DCMA questioned Unconstitutional/New Motherboard against RIAA

[FutureIverson]

I wish i could find the article i was crusiing on google, and now their saying the DCMA has parts of itself that are unconstituional, looks like this riaa's case is falling beneath it's eyes.


This is a new thing............................................. .....

Keep the RIAA away from your Kazaa files
"ABIT's SecureIDE will keep government supercomputers busy for weeks and will keep the RIAA away from your Kazaa files."

That's the promise of ABIT Computer's new IC7-MAX3 motherboard - and what must be the world's first product to use a claimed ability to block out the RIAA as a major selling feature.

Based in Taipei, Taiwan, ABIT obviously believes it's safe from the wiles of the RIAA and its allies in associated hardware companies.

It goes on: "For MAX3, the ABIT Engineers listened to users who were asking for information security. SecureIDE connects to your IDE hard disk and has a special decoder; without a special key, your hard disk cannot be opened by anyone. Thus hackers and would be information thieves cannot access your hard disk, even if they remove it from your PC.

"Protect your privacy and keep anyone from snooping into your information. Lock down your hard disk, not with a password, but with encryption."

Watch this space.

[FileHoover]

Woo Hoo!

Sounds great.

Won't protect you from gettting sued, but might protect you from losing the lawsuit. You still have to pony up big bucks for a lawyer though.

[FreakinWeasel]

Originally posted by FutureIverson

Keep the RIAA away from your Kazaa files
"ABIT's SecureIDE will keep government supercomputers busy for weeks and will keep the RIAA away from your Kazaa files."

That's the promise of ABIT Computer's new IC7-MAX3 motherboard - and what must be the world's first product to use a claimed ability to block out the RIAA as a major selling feature.

Based in Taipei, Taiwan, ABIT obviously believes it's safe from the wiles of the RIAA and its allies in associated hardware companies.

It goes on: "For MAX3, the ABIT Engineers listened to users who were asking for information security. SecureIDE connects to your IDE hard disk and has a special decoder; without a special key, your hard disk cannot be opened by anyone. Thus hackers and would be information thieves cannot access your hard disk, even if they remove it from your PC.

"Protect your privacy and keep anyone from snooping into your information. Lock down your hard disk, not with a password, but with encryption."

Watch this space.

Yeah unfortunatly it keeps everyone else out of your files by encrypting your HD locally. So instant leech! And if your thinking that the RIAA will confiscate your HD and look at your files. As it was explanied to me in a civil trial you have to assist the prosecution in this disclosure or risk jail for obstruction. Mind you I am not anywhere near the legal profession ( except for that little issue when I was 18.....) but it made sense the way it was explained.

[Psilaxs]

Originally posted by FreakinWeasel
Yeah unfortunatly it keeps everyone else out of your files by encrypting your HD locally. So instant leech! And if your thinking that the RIAA will confiscate your HD and look at your files. As it was explanied to me in a civil trial you have to assist the prosecution in this disclosure or risk jail for obstruction. Mind you I am not anywhere near the legal profession ( except for that little issue when I was 18.....) but it made sense the way it was explained.

Wrong, it will decrypt the data before it sends it out of course. Abit isn't stupid.

But any rate, great idea, but what happens when the confiscate your ENTIRE PC?

*EDIT* you do not have to give ANY information or assistance to the parties prosecuting you. 5th amendment.

[sleepischeap]

press the detonate button.

[Theinfamousone]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
Wrong, it will decrypt the data before it sends it out of course. Abit isn't stupid.

But any rate, great idea, but what happens when the confiscate your ENTIRE PC?

*EDIT* you do not have to give ANY information or assistance to the parties prosecuting you. 5th amendment.

I'm gonna pretend this isn't the third time I've read about this new motherboard...

Yes, Psilaxs is right, you think they are going to surgically take components out of your PC? LOL. They'll take the whole thing if they have to. The thing is that they have to get a warrant to do that, is that possible? I don't think so. Therefore this abit thing is just a way to make money off of scared users. And File Hoover is right, it doesn't stop you from getting sued and getting you hauled into court and paying for the lawyers and ruining your life, even if they were stupid enough just to take your hard drive.

[Nothingface5384]

the 5th amendmit is like a trick....it makes u look/sound guilty..like u have something to hide heh

[FreakinWeasel]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
Wrong, it will decrypt the data before it sends it out of course. Abit isn't stupid.

But any rate, great idea, but what happens when the confiscate your ENTIRE PC?

*EDIT* you do not have to give ANY information or assistance to the parties prosecuting you. 5th amendment.

Here's what the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution actually says:

"No person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself . . . ."

