From The Register, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/25/doj_goes_after_filetraders/
"Attorney General John Ashcroft announced the raids during a press conference, saying individuals in Texas, New York and Wisconsin were all under investigation. These actions come as part of the ironically named Operation Digital Gridlock and target the trade of music, movies, games and other software over P2P networks. The government has long sided with the entertainment industry in its crusade to shut down P2P networks even though the most comprehensive study to date from Harvard has said the networks have almost no effect on entertainment sales.

"When online thieves illegally distribute copyrighted programs and products, they put the livelihoods of millions of hard-working Americans at risk and damage our economy,” Ashcroft said. "The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing intellectual property laws, and we will pursue those who steal copyrighted materials even when they try to hide behind the false anonymity of peer-to-peer networks."

It's unclear what false anonymity means or if Ashcroft consulted the higher power before using that phrase."
==============SNIP=================
OK...most people know what I think of use of the term "piracy" and also, using
theft or stealing in concert with the term, copyright infringement , and I don't want to get mired down in that again.

What I was musing about was Ashcroft's mental state. We know that the fundamentalist attorney general thinks God is guiding in his hands in the persecution of file traders.

But, I was wondering if he hasn't been hanging around with Donald "There are Known Knowns and Known Unknowns" Rumsfeld too much.

Does anyone know what "false anonymity" is? If there is a false anonymity, is there a true or valid anonymity?

Between Rummie and Ashcroft and their bizarre terms, is anyone with any common sense in power?

I found this quote from the article to be a bit chilling...
"A first time offender for a copyright infringement violation could receive five years in the clink and a fine of $250,000. The DoJ also reminded the public that the illegal reproduction and distribution of copyrighted works costs US companies $19bn each year. Again, however, there has yet to be a conclusive study that shows any link between P2P file-trading and declining music or movie sales. In fact, the movie studios refuse to even investigate if downloading actually increases movie sales.

The DoJ's actions today could be seen as a response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision backing up the legality of P2P networks. The court warned the entertainment industry and Congress to steer clear of legislation affecting the advancement of P2P and similar technology. But while P2P software makers have been declared legitimate, individuals who choose to share copyright works are still under the gun for being infringers.

The DoJ, long a friend of the entertainment industry, seems to be sending a message that it will step up attacks against these individuals given the Ninth Circuit's decision."
=========SNIP===========
So, the RIAA/MPAA loses in Court and they (through puppets at the DOJ) are back at terrorizing private citizens again with a vengeance.

Excuse me, but the PIRATE Act isn't law yet is it?

I think that its a requirement of being in a place of power in goverment that you get your brain removed. This way its easier for you to be controlled by the people who pay for your campain. Like the RIAA, Gas companies, and special intrests. You know, the companies running ammerica.

John Ashcroft is so full of manure that he should legally be classified as organic fertilizer.

John Ashcrofy is so full of manure!! You sure got that right CodeWarrior!!

And what do you Code find interesting or suspicious about the term false anonymity? I can see how it does sound like a suspicious term, but do you see it as some form of censorship or danger?

I was just wondering that, Code. I thought I missed something. It sure seems like it's been passed.

The PIRATE act was passed by the senate, but still would have to make it through the house last I heard.

I just updated my blog and added this:
"Is John Ashcroft retarded? I don't know. I DO think he should practice truth in marketing and change his name legally to "Ayman A. Noose"."
The point about the false anonymity is this.

There is an underlying theme in this administration of blurring the lines about your rights and privileges and what is and is not an act of terrorism.

The term "false anonymity" setups, albeit subliminally to me, the notion that anonymity is linked to false...since he links the words. It is part and parcel of the Big Brother notion that anonymity is bad, and that the government needs to know everything about you....i.e. all you do, all you buy, where you live, what you read, etc. Part and parcel of the trusted computer architecture scheme that promotes that everyone who logs onto the internet must be tracked, identified, and that their actions and movements in virtual space must be documented and stored in some big database.

It is part and parcel of the "deliver your papers on demand"....

This administration, much like Nazi Germany, much like Stalinist Russia, sees people being anonymous, as a bad thing, as a threatening. The founding fathers would be aghast that a government would embark on things like identifying everyone everywhere they went and everything they did. Ben Franklin would find that, keeping track of everything people read at libraries, would be the job of government, and the founding fathers would undoubtably see as sheer lunacy, and probably, outright evil, that the State would demand (as is promoted in the New Freedom Initiative of Bush) that every person would be mandatorily tested for "mental illness".

Anonymity, in the age of computers, is the last refuge of the free man.

