Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The RIAA and MPAA Target Day-Job Downloaders

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the say-isn't-that-a-cash-register-over-there dept.

The Internet 293

BrianUofR points to this USA Today article, which says "the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America are sending a six-page brochure this week to Fortune 1000 corporations with suggested policies -- including a sample memo to workers warning them against using company computers to download songs and movies."

cancel ×

293 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST POST NIGS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310955)

Re:FIRST POST NIGS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310961)

niggas, niggettes and nigglettes.

Re:FIRST POST NIGS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310973)

quit yer niggling

Is it really this easy?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311005)

I am owner of the FP for this article and it makes me wonder, what exactly is so hard about getting an FP?? My FP success rate is somewhere around 75% (I've made 3 of 4 attempted), and seem to have no problems getting the FP when I attempt it. Do I simply have a knack for getting FPs or do the rest of you just suck that bad?? Please comment.

Re:Is it really this easy?? (-1, Offtopic)

JHelgie (598219) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311033)

Well, I think because, perhaps, other people have better things to do than sit around and say "DUR, ME GOTS FRIST POST!!!" So please, go to hell.

Re:Is it really this easy?? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311074)

And some people have better things to do than sit around and say "Well, I think because, perhaps, other people have better things to do than sit around and say 'DUR, ME GOTS FRIST POST!!!' So please, go to hell."

So please, go to hell.

STACK OVERVLOW

Re:Is it really this easy?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311108)

I find it pretty hard sitting around hitting reload all day when I have better things to do.

eef pee? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310957)

could it be? yes indeed?

Re:eef pee? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310977)

ess pee, biatch.

One word... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310964)

...Freenet [freenetproject.org] .

It is finally starting to work well enough to be useful. It still needs people to create mp3-specific freesites to allow people to find mp3s easily, but this could be the motivation.

And don't forget to.... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310981)

...do your bit [freenetproject.org] to make sure that the RIAA will never stamp out P2P.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1)

Trolling Thunder (639121) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310968)

The RIAA and MPAA target YOU!

Quick! (5, Funny)

$$$$$exyGal (638164) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310971)

Somebody post the 6-page brochure to Kazaa so I can see it.

--sex [slashdot.org]

Re:Quick! (4, Funny)

PovRayMan (31900) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311133)

Searching for it, you better read the description or else you might end up getting a guide about man-dolphin relations...

Damn you Kazaa polluters!

Re:Quick! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311235)

That was the funniest guide I ever read. I mean, really, who doesn't know that a dolphin's ejaculate comes out with enough force to rip a hole in your colon.

do you wanna bet... (3, Interesting)

TheHawke (237817) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310976)

That some of the know-nothing managers will forward these boilerplate memos onto their charges without any changes??

ALSO, how many managers will take their threats for real?

Re:do you wanna bet... (3, Insightful)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311129)

Remember, this went out to Fortune 1000 companies, presumably to their legal departments, who would then consider what to do with it in-house.

A manager with any common sense, however, might well note this article with their direct reports - giving them a heads-up (if they already didn't know) that P2P at work is a bad idea...

Re:do you wanna bet... (4, Insightful)

The Man (684) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311177)

I'm a network admin, not a manager, and I'm happy to have something like this to give my boss to hand out. I'm neither for nor against the "free everything" mentality - I consider each person who produces something to have the right to distribute it under whatever terms he or she sees fit. Personally I distribute my work freely, and encourage others to do the same; not everyone chooses to do so. But regardless of your beliefs about the RIAA (evil) or the MPAA (evil) or whether you should be permitted to steal their property (you shouldn't), using your employer's property for personal purposes is always wrong. Viewing free porn is not illegal, but unless that is your job, doing so with your company's systems and networks almost certainly goes against both professional ethics and your employment agreement or contract. Therefore you should not do that. The same argument goes for downloading or viewing or listening to non-work-related material - if you're using company property to do it, you are in the wrong. Whether the material is legal or illegal, copyrighted or public domain, offensive, harmless, or valuable is irrelevant. Do it at home, not at work.

