A NEW COURT RULING COULD LAND YOU IN JAIL IF YOU DO SO MUCH AS
SHARE YOUR NETFLIX PASSWORD, AS I WOULD ASSUME ONE OR TWO
OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE PUBLICLY HAVE.
ON JULY 5, THE U.S. KNIFE COURT OF APPEALS ISSUED AN OPINION
WHICH FOUND THAT SHARING PASSWORDS IS A CRIME.
THE DECISION CAME IN THE CASE OF DAVID NOSAL, AN EMPLOYEE AT THE
EXECUTIVE SEARCH FIRM KORN/FERRY INTERNATIONAL.
AFTER LEAVING THE COMPANY IS STARTING HIS OWN COMPANY, THEY
USED THE OLD LOGIN CREDENTIALS FROM AN ASSISTANT WHO WAS
STILL WORKING THERE.
SO YOU MIGHT SAY THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO
WITH HBO GO YET, BUT ONE OF THE JUDGES SAID, " HE TOOK NO
CONVICTION WITH CONVICTIONS ON TRADE SECRET VIOLATIONS,
BUT HE SAID THE NEW DECISION ALSO MAKES CONSENSUAL
PASSWORD SHARING A PROSECUTABLE OFFENSE."
AS YOU WERE DOING THE STORY I REMEMBERED THAT WE HAVE A
MEMBERSHIP AND I WAS LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE MAYBE I SHOULD
CHANGE MY OPINION.
WE'RE GONNA PUT YOU AWAY FOR LIFE IF YOU SHARE YOUR
MEMBERSHIP PASSWORD.
ANYWAY, DON'T DO THAT.
BE COOL, BUT TRUST ME WE'RE NOT GOING TO ARREST YOU.
BUT YOU SHOULD JOIN.
NOW, AS JOHN POINTED OUT, NOBODY HAS BEEN ARRESTED FOR SHARING A
NETFLIX PASSWORD YET, BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR THAT PRECEDENT.
THIS WAS THE SAME LAW THAT WAS ABUSED IN THE AARON SWARTS CASE.
HE WAS A YOUNG PROMED ñ
MIT STUDENT, YOUNG PROGRAMMER, AND HE HAD ACCESS TO THE
DATABASE AND THEY SAID THEY WERE PROSECUTING HIM FOR BEING
IN VIOLATION OF THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE.
THERE WAS AN EXCELLENT CASE TO BE MADE THAT HE WASN'T
VIOLATING THE TERMS OF SERVICE BECAUSE HE WAS A RESEARCH
FELLOW AT MIT AND HE HAD AUTHORIZED ACCESS.
THAT WAS SO WRONG IN SO MANY WAYS BUT THEY WERE GOING
AFTER HIM LIKE HE WAS A FEDERAL CRIMINAL.
A GOT SO BAD THAT HE COMMITTED SUICIDE.
IF HE WANTED TO AVOID THAT HE SHOULD'VE BEEN THE NOMINEE
FOR A MAJOR PARTY FOR PRESIDENCY.
ISN'T IT DISGUSTING THAT PEOPLE IN POWER HAVE DIFFERENT RULES?
HE WAS A GUY WHO WANTED TO GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS, HE
WAS A HUGE FIGHTER FOR THAT.
HE WANTED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION.
VERY TECHNICAL STUFF, BUT HE THOUGHT IT BELONGED IN THE
WORLD.
BUT SINCE HE UPSET THE PEOPLE IN POWER, THEY TARGETED HIM.
IT WAS ONE OF THE MOST POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS I HAVE EVER SEEN.
SO NOT ONLY IS THIS A TERRIBLE DECISION THAT WILL AFFECT MANY
OF US, IT ALSO ALLOWS THE GOVERNMENT TO TARGET THEIR
ENEMIES.
THIS IS INSANITY.
IT WAS CALLED, "THE WORST LAW AND TECHNOLOGY."
THAT PARTICULAR LAW, NOT THIS RULING NECESSARILY, BUT
THAT PARTICULAR LAW.
THAT'S RIGHT, BUT NOW WITH THIS RULING, LET ALONE
THEIR PREVIOUS DECISIONS ON THIS, THE GATE IS OPEN AND
GOD KNOWS WHAT THEY'VE UNLEASHED THROUGH THAT.
AND I REMEMBER BACK IT WAS BEING USED FOR STUFF FAR
BEYOND ITS INITIAL INTENDED USE.
I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF THE CFA THE SAME WAY THAT YOU
DO, BUT I WOULD PREFER THAT IF THEY ARE GOING TO OUTLAW
PASSWORD SHARING THAT IT NOT BE THROUGH SOME WEIRD TRADE
SECRETS HACKING THING.
INSTEAD MAKE A LAW SPECIFICALLY FOR SUBSCRIPTION-BASED SERVICES.
YOU CAN'T SHARE YOUR THING.
BUT I WOULD SAY, I TOTALLY GET IF THEY WANT TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL.
IT'S A SERVICE THAT THEY LAY OUT IN THE BIG DOCUMENT THAT
YOU DON'T READ THAT YOU SIGN ANY WAY THAT IT'S FOR YOU TO USE.
SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH THEM MAKING IT ILLEGAL TO SHARE?
I GET THAT.
I UNDERSTAND AND YOU MAKE IT A MINOR OFFENSE.
MAYBE NOT A FEDERAL CRIME.
A FEDERAL CRIME, PROSECUTED IN THIS WAY, AND WITH THIS
MUCH LEEWAY IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.