Sui juris will become a term of the distant past as we all become assimilated into the Borg, into this "shining new world order".

Arrrrggghh...gimme Medieval times!

The unhealthy preoccupation with overlaying metrics on everyone, i.e. counting them through a mandatory census, making them carry identification, etc., did not start with Nazi Germany. We can track it at least as far back as the Roman Empire. So called "civilizations" who are preoccupied with militaristic goals, eventually get overcome with this madness of finding out everything they can about everyone, or pushing such data accumulation as far as prevailing technological standards will allow them.

As technology enables the compilation and storage of more and more personal data on each of us, our privacy is more and more endangered, and yes, I believe our personal freedoms are more and more endangered. Another way of looking at it is this....why does the government need to know so much about you and me. Why do they need to know that? (and, that terrorist scare is an old one....the Romans used that one too).

The one thing I do not get is the fact that they took down the hubs. Most hubs do not contain files. So the fact that they said they contained 40 Petabytes of data would be complete bull. They are more of a meeting place for people to request files. Once the hub finds the PC that contains files it make a direct connection between the requestor and the PC that contains the file. So if that is the case are the warrants they used to acquire the computer equipment valid? According the one article I read they listed specific files in the warrant. So if the PC’s did not contain the files in the warrant can the people that owned the PC’s go after the government?

I got this at Slyck.com : Quote:
Hello everyone. As many now may know, the FBI and DoJ have executed search warrants on some of us, and questioned others (myself included). It's unfortunate they cannot get their facts straight before spouting off to the press. (Same goes for the press... they really should be checking their facts.)

To those who have no clue what I'm talking about, try Google News. (search for: underground network p2p)

If you read an article, and came here looking for answers or are curious as to what's going on, I'm about to fill you in. After all, I'm the "Answer Man". (Was odd to hear the FBI refer to me by that title as too.)

There have been many misconceptions in the handful of articles I've read. They all claim to be the same article by Curt Anderson of the Associated Press. Funny how I've read 30 different versions of the same article, written by the same person. It's difficult to tell how many facts were blatently wrong to begin with, but it's downright upsetting how many are currently wrong. I could never begin to explain all the misconstuded facts, as I haven't read them all.

However, I would like to clear up a few "facts" I've read about a place I've been involved in for some time. That place: The Underground Network.

First off, I've yet to figure out the "100 Gigabyte minimum requirement" claim for joining the network. What is it to join the network anyway? What is the network? These are the questions so many have wrong. If you're talking about the forums... which is the only thing there IS to join in any sense, then there are no requirements. Well, no requirements past having access to a computer, the Internet, and an email account, plus being older then 13 (or lying that you are). It's the standard "requirements" of any other vB forum. There are thousands of them out there. Check Google.

So that must not be what they are talking about when they say "members are required to share 100gb of copyrighted material to join" (quoting a story posted to the Register.co.uk). Excuse me? If they are talking about the hubs, well, you don't "join the network" to login to a hub. You connect to one of the hubs with our name in it. That's really all there is to it. We are just a collection of people with similar interests (read the forums to learn some of them) who also help eachother out in the hubs. To join a hub (like all other 13,000+ Direct Connect hubs out there, besides ours), you need a preset "minshare" that the hub decides. That is, files you are willing to share with other users in that hub. We do NOT police these files beyond the stuff we KNOW is illegal (underage porn, beastality, etc). Beyond that we are very clear with one point: THE USER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SHARE!

If you connect to one of the hubs with our name on it and are sharing files you shouldn't, then YOU made a boo-boo. Not us. The media and the FBI seem to have missed this point. I've seen write-ups about how much info "is stored on" or "passes through hubs". They claim "up to 60,000 movies and 18 million songs a day" (again, quoting an article). EXCUSE me? No... the hubs don't hold a SINGLE byte of digital information. They don't even transfer any of it from user to user in fact. Did anyone bother to do the research? They didn't call the protocol and application "Direct Connect" because it sounded pretty. Once you are in the hub as a USER (not a member - nothing to join), you DIRECTLY CONNECT to the other users in the hub. Not too complicated... yet the FBI "infiltrated and investigated for 3 months" and they still have the facts wrong. John Ashcroft has some explaining to do. It's a scary world we live in if our own government gathers and uses their facts this way.