So I'm happy to have someone giving ammunition to help put these slackers out of business. The company doesn't need them, and they waste the resources for which I am responsible. Whether they are canned because the CEO worries over his company's legitimate potential liability to the evil conglomerates or because these people are being paid to work and are goofing off instead, means nothing to me. They are abusing company property for personal gain and should be fired. A warning letter like this is a valuable policy tool. That I personally do not care for the conglomerates' heavy-handed tactics does nothing to lessen the validity of their fundamental argument, and does nothing to diminish the value of a document issued by Legal telling slackers to knock off the network abuse.

Your use of Kazaa to steal from those who purchased the musicians is for any reasonable person equal to Microsoft including linux/sched.c in the next version of Windows or to that scruffy-looking man outside stealing my car. All three hypothetical offenders are taking from others without permission. A pity they don't hang cattle rustlers any longer.

Centralized Ticket Server (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5310982)

There are some interesting ramifications to the ticket server idea. For example, 1000 pre-paid tickets might be bundled with each new PC. Look here for some initial thoughts on this scheme.


At least they're honest enough to recognize that a centralized ticket service doesn't prevent spam, it just makes the senders pay Microsoft for the privilege.

Wrong article (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311164)

and dumb comment to boot

at work? (5, Insightful)

astrashe (7452) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310990)

I wouldn't want people I was managing screwing around with p2p software at work.

For managers, this is going to be a no-brainer.

Re:at work? (0, Flamebait)

Sanity (1431) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311061)

For managers, this is going to be a no-brainer.
Yeah, managers who think that their employees should be treated like school-children.

I hope that you aren't anyone's manager.

Re:at work? (5, Insightful)

NetJunkie (56134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311080)

Please explain hos this means treating employees like kids? There is no reason for an employee to be using a P2P app at work. I don't care if you own the CD you're downloading, rip your own at home and bring it in.

P2P apps should be banned just for the security problems alone...not even considering legal liability of the company.

Grow up. Get a real job.

Re:at work? (1, Interesting)

Sanity (1431) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311113)

Wow - then you go and prove my point.

There is no reason for them not to wash their hands either, perhaps you should send a memo about that too?

Re:at work? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311119)

There's something to be said for moral. Most techies intermix their day between doing solid 100% and doing solid 100% play and doing a mix of both for part of the day. It's only reasonable that we bring some of our play to work since most of us TAKE OUR WORK HOME.

Fortunately, my employer has me work from my house a couple thousand miles away and I use my own machines and bandwidth in my boxers in my den - so what I do *really* doesn't matter to anyone.

Re:at work? (5, Insightful)

NetJunkie (56134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311187)

The problem is legal liability. If I know my employees download this stuff and don't do anything then the company can be liable. I'm not going to get in trouble and possibly fired so people I manage can warez Britney Spears.

Re:at work? (1)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311124)

grep world "real job" "real job" not found in world sorry.

Re:at work? (2, Insightful)

bryanthompson (627923) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311134)

The bottom line is a lot of employees need to be treated like school-children. Not everyone's a happy little drone sitting there working away all 8 hours a day. they'll sit on kazaa all day downloading movies or listening to movies if you let them.
the bottom line is that there's no reason for kazaa being on a network/business system in the first place. it sucks resources and is a security risk. I know, a good network has virus scanners and whatnot, but the bottom line is that if a program can be used to get viruses, it will. We use Eudora and still get viruses all the time.

Re:at work? (1)

bryanthompson (627923) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311165)

omg, i gotta stop writing half a msg then coming back and writing the rest. can you tell i'm at work? yeah, i'm a hypocrit... there goes't my karma.

Re:at work? (5, Insightful)

Anonvmous Coward (589068) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311197)

"Yeah, managers who think that their employees should be treated like school-children."

Who says it's about treating coworkers like 'school-children'?

I'm a sysadmin for a small company. I used Kazaa at home quite a bit. I'm against the RIAA's stance on P2P. Despite all that, I don't want it used at work, and I will (and have) told people to remove it. Not because I'm an asshole or because I wanted to use my 'power'. I did it to make sure that my company doesn't invent mindless policies as a result of problems that arise from it. If the net connection gets bogged down and it's traced back to P2P usage, then my company will respond with a strict internet policy. That would suck because my company has a "It's only a problem when it's actually a problem" stance on things like that.

The dude you just got shitty with is right. Don't put businensses into a position where they WILL have to create policy. Especially when it is completely unnecessary.

Not children - Adults. (4, Insightful)

nlinecomputers (602059) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311265)

I happen to be a business owner.

