so they can be tracked for piracy is like mandating a Chrysler mini-van to a farmer because he beat his wife. Sure, you can carry produce to market in a mini-van, but making the farmer buy a new Chrysler mini-van to replace his perfectly functional Toyota pickup truck is absurd.
Re:Jail for movie piracy? WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's not the having to use windows (Score:5, Insightful)
By `indirect' I mean things like not being able to get a good job, being shunned/tormented/killed by people merely because you're a registered sex offender, etc.
By `direct' I mean going to jail, paying fines, probation, even having to register as a sex offender.
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:3, Insightful)
Even so, when the state drunk drivers attend AA, they don't force them to go to a gay and lesbian AA clubhouse. That is a better analogy.
Re:Best reason of all to swtich (Score:3, Insightful)
pwned.
Not that the NSA really cares about some movie pirate who got busted, and just because they wrote something useful for Linux and had it included in the kernel, that doesn't mean they're going to go write monitoring software for you too.
Re:Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not making money off something you did previously doesn't sound like a very great harm to me, not enough to justify taking away a person's freedom by putting them in jail -or- by making them use Windows. But then again in our "right to profit" society I guess that's a capital offense.
Hang 'em.
Re:what makes this punishment cruel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think (and I expect most libertarians would agree) that the government should never have the power to force a citizen to do business with any corporation, especially when that corporation is an unregulated abusive monopoly.
Re:Why can he use a computer at all? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean nowdays Internet access is *essential*. It is like having a phone or a car. Imagine you have a job and do DUI. You will be only allowed to use car like 8-9am and 4-5pm (so you can go to work). Without your car you wouldn't be able to work and thus you will loose your job and become a citizen that parasites on others. I don't think that law system is built to punish citizens this way that they loose their jobs and became parasites on others. That would be stupid.
So with that in mind the judge allowed the man to use Internet (maybe for working from home - quite usual) but he wishes to monitor his activity.
I don't see anything wrong here.
But I don't know why don't they force him (if he wishes to use the Internet) to just use a special broadband service for convicts which is monitored server-side. Such setup would not require any client side software.
Re:Why... (Score:2, Insightful)
Honestly, this guy committed a crime. Nevermind all the complaining everybody does about whether it should or should not be a crime. The item under discussion is the punishment. I'm with a lot of posters above: his sentence could be a LOT worse. Bite the bullet.
Re:It's not the having to use windows (Score:2, Insightful)
By `indirect' I mean things like not being able to get a good job, being shunned/tormented/killed by people merely because you're a registered sex offender, etc.
By `direct' I mean going to jail, paying fines, probation, even having to register as a sex offender.
Re:Jail for movie piracy? WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Jail for movie piracy? WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, jail time is appropriate for some economic crimes. Maybe not in this case, no, but your blanket statement just doesn't work in all blanket cases.
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why... (Score:3, Insightful)
The man committed a crime for which there are punishments. It's called THE LAW. In doing so he essentially forked over some of his rights to the government, things like the ability to and do whatever he wants. The government in this case was kind enough to say "Normally this is a jailable offence, however we don't think you really need to go to the pen. Instead we're going to confine you to your house and monitor you computer to ensure that you're not pirating stuff from home. Since we don't have anything compatible with your OS, you'll have to switch to Windows."
It's no different than them saying "We'll let you out of jail early on certain conditions, such as not committing a crim for the next 3 years."
On a personal note, I was hoping that the story was about a real pirate...that would've been infinitely more interesting. =)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:3, Insightful)
If, indeed, it was not even quantified does not mean that there wasn't one (and, conversely, conviction doesn't exactly mean that there was).
I guess that I'm in the mood to mince the hairs of the hair-mincers today.
Re:Why... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why... (Score:3, Insightful)
2. It is not definitely less than what a murderer would serve. There have been TONS of cases where rapists, child molesters and murderers get out to do it all again, repeatedly, and frequently in less than a year. It has been shown over and over that crimes against citizens are not the same thing as crimes against big money moving entities.
When I don't have to worry about what part of town I am driving through at what time of night and what color my skin might be, THEN I will be interested in tracking down music/movie uploaders. He is going to serve more punishment than good ol Scooter. The system is so insanely unbalanced chasing down this kind of crap is insane. Hell they had that asshole talk about how they should quit going after murderers and bank robbers because music/movie stealing was SOOO much worse for the economy.
Re:Why... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:1, Insightful)
So whats to stop him from dual booting anyway? He goes on the Internet and visits normal sites in Windows, then reboots into Ubuntu and does whatever he wants... Unless they tap his connection at the ISP they wouldn't know, and if they did tap it at the ISP then there would be no need for monitoring tools on his PC.
Sounds entirely retarded to me, not to mention ineffective.
Why not? (Score:3, Insightful)
I also understand that automotive analogies are lame.
However, supposing he was allowed to leave the house, would they restrict him to one brand of car?
I think what this shows, more than anything, is how stupidly incompatible software is. Java had the right idea (but a poor implementation). Software should be platform-agnostic -- perhaps enough so that the FBI could force him to run their own OS, and he'd still have all his favorite software.
Don't play games with your parole officer (Score:3, Insightful)
Brilliant. Your advice to this guy is turn a lightly supervised probation into a spanking-new charge of parole violation - playing against the two felony convictions already on his record?
Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.
Re:Why... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, take it in context, he pirated a bunch of movies - clearly not something that should be jailtime. At most maybe a steep fine, but jailtime is to keep the freakazoids out of society until we can get them (hopefully) rehabilitated to work properly in said society - it shouldn't really be looked at as punishment.
Frankly, I don't believe punishing a wrong works all that well -- you have to psychologically change the person to prevent them from doing it again. Of course, my opinion is my own, largely untrained, based upon a relatively quick judgement =P
Re:Why... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever happened to 'never trust the client'? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt it. The court order would have be very specific. Running Linux in Ubuntu is a perfectly valid application of Windows use.
C//
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:1, Insightful)
That would be the gov't in a nutshell.
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, wrong. He infringed copyright. I know in wonderland where most Americans live, a word can mean whatever you want it to mean, but legally, words have precise definitions.
No stealing occurred.
Demonstration of intent (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:2, Insightful)
For me it'd be a question of "Would you like to eat? Well you can only do it at McDonalds (eugh) and we have to monitor you with Ronald McDietitian's to make sure you aren't getting too many Vitamins". Of course you want/need food. You will be forced to using that which has been allowed.
This sentence is a joke (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? Can't he use a Windows box to route? (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:This sentence is a joke (Score:3, Insightful)
if the Government cant run applications on Linux Whats the chance of them recognizing a VPN?
~Dan