Oh there is so much else. Yes, users are required to share to connect to the hub. It can be a FREE open source (non-copyrighted) Linux operating system downloaded from http://www.LinuxISO.org. It could be programs YOU wrote that you want to distribute. It could be a song YOU recorded to MP3 that you want the world to hear. That's up to you. That's the USER'S responsibility. We do not condone or encourage piracy of any form. Unfortunately this fact also escaped the powers that be. A 'hub' is simply a meeting place for people to come to and have fun, chat, and share what THE USER decides they want to ( and is responsible for). The hub operator DOES NOT in ANY way share or distrubute ANY material, copyrighted or otherwise.

Browse around the forums. You will see what we do. We chat with each other on current events. We help each other with hardware or software troubles. We joke around and have fun. We provide a shoulder to cry on if you had a bad day. We share knowledge and information, just like every other forum on the planet. We don't ask, suggest, or force you to share illegal files or spread copyright material ourselves. (In fact, frequently we will remind people that it's not welcome on our forums. Once again, browse around and see for yourself.) Those "facts" are simply fabrication of the press, or worse, the FBI/DoJ.

I'll repeat what I told the special agent this morning when he came knocking:

You guys are on a wild goose chase. You're going after the wrong people in this scenario. Instead of the administrators and hub owners, you need to be worrying about the USERS that are sharing 100+ GBs of these files the FBI claimed they downloaded. The hub owner didn't push that file on you. YOU requested it, then DIRECTLY CONNECTED to the other user to download it. The hubs simply provide a meeting place for people with like interests. You can chat, get help, or share files. What you do is up to YOU.

The "organization" and "admins" of the network are also misunderstood.

We are not some massive group plotting against anyone. It's just everyday people with some free time that have tried to help out others when they could. Look at my posts, for example, and you'll see what I mean. I was made an "administrator of the network" simply because I have computer knowledge and could help users/"members" when necessary.

I like to help - it's what makes me tick. That isn't a crime. Each person does their own thing. Some help keep the forums running well. Some help keep the website up. Others help the hub owners with their computer problems. No one is a "ring leader". No one organizes any "warez" rings or checks the non-existant "minimum requirements of members". Misconstrued facts + false information = ignorance & innocent people having their hard earned personal property seized. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't be one of the ignorant ones - know the facts and realize the truth.

Hopefully this will clear up a few misconceptions and blatant lies about what the Underground Network is. I certainly hope the press will dig into the REAL facts, and actually tell the truth.

I also hope that the FBI/DoJ will realize their mistake(s) and not cause any more undue harm to us.

In reference to Ashcroft & terrorism:

In the long run, the worst terrorists are those who opportunistically use pretexts to deprive citizens of their liberties. That's "terror-able" in the highest degree!
Constitutional sovereignty and individual freedoms stand in the way of the nefarious quest for a new world order (global government). That's the main reason why they're under assault... er, being compromised away... in the--ahem--greater interest of NATIONAL SECURITY.

Again, citizens who continue to allow liberties to be traded for security will ultimately have neither.
As anticipated by plan, most Americans won't face that tragic truth until it's too late to reverse course.

It sounds to me like it's a matter of the DoJ trying to sensationalize this, as if it were a big drug bust. Again, no arrests...sheesh!!

I have a problem with the method that was used to shut this network down.

Has anyone thought about what they did? They took two computers and offered 100 gigs of copywrited materials to get in and get this folks.

If that ain't entrapment, I don't know what is...

entrapment is okay these days. incase you've missed it, they don't even need search warrants anymore. if bush wins a second term, i'm forseeing that some person out there is going to assinate him. won't be me, but somebody will!

The U.S. government has such contempt for its own people. We don't need no stinkin terrorists around when we have Ashcroft and Bush in office. Pretty soon the terrorists will be thinking, "Well, we got em a couple times, but it looks like the American government took our jobs!"

"Yeah, they took our jobs..." rabble rabble.

*sighs*

Add him to the rogues gallary I suppose.

Big 'busts' are often sensationalised and exagerated, either to make those in charge look good or scare other potential criminals. Remember the RIAA raid siezing 'the equivilent of' 400-odd CD burners, when they actually had only 100-odd 4x burners. Another trick is to report a raid and carefully play down that no arrests were made or charges pressed, as is the case here.

"Is John Ashcroft retarded? I don't know. I DO think he should practice truth in marketing and change his name legally to "Ayman A. Noose"."

I think Ashcroft should change his name to Ugly Bastard Jones.

It's an election year, people, and the RIAA and it's minions have more money to offer up than you or I do.


"I think Ashcroft should change his name to Ugly Bastard Jones"
That one is reserved for the Donny Rummy.

"false anonymity" sure sounds like doublespeak to me. Lets face it, its 1984, and all the corporations are in control.