MY bandwidth and My PCs are just that - MINE.

Don't like it. Don't work for me.

Maybe I don't want to be sued just because you are a thief. Personlly I think most of the IP laws are crap but that doesn't mean that I desire(or have the money) to be the fucking test case just because you are NOT adult enough to *gasp* ask my permission before you put MY company at risk.

So after I fire your ass I'll have your ass arrested for theft of MY bandwidth and MY storage space.

Is THAT adult enough? You self-centered little troll.

I sorry that you think that putting the rules down in writting is a "childish" act. It isn't. It is what adults do. Adults don't assume what others should know or expect. They explain out in front what is and isn't expected. Why? Because some people like yourself will assume that employment GIVES them the right to do it. It doesn't. Only if the employer is willing to allow it. And if he is then he should put THAT in writting too.

Re:at work? (1)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311148)

Not that you need any convincing but take a look at InternalMemo.com [internalmemo.com] . Yeah, some of these are just memos that somebody decided to post but I've seen a few that look like somebody shared the wrong directory (like a lay-off memo that was posted the day before the lay-offs hit).

Re:at work? (1)

DarwinDan (596565) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311189)

I agree wholeheartedly! As stated previously, the security risks from (virus-infused) software obtained on P2P services are enough of a reason to block P2P ports at the corporate level.

Oh yeah, I also forgot about those hard drives they have in those computers. What happens when Joe Worker fills up his HDD with 50 gigs of MP3's and nude pictures of Sarah Michelle Geller? Because of Joe's downloading habits, Company X must send an IT person to backup the old HDD, replace it, install a new one, and transfer all 50 gigs of P2P junk to the new HDD. All this while the same IT person could be patching his M$ IIS server (cough cough). Who costs Company X more money? Joe Worker, of course! Who does this cost get passed onto? The everyday consumer! (But I digress...)

Downloading pr0n while the IT department could be sniffing your connection should scare people enough to NOT use P2P at work.

Moral of this story:
GET YOUR OWN CONNECTION!

Re:at work? (1)

jackcolt2 (650768) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311256)

Your comment is interesting because there are "productivity" software products such as Groove Networks that are designed as Peer2Peer collaboration tools. Are products such as Groove now evil because of an architectual decision? Are the RIAA and MPAA now dictating how software can be architected? This would be a poor choice on their part, I believe the design decisions are best left to the talent. The RIAA and MPAA are now scared and thrashing. They will try any little dirty trick to get their way (millions in sales and royalty). I suggest that we all stop buying music and movies. Why give them more money to attack us with?

They finally figured it out (1)

Gerrioholic99 (309014) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310991)

The groups remind corporations that the music industry has begun to identify organizations whose computers are used to download, upload or store music files without authorization.

In the Fortune 1000 I'm pretty sure I can name oh about 1000 companies that have computers doing these "illegal" activities

In the UK (3, Interesting)

jaavaaguru (261551) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310993)

In the UK, it's not unusual for people to have Internet connections at home that are just as fast as those at work. I have 512mbps broadband at home and am considering upgrading to 1mbps, which will be 4 times faster than I have at work.

If I wanted to download a lot of music, I'd SSH to a machine at home and do it there where it's faster. I guess it's different in the US though where lots of companies have T3 connections.

I'd also have though that a lot of large organisations (e.g. Fortune 1000 companies) would already have "downloading music/video" policies in place, and the smaller companies would be the ones with people doing things like this.

Anyway, if you need to spend time doing stuff like that, you're job must not be interesting enough - you employer should tackle that problem first!

Re:In the UK (1)

KoolyM (602345) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311023)

While my home connection (700 something mbps) is now actually *faster* than my office connection (512), I still use P2P apps a lot at work: we have a server at the office where we store mp3s and it's just so much easier (on your workstation) to get mp3s of CDs you own (honest!) from SoulSeek than it is to bring in the CD and rip it (not to mention that most of the music I own is on vinyl, which is too much of a hassle to rip anyways).

The boss is fine with us doing this, it's not like it takes up a lot of work time to load up a queue of downloads once every few days or so.

Re:In the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311030)

I have 512mbps broadband at home

No, you have 512kbps at home.

Pedantry aside, I've had 1.5mbps DSL at home for almost about two years now. It's faster than the 4mbps connection I have access to at work because I'm not sharing bandwidth with 60 other people plus email and web servers.

