American Police Refused To Hand Over Hackers To France

While the American government requires that UK citizens are dragged into one of their courts to face sixty-year sentences, it looks like it is not even reluctant to hand over one of its own hackers over to a more sensible French court.

The US cyclist Floyd Landis had a go at cracking the PCs of the anti-doping lab that found him cheating during Tour de France 6 years ago. He was charged by the court in Paris, which heard how he and his former coach refused to show up in court. In addition, they both were helped by the government of the United States that refused to co-operate against the US hackers.

It turned out that Landis was similar to a UK hacker looking for UFOs or an Australian who published secret tapes of the US helicopter pilots who laughed as they gun down Reuters journalists. Anyway, the authorities seem to be reluctant to hand over American sporting heroes when they do the same sort of thing.

In fact, the French did have enough evidence to convict both Landis and Baker after a Trojan horse spy program was used 6 years ago to poke into the lab's servers to extract data about Landis' file, several months after he tested positive. After this, Landis admitted that he took drugs in his career. Meanwhile, the police explained that they couldn’t turn up who exactly ordered the hacking, thanks to the American authorities sitting on their hands. The data received during the hack was later used in an unsuccessful appeal to sports authorities. It was supposed to prove that Landis was clean and that the lab work was actually faulty. The court decided that Landis' role was limited to the knowledge that he had about the fraudulent origin of the laboratory data used by him and his defense team. The court also ruled that Landis knew that these lab results were really accurate, because he would admit 4 years later that he had taken drugs since 2002.

While Landis didn’t comment the trial, Baker insisted that the charges weren’t true. He said that he had nothing to do with any hacking and as far as he knew, the lab papers he received while serving as an expert consultant to the legal team were received in a legal way. He believes that everything is part of a plot to protect the laboratory, which appears to be a national French institution. As a result, they were both given a year's suspended sentences, which means that there’s probably nothing to worry about unless they ever commit another crime in this country again.

Canadians Opposed Surveillance Legislation

The governing party of Canada – the Conservatives – was planning an omnibus crime legislation which was supposed to include surveillance provision. Although the bill is not yet tabled, opposition to this bill is already growing.

Recently the web was hit by the suggestions that the Canadian surveillance bill may be bundled in to omnibus crime legislation and tabled in the near future. That wasn’t exactly news for industry observers, but the news was that multiple experts, academics and organizations have stepped up to formally oppose the bill in question. They have recently sent an open letter to Prime Minister where they voiced their concerns about the proposed legislation. The opposers cited previous laws making up the surveillance legislation in the last government session and expressed their concerns about them. The particular concern is that three of the proposed bills would have serious negative implications for the privacy rights of the citizens. In addition, the controversial aspects would not receive the scrutiny they deserve if they were rolled into an omnibus bill.

The main focus of concern was the ease by which the country’s ISPs, social networks, and even their handsets and cars can be turned into instruments to spy on their activities, thus implicating fundamental rights and freedoms. In addition, the letter contains a very detailed list of other concerns, warning that the costs of enforcing such measures would finally be passed on to consumers, because it is a new cost of doing business for Internet service providers. Actually, it has precedent: in France, when the country’s government forced Internet service providers to adopt a “three-strikes” regime, the broadband providers just passed the costs of implementing the system on to their subscribers.

Although the letter was signed by a lot of people and organizations, there’s a difference between when the citizens were fighting dangerous bills in the past and today. The matter is that the Conservatives have a majority government, which means they are able to pass whatever bills they want without fearing an opposition. In other words, no evidence or reason would matter to the government, it will simply legislate how it likes, and this is the government the country is stuck with.

School Teacher Will Sue HADOPI

A 54-year-old school teacher in France appeared to be one of the first users to be disconnected from the web under HADOPI legislation. However, he has no idea how to download illegal copies of copyrighted content, saying that he became the victim of Wi-Fi hacking.

The industry observers are tired to insist that the “three-strikes” legislation, which is quickly developed throughout the world, involves false accusations. In other words, there is probability that people who don’t download illegal content will find themselves cut off the web because the system is guilty until proven innocent.

So, the story with a teacher becomes one of the most predictable ones that the media have covered all year. A 54-year-old school teacher turned out to be disconnected from the Internet because his IP address was used by someone else to infringe copyright. The problem is that the teacher himself has never downloaded copyrighted content on the Internet. That’s why he’s planning to fight HADOPI, which only began issuing these notifications back in October of last year. According to the media reports, the teacher is even ready to take this issue to the European Justice court.

Meanwhile, the sad part of the issue is that the teacher is fighting HADOPI at great expense. Aside from having to fight the court charges, he’ll have to move from the countryside at his own expense if the problem be escalated to going to the European court.

Now the question is how this happened at the first place. Apparently, the teacher’s Wi-Fi connection was hacked. When he had received the second wrongful accusation, he took steps to secure the connection, but failed to do so, as the hackers still succeeded in breaking in to his Wi-Fi connection and his IP address was registered downloading the illegal copy of the movie “Iron Man 2”. In the meantime, the teacher is being accused of downloading that film though he has no idea how it is done.

The story came as no surprise, because with such a highly publicized new policy and outfit, Internet users were bound to cover their tracks by breaking in to someone else’s Wi-Fi connection in order to use their IP address to avoid detection. As the result, innocent citizens will get disconnected, while those responsible keep doing the same. It seems that the teacher won’t be the last target.

ACTA Might Harm National Security

The letter sent by the Department of Homeland Security said that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement turned out to be a potential national security risk back three years ago. 

One of the outfits following the ACTA development has received very interesting information over the agreement way back in 2008. When the treaty was first discovered, it was the worst that ever happened to copyright legislation. The agreement included a global “three-strikes” regime, which demanded that all digital devices including laptops and MP3 players be seized at borders and checked for infringing content. Moreover, it featured DMCA-style anti-circumvention provisions, and any negotiations over the treaty were entirely secret. It actually became known thanks to Wikileaks, which blew the lid off the treaty.

Ever since the information leaked online, there were many criticisms of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, one of them being that it represents a national security risk due to containing a “three-strikes” provision. France, which has already introduced the similar regime, was “yelled” at by the NSA for that. That’s what Homeland Security pointed out back then.

It turned out that the Department of Homeland Security sent a letter to the US ambassador, where it expressed concerns over the treaty negotiations. More specifically, the concern was about border security, or the priority IP Enforcement had as compared to other national security threats. The Department of Homeland Security asked where all the extra resources needed for seizing and searching all staff at borders would come from. What is more important, the letter was sent before the stock market crashed and the country considered tightening the belt. You can imagine what costs it would be today, if 3 years ago it was a matter of concern already. How does this relate to national security? Easy. Now ACTA would demand Homeland Security to do more with less resources, and if it tries to allocate all its resources to searching though every mobile phone and MP3 player at borders, then national security would be put at risk.

In other words, it looks like there’s a choice between huge national security risks and counterfeiters. That would be weird if the governments prefer corporate interests to issues of national security, but this war on copyright infringement is really getting out of hand.