Anonymous strikes back: takes down DoJ, Universal, RIAA and MPAA sites | Hacker News Reader

Anonymous strikes back: takes down DoJ, Universal, RIAA and MPAA sites

geek.com

128 points11031a31 comments

This ... doesn't help. Especially right now.

If I worked PR for SOPA/PIPA, I'd try to associate the anti-SOPA/PIPA movement with Anonymous. Let's see: Megaupload is a foreign website being taken down. SOPA is about taking foreign websites down. Anonymous responds with vandalism as a result of Megaupload being taken down. Therefore, anyone opposing SOPA are criminal vandals. Yep, that logic should be strong enough for the American public.

But it also gives you the excuse to say "see? we don't need SOPA, overseas websites are already being closed down".

It doesn't matter what "the American public" thinks, as long as senators' phones keep ringing an people keep organizing. The copyright mafia will never be able to take the streets, TeaParty-style, so whether they brainwash a moron here and there doesn't really matter.

EDIT: btw, I do find the timing of this operation quite "funny". Conspiracy theorists will go wild.

This would be more interesting if it was something that affected those groups. Those groups live in different media, not online. If their cable streams were hacked, billboards, advertising, commercials were compromised, it would truly taking the 'fight' to their door.

I'm still waiting for a well-formed movement to impact the RIAA/MPAA financials via boycott. It seems everyone that is anti-SOPA is also against their business practices, and if the 4 million people that signed the google petition could even partially support it that seems much more meaningful.

Are not all the people who choose to download content without payment already carrying out a form of deafacto boycott?

In the opinion of the RIAA/MPAA they are. I think that's not necessarily true because many of them are still buying media, just not all of the possible media that interests them.

They're probably still going to the movies, renting or buying DVDs (redbox, Amazon/iTunes, Netflix), listening to music on the radio, buying CDs, paying for cable, etc. A total boycott would be difficult - basically no music, TV, or movies unless they were independently distributed.

Personally, I already mostly do this. Pandora on my way to work is an exception.

In a sense, yes, but they're also proving that the products they are "boycotting" are so important to them that they cannot do without them, even to make a point that supposedly is very important to them. It doesn't tell the MPAA "you need to provide a more valuable product", it tells them exactly the opposite - their product is so important to them that they can't live without it.

It tells them that if they can manage to game the political system to push the risk of prosecution and/or cost of conviction high enough, then many of those people will pay. In other words, it motivates them to do exactly what they are doing.

On the other hand, if very large group were to simply stop consuming they would be in a much stronger bargaining position. I don't see that happening though. I just don't believe enough 1st world humans have it in them to pull off something like that.

> Are not all the people who choose to download content without payment already carrying out a form of deafacto boycott?

but they're also proving that the products they are "boycotting" are so important to them that they cannot do without them

That seems like a rather strong conclusion to draw from seeing someone willing to pay no money and assume a negligible risk in order to acquire the product.

Taking the fight IRL would also escalate the situation to a point where anonymous members would be seriously hunted down by FBI and (overseas) CIA as a full-on terrorist organization. I don't think even anons really want that.

One thing is to express your dissatisfaction and disaffection towards the establishment who is "messing with the intertubes"; another is to move every night to a different house and go out cutting telegraph poles.

> This would be more interesting if it was something that affected those groups. Those groups live in different media, not online. If their cable streams were hacked, billboards, advertising, commercials were compromised, it would truly taking the 'fight' to their door.

But that would probably entail doing something more than loading up LOIC...

Some of Anonymous's early protests were impressive. But this is just cowardly vandalism. The DoJ is not thinking, "Whoa, we better not arrest any more copyright infringers so our web site is safe."

'If only tool you have is a DDoS...'

It's time for Anonymous to do something more creative. They are capable of it. DDoSing people doesn't work anymore.

I predict that Anonymous will face the same emotional reaction as al'Qaida. "We will never bend to terrorists."

And I support this sentiment. Anonymous is retarded, and HN is retarded for not coming out strongly against them.

Interesting... you realise you are in the latter group you are calling retarded?

Can I ask why you think that? And why you buy into US propaganda and apply it so readily to other groups?

N.B By propaganda I mean applying the label "terrorist" to anything I want right wing support for.

Sounds like a trick to make us _like_ terrorists. ;-)

Many here certainly wants to disrupt society.

> HN is retarded for not coming out strongly against them.

Just how many are supporting this? I do not condone their SOPA-like tactics one bit. These actions are purely harmful to us.

I can see where you are coming from but on the other hand I can also understand that others take a less rational approach to things like that. In my personal view of morality any form of protest is acceptable as long as it doesn't endanger human life. Certainly this activism is going to lead to a backslash but on the other hand I appreciate that it is today possible for people to retaliate against actions that had no trial and no due process.

Protest I understand. And while you & I know that some silly DoS of a few random sites is pretty harmless, the average person thinks of this as some evil hacker thing.

I absolutely support protesting. I just want people to protest in a more effective way. Remember: ex-RIAA lawyers got top Justice Department spots a few years back. This is just the other shoe dropping. This has probably been in the works for quite a while now. Maybe the timing was hastened or something for political reasons, but I doubt they started this investigation yesterday.

> Anonymous is retarded, and HN is retarded for not coming out strongly against them.

This is the kind of eloquent criticism that I read the HN comments for.

My dad could beat up Anonymous' dad.

HN is a political organization now?

Protesting a law that threatens one's own existence doesn't mean one has to then express an opinion on every political fact under the sun.

My knee jerk reaction here is to fist pump and go "yea!" I do wonder though if this accomplishes much. I don't think these sites are really that integral to anyone's day, and unless they can somehow keep them down it's a short lived thing.

It's of form of "offensive blackout" I guess, that will raise awareness.

Yeah. It is true that most computer literate people understand it is just a website going down, but often CNN, etc report it like it was an airstrike. For example when the CIA's site was slightly slowed down it was reported in some news outlets as "hackers attack the CIA"

That's true, I know my mom would imagine the DoJ site was some sort of super site and think it an incredible feat to bring it down.

My first reaction was a hearty chuckle. I know vigilantly justice is wrong but in this case I'll let that slide. None of these targets actually lost much given that they are mostly just for information sites.

Just so you know: it's "vigilante", pronounced "vigilantay". There's a secret accent over that last 'e'.

Actually, it's pronounced "vij-uh-lan-tee." No accent.

Actually, it's "vigilante" with a silent "e" as in "dilettante".

-Pronunciation troll

Will thank you Anonymous! you and occutards are responsible for SOPA, PIPA and NDAA without you we couldn't have had all this fun thank you!!! middle fingers extends

What do "occutards" have to do with this?

And do you really think that the media industry wouldn't have pushed for SOPA and PIPA if not for them?

Indeed, they were pushing for laws like PIPA and SOPA long before Anonymous and Occupy even existed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com