Re:In the UK (1)

gearheadsmp (569823) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311065)

Yeah, I'm sure you have a 512 megabit-per-second connection. Nice typo ;)

That's Nothing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311075)

The guy above you had a 700 mbps connection.

Re:In the UK (1)

jaavaaguru (261551) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311093)

Oops! I wish!

Re:In the UK (1)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311100)

In the UK, it's not unusual for people to have Internet connections at home that are just as fast as those at work.

Yeah and they don't take a tea break at 11 o'clock or 3:30.

As the signs in London said "Make Tea, Not War".

I'd also have though that a lot of large organisations (e.g. Fortune 1000 companies) would already have "downloading music/video" policies in place,

Not to mention firewalls that are pretty P2P unfriendly.

But the RIAA are basically playing into the corporate policy game. Basically Big 5 consultancy, sorry Big 4, oops make that 3 firms have a racket in which they charge $50K a pop for an 'Employee Navigator' or some such. These are written by fresh out of college grads billing at $2K a day or more. So any proposal is likely to get thrown in.

This is how we are going to get companies to take noptice of spam problems. Make them scared of fired employees claiming that being bombarded by hard core spam created a hostile workplace.

Re:In the UK (1)

stonedCoder (650101) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311225)

I hope you're not using NTL (see this [dont-pay-ntl.co.uk] )

Along with the rants, there's some interesting ideas about who and why, with major copyright holders and money for a debt-ridden company being used in the same string ;)

Good For Them (4, Insightful)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 11 years ago | (#5310994)

What the fuck does this have to do with my rights online?? My "rights" in the workplace are limited all the time at work.

My company has blocked access to p2p applications, all sorts of website, and limit my access to my PC. Should I be crying about my rights being violated?

Where is it part of my rights that I can illegaly download music at my desk, thereby wasting bandwidth and company time?

Seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311072)

This aint flamebait! Why are people so gung ho about the right to jack off at work that they mod this down? The company I work for would crucify anyone doing "personal business" on company time... the only reason I'm even excempt is because I wrote the stinking policy. We don't need people tracking their ebay auctions, cruising the personals, trading stocks at work. File sharing among the great unwashed masses is simply dangerous at work... toss some porn in there and turn it into a hostile work environ...

Re:Good For Them (1)

koko775 (617640) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311152)

Right on.
What rights?

They're companies, and as such can impose anything on the employees unless there is a LAW protecting them. Constitutions (US and state) only protect the rights of people from the government.

For example, any sort of club or company can racially discriminate however they want -- unless there is a law prohibiting them from doing so. On the other hand, the GOVERNMENT (US or state) cannot distinguish between race if it is laid out in the CONSTITUTION (US or state).

IANAL, but my dad is.

Re:Good For Them (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311202)

no shiznit

you can't do a lot of things at work. you can't wear what you like, you can't practice your religion in public (unless it involves praying to a certain deity, then you're patriotic), you can't tell a pretty co-worker that you think she's pretty, you can't set your own hours, and you can't use the computer for personal use (though somehow they don't mind the phone used for personal stuff).

I'm self-employed. That means I can wake up at 10, I can work in my undies with my cock hanging out, jerking off to porn, and I can download Britney till my MP3 player deletes itself in protest.

Don't people read their employer agreements?? You're a PIECE OF A MACHINE, and if you don't function correctly you will be adjusted!

This isn't that bad... (3, Interesting)

I'm a racist. (631537) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311001)

Honestly, compared to the usual shit these two organizations pull, sending out recommended procedures is really not so bad. Of course, (not having read the memo) I'll assume they made some "threats" against those companies that don't implement said procedures (as per their 'usual shit').

If they kept themselves confined to asking companies to police themselves, and "enlightening" the public to the plight of their failing business model, I wouldn't really hate them. The problem is that they insist on buying laws and bullying other companies into proping up their fading legacy.

Re:This isn't that bad... (4, Interesting)

Forgotten (225254) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311150)

But the question remains, what the hell business does the RIAA or MPAA have telling me how I should administer *my* business. This isn't for your own good in the sense that it'll improve productivity (in fact, being able to listen to music at work and freely use the net often raises productivity). That's only a question of having good employees with interesting work to do anyway.

