Did you vote for or are you going to vote for a politician who supports illegal spreading of computer viruses around the world? It is a federal offence in USA, as well as most other countries around the world. Yet some politicians have close ties to the organisations that are spamming the p2p networks with compputer viruses. Some politicians have been sponsored/donated to by such organisations or members there of, to support their illegal activities. Spreading of computer viruses is akin to Terrorism. Just in the same way 'deliberate' spreading of viruses like the bird flu or any other potentially highly contagious & deadly human virus, would be viewed as terrorism.

Spreading of computer viruses around p2p networks has cost business world wide highly financially by having to close their systems or database damage, and losses of jobs as a result. As you can see, terrorists do not care who they harm along the way. And deep down neither do the politicians who support them, as long as they get to their political aims of remaining in office.

RIAA’s “Recording Industry Of America Inc. Political Action Committee” and MPAA’s “Motion Picture Association of America Political Action Committee” & other groups that support software companies & porn industries sponsor companies that spam p2p networks. More about this http://www.gnutellaforums.com/downlo...h-results.html

So who are these Politicians who have received donations & support these organisations who spam viruses around the world?

Here's a starting point: Bart Gordon (Democratic Rep., Tennessee), Tom Feeney (Republican, Florida), Lamar Smith (Republican, Texas), Rep. Wexler (Democrat, Florida), Mary Bono (Democrat, California), Senator Joe Biden (D-Del)

Some politicians financially sponsored by the RIAA / MPAA (direct or/and advertising, personal donations in the names of its staff)

Some known Anti-p2p sharing politicians: Lamar Smith (Republican,Texas), who wants p2p sharers to be jailed for up to 10 years for sharing a few songs. Now really, is not spreading of computer viruses a more severe breach of law & more damaging world wide. Such politicians should themselves be locked away for a lifetime for supporting terrorist organisations.

These politicians are in favor of bringing in internet packet analysing, which is akin to listening in to everyone's personal telephone calls. Thus, nobody's email will be safe from being seen by .... ? Makes you wonder doesn't it. Would you vote for politicians who support these Bills to create laws allowing this, and draconian laws to jail people for simple file sharing?

Leading articles:

Bush Signs Draconian Anti-Piracy Law | TorrentFreak

Which Politicians voted for the Bill? See if anybody you may vote for is on this list.

Senators want Justice Department to sue P2P pirates | Latest News in Politics and Law - CNET News

RIAA and MPAA Fund Anti-Piracy Politicians | TorrentFreak

buckeye express is severly throttling torrents, and seeding is almost worthless .. lowest article on page about present USA parties & their views.

GovTrack: House Vote On Passage: S. 3325: Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual...

Slashdot | Senator Proposes to Monitor All P2P Traffic for Illegal Files

Congress Moves to Criminalize P2P

More articles:

Congress: P2P networks harm national security | Tech News on ZDNet

Techdirt: Politicians Blame P2P Software For Not Stopping Gov't Employee Stupidity

US Congress: P2P networks harm national security - News - Builder AU

Committee Holds Hearing on Inadvertent File Sharing over Peer-to-Peer Networks :: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform :: United States House of Representatives

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Music | Destroy 'pirate' PCs, says politician

Deep packet inspection meets 'Net neutrality, CALEA: Page 1

The Record Industry's Decline : Rolling Stone

I know this post is over a year and a half old, but i was wondering if any of these laws and what not have been passed? Do you have an update?

BCI

You know, as much as I like the sentiment of this thread but life and voting for an MP or government is not that simple as a one issue subject.

Obviously, I cannot speak for the American system but here in the UK, when voting, you have to consider the range of issues a candidate stands for and then weigh up which is the most important.

And for me, although I love it, P2P usage comes way down the line when I consider who and what party I am going to vote for come election time (which is likely to be April or May of this year)..


UK Bob

I dunno...I think the way a politico votes on certain subjects is a real indication of just who it is that owns them...I prefer to vote for those that look like they are the least owned...being owned (pwned?) by the RIAA/MPAA doesn't sit well with me...

__________________


So Long and Thanks for All the Files
_____________________________________________

Beware of the big 3 insurance companies in Texas! Read your policies carefully (maybe you'll need a lawyer) Allstate, Farmers & State Farm are overextended and their 'coverage' is worthless...a true waste of your money Read This

Agreed. It would be nice to have someone run for office that only worked on things that were really important. Someone that was really for the people, and not just a big talker. I had the hardest time deciding on who to vote for the last election. Most of my friends (like most college students in the US) voted for Obama. Even though he was the obvious better out of the two(Palin being anywhere near the white house is a nightmare even in thought, ecspecially with McCain looking like he could kick-the-bucket at any time) I ended up not even voting. I guess I have a hard time trusting anyone for their word, ecspecially someone who seems to be a big talker (It's been a year now, and I still havent seen any substantial movements done on his part yet).

