# Could the government really destroy downloaders computers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 18, 2003, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637 "2003-06-18T05:08:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![badmana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@badmana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/badmana)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/21 "2003-06-18T14:20:33Z")
No, a better analogy would be, they find stolen stuff in your house, and then burn down your house. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/22 "2003-06-18T15:06:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by badmana \* > \*\*No, a better analogy would be, they find stolen stuff in your house, and then burn down your house. \*\* Better: **manhattan** finds a political debate in a GQ thread, and closes the thread. šŸ˜‰ ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/23 "2003-06-18T15:18:49Z")
Yes, it would CURRENTLY be illegal. More than any misunderstanding of technology on the part of Hatch (which is being overstated here[sup]1[/sup]), this is disturbing: > [@](#): > > The senator acknowledged Congress would have to enact an exemption for copyright owners from liability for damaging computers. This sort of thing is supposed to be within his area of competency as a legislator, and he should be able to see that suspending the law to allow retaliatory, not just defensive, measures in protection of property rights is a BAD idea. Even if ā€œdamageā€ simply means screwing up the filesystem [sup]2[/sup]. Hatch is a published songwriter, and his objectivity in this area is probably questionable. We are tending towards GD here. [sup]1[/sup] - the ā€œdestructionā€ remarks appear to be attached to hearing testimony from the head of MediaDefender, Inc, who said ā€œNo one is interested in destroying anybodyā€™s computer.ā€. Hatch said he WOULD be, if thatā€™s what it took. MediaDefender, BTW, is a company, surrently in ā€œstealth modeā€, that is working on policing the P2P space to protect the interests of copyright holders. Currently, it seems that they are doing things like proliferating bogus copies to frustrate downloaders and performing request flood attacks on machines they identify as having copies of their clientā€™s copyrighted material. [sup]2[/sup] - to the average person on the street, a messed up filesystem or OS may be a ā€œdamaged computerā€, in spite of the fact that no hardware damage is involved. It no longer functions, and may be beyond their competency to fix. ā€œThe damned thingā€™s brokeā€ is a reasonable assessment at that level. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/24 "2003-06-18T16:12:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by badmana \* > \*\*No, a better analogy would be, they find stolen stuff in your house, and then burn down your house. \*\* If they wreck your computer or delete other files, youā€™re right. However, if they erase just the pirated MP3ā€™s on the computer, my analogy stands. There would be some legal justification for deleting illegal material. Damaging the computer, however, would be unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![badmana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@badmana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/badmana)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/25 "2003-06-18T16:21:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Derleth \* > \*\*Better: **manhattan** finds a political debate in a GQ thread, and closes the thread. > > šŸ˜‰ \*\* No no no, the best analogy would be **manhattan** closes the thread, finds out where you live and comes by to administer a beating while chanting SDMB rules and regs. > [@](#): > > If they wreck your computer or delete other files, youā€™re right. However, if they erase just the pirated MP3ā€™s on the computer, my analogy stands. > > There would be some legal justification for deleting illegal material. Damaging the computer, however, would be unconstitutional. Of course the thread was talking about destroying your computer. Even deleting files remotely would be easy to block. And of course how do you prove itā€™s all stolen? ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/26 "2003-06-18T18:34:49Z")
How many folk woud buy a computer they knew was capable of being damaged in this way ? Itā€™d kill the computor trade dead, everyone would stick to their old machines, and their old software, we would probably not need technical help lines as stuff aged and slowly became better developed, even Microsoft might find time to take bugs out of their OS instead of writign new OSā€™s. Would a high end user with a computer critical business want such a vulnerablilty ? Any system used for law enforcement would be extremely highly targetable to. ---
**Author:** ![netscape\_6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8c91f0/32.png) [@netscape\_6](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/netscape_6)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/27 "2003-06-18T18:51:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RealityChuck \* > \*\*Extremely poor analogy that has no relevance to the situation. > > Better one: Cops find stolen merchandise in your possession. Cops confiscate stolen merchandise. > > Remember, unless thereā€™s some sort of digital rights management (like that new Apple download site), if itā€™s on your computer, itā€™s not legally your property. \*\* **no** that is misniformed at best, and a bold face lie at the worst. fair use rights allow you make mp3s copies of music you own cds, or tapes ectā€¦ diamond rio vs riaa set a precedent that coping music you own (own as in you own a michele branch cd) from one medium to another **for your own personal use** does not violate copy right. not to mention the riaa has sent dmca supeonas against people with files that just sort of had similer names but were not copy right violating files. should these idiots really be trusted to delete files? a better anology would cops get blow up cars becouse they look kind of of like they have done something wrong, wether or not they have is another story. sorry for flying off the handle there. back to your reguarly schdualed factual answers, ---
**Author:** ![netscape\_6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8c91f0/32.png) [@netscape\_6](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/netscape_6)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/28 "2003-06-18T18:55:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by netscape 6 \* > \*\* > > a better anology would cops get blow up cars becouse they look kind of of like they have done something wrong, wether or not they have is another story. > \*\* :smack: it should