This is simply a veiled legal threat. It's "do this or we'll eventually get around to suing your ass off". Never mind that it's largely an empty threat - the intent is to invade another business and, through legal chill, affect the way they *do* business. And that's simply unacceptable.

More terror tactics (3, Insightful)

www.sorehands.com (142825) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311002)

Companies will take action and institute policies against downloading copywritten materials. This will be their defense against the company being liable for the downloading.

The RIAA/MPAA is doing this to aim at deep pockets that can order lots of people to do, or in this case not do, specific acts.

Re:More terror tactics (2, Insightful)

El Pollo Loco (562236) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311016)

What I don't understand is the whole innocent until proven guilty thing. Just because they have a log saying an IP from a company was downloading illegalsong.mp3 doesn't mean that the person doesn't actually own that on cd. Why are they guilty until proven innocent. I see how an individual couldn't fight them, or a small business because of the legal costs involved, but a fortune 1000 company should be able to. At least, I'd hope they could fight them, and I'm sure they'd be able to recover legal fees in court.

Re:More terror tactics (1)

GreatOgre (75402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311022)

Companies will take action and institute policies against downloading copywritten materials. This will be their defense against the company being liable for the downloading.

I agree. It's a shame that none of these companies have the backbone to tell the RIAA and MPAA to back the fuck off!

Re:More terror tactics (2, Insightful)

dmaxwell (43234) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311091)

The problem is that the mere act of viewing a webpage involves "downloading copyrighted materials". The browser cache even retains copies of some of it for awhile.

Such a policy taken literally means that the organization in question will have to pull their net connection entirely.

A better policy would forbidding downloading of copyrighted material without permission. Normal websites give implicit permission to do the downloading necessary to view them. This also has the advantage of forbidding illegal mp3 downloads while still permitted downloads of legal mp3s and software.

Re:More terror tactics (1)

droleary (47999) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311128)

Companies will take action and institute policies against downloading copywritten materials.

Of course, the only real way to do that is to shut off the Internet connection completely. There are very few things people access online that are actually in the public domain.

Everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311008)

I don't think that Fortune 1000 corporations are going to have employies left. Who hasn't downloaded music to listen to at work. Data entry does get boring.

And I thought.. (0)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311010)

And I thought that the RIAA wanted us to download all we could from work.

Does the words "No Shit" mean anything to you?

What I want to know is... (3, Interesting)

Visaris (553352) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311013)

How much will it cost the RIAA and MPAA to send out all these letters? How much money will they save/make by stopping the "theft"?

Don't worry, it won't cost the RIAA a red cent (2, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311127)

The music companies they represent are billing it back against the artists, just like everything else.

KFG

Here are some of the enclosed brochures (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311024)

Dear fellow workers (and soon to be ex-workers).

We the managment of [INCLUDE COMPANY NAME], have felt it necessary to assert our position in regard to file sharing as dicated by the RIAA and MPAA of America.

You, the much loved workers of [INCLUDE COMPANY NAME], are from this day forth given the notice, that any contraband (aka shared files) ending with the following (but not limited to) extensions are hereby seen as illegal.

Extensions : .avi and .mp3

If for any reason any file ending with these extensions were found on your desktop or backup media, we would be forced to report you to the good companies listed above and further report you to our good government. You will be reported as terrorist file sharers who are affecting our great nations economy by sharing the files ending in the said extensions.

The lawyers representing [INCLUDE COMPANY NAME], RIAA and MPAA could at no point be sued or counter sued for any loss. You withhold the right to class action lawsuite, trial by jury and any sort of criminal charges against the companies that own the said file extensions.

Any tools that you use to create, display or duplicate the said file extensions are from this day forth labeled as tools of terrorists.

Thank you.
[INCLUDE NAME OF COMPANY CEO].

Re:Here are some of the enclosed brochures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311039)

LOL GOOD ONE.

Oh the EVIL extensions. We should nuke em! ;)

Clean themselves out first! (1)

Goalie_Ca (584234) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311027)

Who here doesn't think that sony and warner bros don't have employees that download stuff at work, and possibly from work.
I honestly don't think this story is worth a post because this isn't big news at all. Nothing's gonna come of it and i'm sure these companies couldn't care less about RIAA and MPAA. I'm sure they're more concerned about workers wasting their time!