And as for that "Senator wants to monitor p2p for illegal files" act, anyone that would honestly think some 60 year old came up with this idea all by himself, to really monitor p2p for CP(of course the RIAA had nothing to do with this) is blinded. Why would they need a billion dollars to monitor Gnutella? All you need is p2p software to connect to the network, do a search, and whoever is sharing those illicit files can be caught. But of course, this "Operation Fairplay" software can do "way" more than that, and they obviously need this billion to "train officers to use this special software". Ha.

Yep, the RIAA and MPAA have absolutely nothing to do with this....wow.

In politics, 'ya dance with the one who brung ya.'

If I want to fix education or legalize marijuana I've got to get elected. When a corporation wishes to express it's free speech ($) by supporting me, and they only ask for my vote on another issue that I don't care anything about, I'll take their money and they'll get my vote.

Indeed, my constituents, who supoorted me 'cause I was going to fix the schools, may not care that I have to vote for the RIAA's agenda in order to get corporate support. Would I get re-elected if I didn't fix the schools because I turned down RIAA's money, in order to protect your kid's right to use p-p?


When you need, say, a homeless shelter for 200 people, you'll probably get offered funds for 50 people. Do you take the money so you can at least help those 50? Thing is, you can't come back next year and ask for money for the other 150 people because the Legislature will tell you there isn't enough time to address every important issue; a problem that was addressed last year is just not going to get back on the agenda for a couple more years.

Or do you turn down the offer to help 50 people because you want to come back next year and say that there remains a desperate need to help the 200? You get far more media coverage when you can say, "Nothing has been done to fix this!", instead of, "They haven't done enough".

The question is tricky enough if we're talking about widgets. When the issue is about people's suffering, (the 50 who will sleep in the cold because of your concerns for the other 150), it becomes a very difficult decision.

Most people say we should lock up crack-addicted expectant mothers so that they can get proper nutrition and pre-natal care, to have healthy babies who will grow up to become good taxpayers. However, addicts don't like to be locked up. When those expectant mothers find that going in for pre-natal care will result in them being locked up, they don't go. We end up with crack-addicted mothers who receive no pre-natal care, and babies who grow up to be tax recipients. Trying to explain that to people results in many saying, "So you just want to let them do crack!" No, but the road to Hell...

The above are two examples of my reasons for leaving the Dept. of Public Health, and giving up any thoughts of holding elective office. If you really care, you face endless frustration when services provided a community are based upon budget, rather than need.

bci:

I appreciate your dilemma, however I disagree with your final decision to abstain from voting. I think you should be required to vote or pay a fine for making the rest of us decide for you. I put on a uniform and stood at post to protect your rights; please excercise them.

Our friends from Down Under are required to vote. And on the whole, I believe the average Aussie is more politically aware than the average Yank. Even when your vote is for the lesser of two evils, you're involved in the system, and that's the first step in holding elected officials accountable. Politicians are far more open to hear from one who says, "I voted for you..."

Blackhorse 70V

I totally agree with your sentiments and the Australians compulsory voting system.

As for BCI, suppose Palin became the US President by default, i.e. McCain became President then dies, the world would be a far more dangerous place because that woman would start WWIII out of shear ignorance.

I believe that if you want your government to provide services, such as a police force, medical facilities, shelter for the less fortunate, etc., then you have to vote for it.


UK Bob

I fully intended on voting at first. It wasn't that I didn't care, I guess I just began to feel that my vote would not have mattered. It was quite obvious that Obama was going to win, even die-hard Republicans were voting for him. I know I should have voted, and I fully intend on voting during the next election, as well as for or against future bills trying to be passed in my state. However, my interest in politics has really only just started to kick in, and I fully intend to keep tabs on what is going on with our Government.

BCI

Pardon my minor rebuke but I get the impression that you guys in the US just don't realise how important it is to the world that you cast your vote and don't let an ignoramus get (back) into the White House through apathy.

So when you next vote for a President just remember you are not just voting for domestic US issues but the direction the whole world's going to take for the next four or so years.


UK Bob

My neighbor's son lives in the UK. He tells everyone that he's Canadian.

I was a proud american kid when Kennedy was Pres. Since then I have seen the slow erosion of which he spoke. (You can download his inaugural speech by using some kind of p-p software.) After the shrub stole the election I was afraid to leave the country as I can't fake another nationality.