be a better anology would cops get blow up **drivers** cars becouse they look kind of of like they have done something wrong, wether or not they have is another story. ---
**Author:** ![badmana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@badmana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/badmana)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/29 "2003-06-18T19:07:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by casdave \* > \*\*How many folk woud buy a computer they knew was capable of being damaged in this way ? > > Itā€™d kill the computor trade dead, everyone would stick to their old machines, and their old software, we would probably not need technical help lines as stuff aged and slowly became better developed, even Microsoft might find time to take bugs out of their OS instead of writign new OSā€™s. > > Would a high end user with a computer critical business want such a vulnerablilty ? > Any system used for law enforcement would be extremely highly targetable to. \*\* Or the resulting boom from the IT market in showing people how to prevent this sort of security hole would cause a world wide shortage in IT people and Iā€™ll be rich! I dunno if it would stop the computer industry. Iā€™ll still be looking for the fastest CPUs and videocards. I just wonā€™t change to an OS that had this security hole, or Iā€™ll place all my MP3s onto my DVD-RWs (where they are right now anyways) or perhaps just place my larger HDs on my server and store everything there (hey, the thing supports 8 IDE drives anyways!). Like I said, lots of ways to prevent this sort of thing from happening. It would be just a huge waste of money (but since when did _that_ stop the government?) ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/30 "2003-06-18T19:14:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RealityChuck \* > \*\*Extremely poor analogy that has no relevance to the situation. > > Better one: Cops find stolen merchandise in your possession. Cops confiscate stolen merchandise. > \*\* Wrong, O crypto-fascist. Cops find stolen merchandise on your person. Cops then burn all your clothes and beat you up for it, or if they find it in your house, they then burn your house down for it. Oh, how very just that is, yes? ---
**Author:** ![Futile\_Gesture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f05b48/32.png) [@Futile\_Gesture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Futile_Gesture)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/31 "2003-06-18T19:31:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RealityChuck \* > \*\*Extremely poor analogy that has no relevance to the situation. > > Better one: Cops find stolen merchandise in your possession. Cops confiscate stolen merchandise. > \*\* šŸ˜• Have you read any of the OP at all? 1. The suggestion was the law enforcement authorities would not be involved. The alleged injured party would be permitted to inflict punishment without any legal action or requirement of proof. 2. The suggestion was the alleged injured party gets to damage your property, in addition to removal of the alleged stolen property. > [@](#): > > \*\*Remember, unless thereā€™s some sort of digital rights management (like that new Apple download site), if itā€™s on your computer, itā€™s not legally your property. \*\* Factually, totally incorrect. My computer has MP3s that are legally my property and/or I have full rights to. ---
**Author:** ![Punoqllads](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d2c977/32.png) [@Punoqllads](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Punoqllads)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/32 "2003-06-18T19:55:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by engineer\_comp\_geek \* > It was supposedly possible to damage a Pet by repeatedly writing to the exact same video location in a tight loop. This would cause the video ram chip to overheat. The way that DRAM/VRAM chips are made, repeatedly writing to the same memory location would do nothing special to the chip. You could damage the PET with a [killer poke](http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/k/killer_poke.html). The way I heard it, the raster deflection values were stored in memory. If you set both the horizontal and vertical deflection values to 0, the monitorā€™s electron beam would stay in the middle of the screen, eventually damaging it. As far as fair-use laws regarding recording copies of music that you purchased, I know of no case law that directly states that you have such a right. If someone does know of such a case, Iā€™d love to see it. I know that under fair use, a library has the right to make a limited number of copies for its own archival purposes, and a person has the right to tape television shows to view at a later time, though. You could argue that those imply you could make copies, but Iā€™m sure RIAAā€™s lawyers would argue right back that they donā€™t. ---
**Author:** ![Punoqllads](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d2c977/32.png) [@Punoqllads](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Punoqllads)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/33 "2003-06-18T20:04:55Z")
I missed **netscape 6** ā€™s cite of diamond v riaa. Intriguingā€¦ ---
**Author:** ![Alereon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Alereon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alereon)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2003, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/34 "2003-06-18T21:23:10Z")
I still maintain that thereā€™s no actual way to physically damage a system without physical access to it. A monitor wonā€™t let you just set it to any unsupported mode. For years, monitors have simply flashed ā€œunknown modeā€ or similar error messages if you tried to exceed their specifications, assuming that the videocard and operating system even let you do it. Windows will disable any display modes that both the videocard and monitor donā€™t indicate as supported. As for the harddrive, itā€™s certainly smart enough not to let you do anything that will physically damage it. You could try repeatedly writing and rewriting to the same location, but this would take a LONG time to do anything effectual, if it worked at all. As for the CPU, you canā€™t alter voltage settings via software. Motherboards are equipped with software programmable clock generators, but the most you can do with these is alter the FSB upwards. This could, indeed, crash the system, but it isnā€™t going to fry the processor except in the very long term, and there will be lots of instability first that would necessitate fixing the problem before damage could occur. Even this assumes that the processor and motherboard have no overheating protection, which most systems do. Furthermore, the FSB will be reset to stock at every reboot, meaning that the virus would need to stay installed and operating. Of course, firmware modification isnā€™t physical damage, youā€™re just hosing some very important software, which can be repaired. The BIOS in a modern motherboard (those produced since the Chernobyl Virus, especially) wonā€™t allow you flash them without authentication, hence why you have to use a specific flashing program. Thereā€™s also a Boot-Block BIOS that you canā€™t touch, which should remain intact even through a malicious attempt to scramble the BIOS. This would, in theory, allow the user to repair the damage without ever opening the case. You can corrupt the CMOS settings without difficulty, but this can be fixed by simply clearing the CMOS via jumper or software. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/35 "2003-06-19T07:19:28Z")