More bureaucracy... (2, Interesting)

$$$$$exyGal (638164) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311034)

The "sample memo to employees" includes language informing workers that using computers to share illegal files can result in disciplinary action, including termination.

Ok, I don't really have a problem with that, because you shouldn't be using your employer's network like that.

The brochure recommends performing regular audits of employees' computers to search for audio and video files as well as the presence of peer-to-peer software.

But that is a really stupid recommendation. For one, who's going to pay for that? For two, the last thing big companies need is more big-brother'ness. There are already cameras everywhere, and it's already tough to get anything installed on your network without a huge audit. Now they are going to add: "We need to check your computer every night for MP3's, so make sure you leave your computer on". Just more bureaucracy.

--sex [slashdot.org]

I'm scared(!) (2, Interesting)

Duds (100634) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311060)

[quote]
The brochure recommends performing regular audits of employees' computers to search for audio and video files as well as the presence of peer-to-peer software.
[/quote]

Gotta love working for the govt.

They gave me the laptop with win95. My very first task was to stick XP on it but give it the exact same hostname.

No-one has yet noticed but my life is a lot more pleasent.

In adddition, the 2Mbit connection we have is only ever stressed by me and the occasional vnc session (again mostly me). Certainly no-one has access to any logs since we all go out direct. If they catch it at head office (our line goes through them) then they won't be able to tell which PC did it our end.

And the laptop comes home with me at night,

This'll be fun.

Re:I'm scared(!) (3, Funny)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311162)

Dear Mr. Stephen Sharp,

Thank you for the information provided in your post. In addition to monitoring your active Internet connections, your supervisors and I have also discussed pursuing an audit of your laptop, and I have recommended that active logging software be installed on all computers in your workspace.

The Government thanks you for your compliance.

Yours Truly,
Your Boss ;P

Many Use Packeteer's Packetshaper (4, Informative)

scubacuda (411898) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311038)

A lot of companies are already blocking this type of thing with layer 4+ appliances, such as Packeteer [packeteer.com] 's PacketShaper [packeteer.com] (white paper here [packeteer.com] )

How would you evade something like that?

Re:Many Use Packeteer's Packetshaper (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311081)

How would you evade something like that?

1. Encrypted tunnels

2. Protocols the fine folks at Packeteer haven't heard of yet

3. Make everything HTTP over port 80

Correction: (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311041)

They really sent the brochures to the Fortune 500 companies, but they said it was the same as the Fortune 1000 companies as these were really fast companies.

PARENT UP MOD YOU WILL! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311156)

teh funniaz!

No a la Guerra (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311057)

No a la Guerra,
.
No a la Guerra, ..
No a la Guerra, ...
No a la Guerra. ....
No a la Guerra.

Internet at work (5, Funny)

craigeyb (518670) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311058)

I am a programmer, and I remember the good ol' days when I had a job with Internet access. Then I was laid off, and the New Economy gave me a job with a company that doesn't allow its programmers access to the Internet! Do you believe this? Now I have to get my Slashdot fix on Saturday nights, alone and drunk in my apartment.

At least it doesn't conflict with my social schedule.

This sig is false.

When will they learn? (2, Interesting)

ZeroIdea (129188) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311073)

Since the movie and music industry continue to lose money, how long before they realize the old busines model does not work anymore. Honestly if they fired all the lawyers and special groups and started worrying about finding good artists and producing quality entertainment I would think their sales would increase, but they keep making more boy bands and wh0rish chick groups. I mean just how much money are they losing in the courts since a good lawyer costs a lot and you know they have a small army of them. Give them enough time and you won't be able to listen to any of your cds or watch your dvds unless you call in and activate them and after you are done you can watch them self destruct.

Meddle Not In The Affairs of Lobbyists... (4, Insightful)

Effugas (2378) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311076)

...for the law you punched through is crunchy, and good with ketchup.

The crux of the RIAA/MPAA's case is that the law makes corporations liable for providing the net connection that people are using to abuse the present definition of copyright. The recommended solutions end up being:

A) Firewall the network to the extreme, reducing network reliability while incurring direct costs for firewall maintenance;
B) Fire employees who violate RIAA/MPAA policy, reducing human reliability while incurring (again) direct costs for retraining;
C) Randomly pay multimillion dollar settlements for copyright liability, reducing per-quarter revenue reliability while incurring direct costs to pay off the lawyers and their suits.