These RIAA lawsuits are not criminal cases. They are civil procedings. Many protections that are available under criminal law aren't available under civil law.

Read this article here (http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm)

"In a criminal case, the suspect or defendant has the right to remain silent during questioning by police and prosecuting attorneys. In a criminal case, the defendant may choose to refuse to be a witness, and the jury may infer nothing from the defendant's choice not to testify.

"However, in a civil case, the defendant must be available and cooperative for depositions and testimony as a witness in the trial. In fact, the defendant in a civil case in Federal court must voluntarily provide his/her opponent with a copy of documents "in the possession, custody, or control of the party that are relevant to disputed facts alleged with particularity in the pleadings" [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(B)] . . . .

In other words, the defendant in a civil case must help his/her opponent collect evidence that will defeat the defendant. And, at trial, if a party invokes their fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination, then the judge will instruct the jury that they may make an adverse inference against the party who refused to testify."
In civil litigation, the burden of proof is initially on the plaintiff. However, there are a number of technical situations in which the burden shifts to the defendant. For example, when the plaintiff has made a prima facie case, the burden shifts to the defendant to refute or rebut the plaintiff's evidence.

In civil litigation, the plaintiff wins if the preponderance of the evidence favors the plaintiff. For example, if the jury believes that there is more than a 50% probability that the defendant was negligent in causing the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff wins. This is a very low standard, compared to criminal law. In my personal view, it is too low a standard, especially considering that the defendant could be ordered to pay millions of dollars to the plaintiff(s).

freakin weasel edit: So it looks like if they have seen what files you have from sharing and DL them then they could make a decent argument to rat fuck you in court. Provided they could prove that you knew what you were doing

A few tort claims (e.g., fraud) require that plaintiff prove his/her case at a level of "clear and convincing evidence", which is a standard higher than preponderance, but less than "beyond a reasonable doubt."

FreakinWeasel: At any rate I'm not a laywer and I'm not trying to be a alarmist, but I do read and pay attention to other opinions such as this guys. Do I know him? Nope, he may be doing a stint at Rikers Island for all I know. But the point is, don't believe the BS Abit puts out as the new Messiah MOBO to save your ass. Trust in what you know and educate yourself. They won't be on your side if it ever comes to that.

[FutureIverson]

weasel, psxil has a point, the programs job is to keep them out completely, they wouldn't make it if it had no purpose... Abit does have a use of working for you while on a p2p program.
it's not one of those self destruct your hard drive programs. If the riaa had info on you it wouldn't do you any good. read on

[FutureIverson]

i don't know can you... the riaa doesn't need your computer to go after you anyways. and don't give them too much power. that's way too much panic right now... are they a threat and should you be scared... probably but don't run around with your head chopped off.

[DeadMan]

Bestcrypt is better and cheaper. You can have two virtual partitions in the same mounted file with TWO different passwords. One access the portion of the encrypted file with your 'safe' files and one accesses the portion where you keep your 'goodies'.

If forced to reveal the password you just go "Sure" and give them the password with the crap images of your pet cat/dog/mum etc on it. Heck throw in your CC info there too so you can give them a valid reason for having an encrypted partition.

They have no way of knowing or proving there is another portion of the file/partition holds the data they are really after. The header does not reveal this. There is nothing they can pinpoint in the file that says there is another portion to access. So what if the partition is 5GB and your collection is only a few megs. They cannot prove anything. Just play dumb.

Use of other progs to clean out any evidence of recent activity also helps.

Obfuscation along with encryption works wonders ;)

[epidemic-to-gnutella]

use steganos security suite 5.0

it is doing the same via software.

[NDGAARONDI]

Dumb question but....

Is FileHoover really banned? Sorry I'vr not been reading every topic here ;)

Thanks

[FutureIverson]

Originally posted by NDGAARONDI
Dumb question but....

Is FileHoover really banned? Sorry I'vr not been reading every topic here ;)

Thanks

Yeah, he kinda FanBoys, because he is one of the top mods at ES5, I hate when people change their status to banned, because it makes you wonder.

[NDGAARONDI]

I had thought of that. I thought I'll change my status to banned when I was having a bit of an uncivilised argument with Skankho(?) and more people chipped in. I thought if I could trick him hehe...couldn't be asked in the end.....lol

Skankho soon got banned, I think........lol

[FutureIverson]

lol, yeah i kinda check by looking at the last 3 post, if their really banned, they would have said something. also if they haven't posted lately, and their a reg, it's a good way to tell

[NDGAARONDI]

Thanks for the tip, mate. Although I guess someone could get banned from a PM too, so we could never see that. Mods could.....