**Alereon** : > [@](#): > > I still maintain that thereā€™s no actual way to physically damage a system without physical access to it. Eh, want to dig up an old 6800 and test that theory? All of what you say holds perfectly true in _modern_ systems, but the blanket statement you made includes _all_ systems, including the ones broken enough to allow you to give them harmful instructions. If you make a statement, especially a broad statement, be prepared to back it up. ---
**Author:** ![Mearl\_Dox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@Mearl\_Dox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mearl_Dox)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/36 "2003-06-19T08:19:15Z")
I have some MP3s on my computer that are music digitally produced by myself and friends, not the music of others. Just another way a person could have the legal right to own an MP3. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/37 "2003-06-19T11:24:24Z")
Hereā€™s a thought. If they allow the recording industry guys to hack into peopleā€™s computers and delete files without their permission, arenā€™t they basically deputizing them? After all, it would amount to being given police powers (ie, search & seizure with no liability for the consequences). You could argue that, since the record companies guys would have police powers, they would become agents of the state, and they would have to obey proper search and seizure protocol. Since the law presumably wouldnā€™t require them to obtain a search warrent, it would be unconstitutional. Does this sound like solid reasoning to you guys? ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/38 "2003-06-19T11:53:49Z")
I think all this argument about ā€œdestroyingā€ is nitpicking. Viruses that erased the hard disks of the top ten most popular operating systems would be a reasonable interpreation of whatā€™s proposed IMHO. This would, of course, still be so stupid on so many levels. Hang on, why restrict to destroying remotely? Why donā€™t we allow copyright holders to hire thugs to come round and smash the computers of persistent offenders? ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/39 "2003-06-19T11:56:20Z")
Iā€™m surprised no one has mentioned the CIH virus so far. That was a virus a while back that could, and still might, remotely ā€œdestroyā€ a computer. The W32/Kriz virus has a similar payload. From [http://www.fireav.com/virusinfo/library/cih.htm](http://www.fireav.com/virusinfo/library/cih.htm) > [@](#): > > The computer motherboards manufactured in the last few years store their BIOS on a flash ROM chip which are rewritable. The CIH virus directly attacks the code stored in the flash ROM chip and makes the computer unbootable. > > In certain motherboard the BIOS chip are replaceable and solution is possible by inserting a new chip. However in most of the cases the BIOS chip is soldered to the motherboard and there is no solution except to replace the motherboard which could be expensive. If the Flash BIOS is write-protected by jumper set then the CIH virus will delete all the data stored on hard disk, which puts every computer at risk irrespective of the BIOS layout. From: > **[Symantec Security Center](https://www.broadcom.com/support/security-center)** > > Symantec security research centers around the world provide unparalleled analysis of and protection from IT security threats that include malware, security risks, vulnerabilities, and spam. > [@](#): > > The first payload overwrites the hard disk with random data, starting at the beginning of the disk (sector 0) using an infinite loop. The overwriting of the sectors does not stop until the system has crashed. As a result, the computer will not boot from the hard disk or floppy disk. Also, the data that has been overwritten on the hard disk will be very difficult or impossible to recover. You must restore the data from backups. > > The second payload tries to cause permanent damage to the computer. This payload attacks the Flash BIOS (a part of your computer that initializes and manages the relationships and data flow between the system devices, including the hard drive, serial and parallel ports, and the keyboard) and tries to corrupt the data stored there. As a result, nothing may be displayed when you start the computer. A computer technician would need to fix this. **So, although it affects only certain systems with specific hardware/software specifications, it is technically possible to remotely ā€œdestroyā€ a computer connected to the Internet.** This virus wonā€™t destroy the BIOS of a motherboard that has a boot block BIOS (as mentioned earlier), but many older motherboards do not have this feature. Additionally, some motherboards have their BIOS chips hard soldered to the motherboard. In such a case, the virus could destroy the motherboard, not just the BIOS chip. However, to practically implement such a legislation, apart from being utterly ridiculous, is not technically feasible due to the fact that there are so many different hardware and software specifications available through which to connect to the Internet. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2003, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637/40 "2003-06-19T12:33:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RealityChuck \* > \*\*Remember, unless thereā€™s some sort of digital rights management (like that new Apple download site), if itā€™s on your computer, itā€™s not legally your property. \*\* This is a completely false statement. My works of intellectual property on my computer are MINE, regardless of whether or not I have a cutesy DRM system in place. I would suggest a review of US Copyright law to look for a requirement of DRM for positive assertion of copyright (there is none). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-government-really-destroy-downloaders-computers/182637.md?page=3)