Let me summarize: "Dear Corporate America: Please spend lots of money. Get nothing in return. Your Friends In Hollywood, Jack Valenti and Hilary Rosen."

Hmmm. Seems to me that the harder the RIAA and MPAA push the megacorps, the quicker they realize their exposure to unreliability and reduced profitability. Unlike individuals, or even ISPs, these are power aggregates that have stuck around precisely because they've been able to crush any threat to their bottom line.

Yes, RIAA. Thank you, MPAA. Please, do everything in your power to bother the big guys. That way, while you're wondering where all that congressional support for compulsory licensing came from (heh, we never got that when we were just harassing DVD Jon!), I'll be quite happy to be part of the Internet community taking the credit, and the power, that you just lost.

Yours Truly,

Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com

Re:Meddle Not In The Affairs of Lobbyists... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311101)

dude, as doxpara troll you must be one of the most weird trolls on /. ever. I've read some of your postings they are almost all flaimbait but overall good trolling. :)

Re:Meddle Not In The Affairs of Lobbyists... (1)

Effugas (2378) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311215)

doxpara troll *laughs*

I totally need that silkscreened onto a t-shirt :-)

Call the BSA (5, Funny)

girth (40643) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311082)

Someone should make sure all the copies of M$ Word the RIAA and MPAA use to create these memos are licensed and accounted for.

Re:Call the BSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311087)

Amen!

Bunch of fuckwits!

My company already did this to us.. (2, Interesting)

stephenisu (580105) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311090)

The admin at my work was way ahead on this one.. not only did he try to scare us by saying it was illegal.. but he used a script to email EACH employee a list of mp3 and ogg files on our comps.. no way did i think he would catch my ogg files.. damn he's good. Thats one way to stop this stuff at work.

Re:My company already did this to us.. (0, Insightful)

droleary (47999) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311170)

The admin at my work was way ahead on this one.

Wow, I'd fire him immediately if I were his boss. He just opened up the company to massive litigation. It'd be akin to the phone company saying "we're going to monitor phone traffic and don't want common carrier status anymore". Moronic.

Thats one way to stop this stuff at work.

Stop what stuff? Creating a pleasant environment to do your job? There is nothing illegal about having music on your computer at home or at work.

Re:My company already did this to us.. (3, Insightful)

tzanger (1575) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311268)

Wow, I'd fire him immediately if I were his boss. He just opened up the company to massive litigation. It'd be akin to the phone company saying "we're going to monitor phone traffic and don't want common carrier status anymore". Moronic.

This is in no way anything like the telco doing that. I think that is an excellent way to curb the behaviour. If you want the music at work, bring in your CDs or even your own computer (geez, a headless P2-233 with 64M of memory would be more than enough) and leave it off the fucking corporate systems. It's not opening up anything to litigation, as the computers are already property of the companies, and can be used for whatever legal purpose the company wants.

Stop what stuff? Creating a pleasant environment to do your job? There is nothing illegal about having music on your computer at home or at work.

Agreed on the pleasant environment but there is nothing in my employee handbook granting me the ability to use the company systems for anything non-company related, including playing music whose legality is in question. It's not up to the company to prove that you own the CDs, and in fact I bet that given the choice between policing that or outright forbidding mp3s, they will chose the latter every time.

I know where they got this idea... (1)

Sanity (1431) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311094)

...they have clearly been stealing ideas from the management genius [bbc.co.uk] at Wernham-Hogg.

Shame on them.

Well that sucks big, fat, hairy monkey balls (4, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311104)

I was just about to take a temp job with a Fortune 1000 company just so I could sit around all day using the company computers to download movies.

NOW they'll probably impliment some sort of official policy of displeasure with such pursuits.

Damn you RIAA.

KFG

Re:Well that sucks big, fat, hairy monkey balls (1)

paradesign (561561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311193)

i know, its as bad as those pee tests they make you take. damn ATF!

Are you now (1)

Forgotten (225254) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311112)

Does this mean the media campaign [modernhumorist.com] has failed?

Hmmm... My sysadmin says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311123)

..we've got some music-sharing software running on port 1214, so he can't close it...

yow! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311126)

The RIAA and MPAA Target Day-Job Downloaders

That's it, I'm switching to the night shift!

