At this point almost nothing about Rupert Murdoch and the behaviour of one his many Slimeball corporations should surprise anyone.<p>If you are a UK resident, you would know the horrendous actions of his tabloids - Hacking the voice mail of a Murdered Child's parents, etc. If in the US think of Fox News (all that needs to be said).<p>This guy and his corporations are as close to a nonredeemable "Bond Villain" as you can get in real life.
I'm so confused.<p>I get that he did it for his own gain, but he funded the cracking of a proprietary DRM encryption scheme.<p>Isn't the HN community anti-MPAA, anti-copyright-extension, pro-information freedom? How is this against those ideas?<p>The only victims I can see here are a DRM enforcement company and content producers. I thought we already agreed they were behemoths ready to be destroyed? And here we have someone financing their destruction and we don't like them?<p>Is it that all that rhetoric about destroying Hollywood was to destroy them without breaking the very laws we're protesting?<p>(this is an honest question. Please respond before downvoting.)
It's weird how it's taken over 10 years for this to come to light. Here's how it was originally broken to Thoic members back in 2001:<p><a href="http://pastebin.com/TW2rdkrx" rel="nofollow">http://pastebin.com/TW2rdkrx</a>
The issue has been covered at least a few times before: <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/satellite/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/satellite/</a> is one, and links to a great article about the hacker Chris Tarnovsky supposedly responsible, who has also been heavily involved securing and deploying countermeasures against hacked decoders: <a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/05/tarnovsky" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/05/tarnovsk...</a>