1) It'll never happen
2) I would criticise this if not the fact that I believe computer hacking should be legal - for everyone.
At the moment incompetent system administrators are seen as the good guys. If people couldnt defend themselves against hacking by making legal threats, they would be forced to defend themselves by actually securing their systems - which is a good outcome.
Of course the idea that copyright holders should be allowed to hack, yet not anyone else is bullshit. On the other hand, "I urm, suspected in very good will, that the nasa satellite I hacked might have had some of my copyrighted material on it" would work as a defence according to the proposed law.
3) Who cares? I mean how much of a n00b do you have to be to be rooted by an RIAA agent. I mean these guys can't keep their own website up for more than a day without it being taken offline by hacktivists.
4) Remotly *DESTROY* a computer? Don't they mean erase some data? Unless they are talking about some very specific modules with buggy bios chips that can be wiped by software, I don't see anyone coming close to actually destroying a PC remotly. Or do they want to pass a legislation that all PCs are required to have a built in "self destruct" circuit connected to a block of plastic explosives, which of course should be remotly activated by anyone who has a spur of the moment belief based on good will