Damn it.. (0)

bobdole34 (444010) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311135)

I have lots of mp3z on my work notebook. Its unlikely I will use it as much as I do now if I can't have music when I'm working on the run.

Think about it Work!

oooh...evil!!! (3, Interesting)

l33t-gu3lph1t3 (567059) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311149)

Here's my message to those who would decry this as another RIAA/MPAA evil act:

Just remember, kiddies, that most large workplaces don't even CARE WTF you're doing on their computers, as long as it isn't work related. Using company equipment for non-work-related activities is grounds for dismissal in many firms, so the RIAA really shouldn't have any resistance here. They're lobbying for a different idea, but will have the same result.

Cartoon (5, Funny)

limekiller4 (451497) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311163)

I swear to god, every time I read something like this I have a flashback of being a kid and watching a cartoon character trying to plug up a leaking dam with his finger, then the other, then a toe, then the other toe...

Valenti does look a lot like Droopy, you have to admit.

Valenti [boycott-riaa.com]
Droopy [collectingpez.com]

Or if we're going for apropos [cottet.org] over strict resemblance...

Most shops will have allready put a stop to this. (1)

nlinecomputers (602059) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311174)

I would bet that many if not most places will have allready put a stop to this not because of the legal risks but because of the virus risks and bandwidth hogging issues that P2P access uses. Many colleges have blocked such nets because of the bandwidth use.

I would think this is a non issue.

Hasn't stop some people I know (1)

wendigo2002 (615633) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311175)

Where I work we have several pc's shared by our group. A few weeks ago I came in to find one of our people had put Kazaa on my workstation. Nice! I promptly unistalled it and let them know that if they want to jepordized their job fine, but don't put that on the pc I use.

Re:Hasn't stop some people I know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311192)

Nice! And you point is?

Re:Hasn't stop some people I know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311253)

So, has being known as the office weenie gotten you any chics yet ?

USA Today had better be careful. (0)

Snork Asaurus (595692) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311190)

CNN might be tempted to sue them for copyright infringement.

RIAA is too late (2, Insightful)

blair1q (305137) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311195)

Any company that doesn't have this in place already as either a copyright-infringement policy or an unnecessary burden on resources is too dumb to read the RIAA's threats anyway.

Re:RIAA is too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311284)

Working in IT does have certain advantages. Even though our company has strict policies about internet usage and P2P, we are largly exempt from that as we have a certain comraderie with Sysadmin and Netadmin and don't care what we do and wont tattle on us. They even warn us when management schedules audits so that we can do something about any MP3s we might have laying around. Ha!

Liabilities (1)

BadBlood (134525) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311205)

I'm sure that businesses will take this very seriously, unfortunately. It's their computer equipment, technically, and if you have illegal media on it the business could face severe liabilities. Just like if you had pirated software on company computers. Not good. I would guess that most corporations would firewall away access to these networks anyway.

Change the file extensions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311206)

File extensions are not needed anyway, so how are they going to filter this based on filenames if the names are random?

RIAA and its IT Deparment. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311248)

I'll let you know, even at the RIAA we have a mp3 file server. And we read slashdot, my god we laugh at our bosses every day!

Finally... (2, Funny)

kien (571074) | more than 11 years ago | (#5311282)

I've been waiting for them to empty the other barrel of the shotgun into their foot.

Now I have a reason.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board, thank you for allowing me to speak. I'd like to address this letter and brochure that you have received from the entertainment cartels. What's that, Mr. Chairman? No sir, I did indeed call them cartels. No, please keep the lawyers in the room...they might find this informative. My presentation consists of the following:
  • How to spot a failing business model
    • Lessons we can learn from the RIAA/MPAA
  • How to avoid alienating customers
    • Where the RIAA went wrong
    • Where the MPAA went wrong
    • How to avoid pissing off your customers
  • The concept of Fair Use
  • Relevant strategic legal strategies
  • Conclusion: Screw 'em.


--K.

I'll post this on Tuesday.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5311283)

You see, the no-talent ass clowns that run my company [jpmorganchase.com] will probably go right along with any threats or warnings imposed by the RIAA. I'm sure there'll be a copy in my inbox when I get to work.

We can't earn money for shit, but we're happy to help other organizations do it. Legally, or illegally.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?