I thought this post from Scripting News highlights many of the errors in the new bill that is being proposed in Congress (see Wired [here])

Questions questions questions. Can a small record label run a virus too, or just the monopolies? How about a software company? How about the Department of Justice? Can they install a virus on our systems to look for terrorism and report it back to the FBI? Do you think that would be constitutional? What if there's a conflict betw a record label's virus and a car dealer's virus, which one survives? Can a record label rent space it its virus to do someone else's bidding? Could they put an advertisement in their virus? Can I go to the bathroom while using my computer? What information on my hard disk is private? What if I record my own MP3, can they erase that? Who pays for the bandwidth the virus uses? Does their virus have an implicit shrinkwrap agreement? Can Symantec defend against Hollywood's virus? Could an irate user write a virus that seeks out Michael Eisner's computer and destroys his data? What about Jack Valenti's computer? Hillary Rosen? Can we read their data? Do we have any privacy remaining after this law is passed? [Scripting News]

When is the madness going to stop? I still haven't figured out who actually supports this type of legislation, other than the big record companies. Permission to spread viruses is bad news. First, it allows the record companies to step up their bully tactics. Second, it isn't going to work anyway! The hackers and crackers will always be ahead of the idots at the record companies. How stupid are they to think that they are going to be able to use technology to beat the people who created the technology in the first place? It's like the person who carves chess pieces trying to beat Kasparov at chess. It ain't gonna work.
1:54:30 PM