Never, perhaps, has this been so true as it is now, when the Recording Industry Association of America feels they are losing potential sales.

According to this article, "Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif., formally proposed legislation that would give the industry unprecedented new authority to secretly hack into consumers' computers or knock them off-line entirely if they are caught downloading copyrighted material."

According to the same article, "Records show Berman received at least $186,891 from the entertainment industry during the 2001-02 election cycle, including $31,000 from The Walt Disney Co. and $28,050 from AOL-Time Warner Inc."

To continue, from the same source, "Under the bill, companies would not be required to warn users in advance of their actions. A user wrongly attacked could sue only if he suffered more than $250 in economic losses and obtained permission to file a lawsuit from the U.S. attorney general."

Did you get that?

In case you missed it, or in case you think I might have been ingesting hallucinogenic drugs, let me sum it up:

1. A single industry, the recording industry, will be allowed, if this bill passes, to break into your computer if they suspect that you may be downloading material copyright by them.
2. They do not have to prove anything before they attack you.
3. They can root around in whatever files they define as relevant.
4. They are allowed to attack your computer to the point of knocking it off line, even though this might disable the subnet or the entire network that you are using.
5. Other users on that network have no legal recourse if the RIAA interferes with their connectivity while going after you.
6. You have no legal recourse unless you can prove that the RIAA attacked your computer in error, that the damages exceed $250.00, and that the RIAA was responsible for the damage.
7. Even then, you must obtain the permission of the Attorney General of the United States before you can file a lawsuit.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

In all fairness, the RIAA must notify the Justice Department before attacking you, and they can't deliberately spread viruses.

I'm glad some safety provisions are built into this bill, because otherwise I might think that Berman, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary subcommittee on courts (which has decision-making powers over the Internet and intellectual property) had taken at least $186,891 in bribes from the entertainment industry and sold out the rights of the people of the United States.

(Berman, by the way, is co-author of a joint resolotion, proposed back in March of 2001, to repeal the 22^nd amendment to the Constitution. He may be mischievous, but he's certainly not boring!)

If this bill passes, can the software industry be far behind? If the RIAA can root around in your computer at the mere suspicion that you might be illegally sharing or copying music, why can't Microsoft? Don't they deserve redress for their losses too?

Please note: I do not condone stealing. Artists work hard for their money. The rights to security and privacy do not extend to allowing us to abuse them by taking - or giving - what is not ours to have or to share. Nobody has a right to own anything just because they want it.

But we do have a tradition, derived from British common law, and dating back to the 14^th century, of presuming people to be innocent until proved guilty.

We have a legal system to support that, and to define, step by step: how this judging is to be done, what proof is required and with whom the burden of producing it lies, the limits of punishment, and a right to appeal.

This legal system, though hardly without flaw, has for the most part worked since the adoption of our Constitution. Changes have been needed and changes have been made. It has been an important component in keeping this country together and is a defining element of our society and those societies that have looked to the United States as a model.

Now is not the time to throw it out.