Slashdot Mirror

I've been wondering why YouTube apparently isn't being hammered with take-down notices. You find a published song or bootleg recording, watch it, and it's still there several years later.

Maybe the labels tacitly acknowledge that it's good advertising.

They can leave it there, claim it is theirs, add adverts, and make money off the adverts, instead of taking it down.

The boss of SONY was complaining that the music rights organisation in Germany was just taking down videos, instead of doing this: http://torrentfreak.com/sony-music-boss-censored-youtube-videos-cost-us-millions-120224/

"No, someone said 'we're going to do that'

And someone else pointed out that it hasn't been legal to do that in sweden at any point in history"

Is there some reason you made all that up? Parliamentary immunity still holds and would be perfectly valid as suggested. The plan was announced in anticipation of the pirate party winning seats and the pirate party just didn't win the seats.

http://torrentfreak.com/swedish-pirate-party-fails-to-enter-parliament-100919/
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-07/5/pirate-bay-swedish-parliament

Apparently not everyone has seen this review of which VPN providers live up to their marketing hype, so I'll share. HMA is definitely not one to expect much from when push comes to shove with the MAFIAA. http://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/

Homeless people with pirate boxes?

http://mxp.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/robin-meades-tuesday-morning-express-preview-controversial-scheme-pays-homeless-to-be-wifi-hotspots-at-sxsw/

+

http://torrentfreak.com/piratebox-takes-file-sharing-off-the-radar-and-offline-for-next-to-nothing-120311/

In this case, I would be willing to be that the reason is that the pirate groups have now made x264 the defacto standard for standard definition TV. AVI is falling by the wayside, and therefore Mozilla is just keeping up with the tech savvy of the interwebs. http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-pirates-go-nuts-after-tv-release-groups-dump-xvid-120303/

No and no.

'Companies must understand that if they want access to 500 million consumers in the EU, then they have to comply. This is not an option,'

The EU legislation needs to learn the same lesson that the US legislators haven't learned yet... The internet is a flexible, resilient system that will route around damage, and attempts to censor it only end up hurting the censor's pockets and/or public image. See the Google vs. China debacle last year, for one high-profile (and perhaps high-profit) example. Alternatively, type "SOPA" or "PIPA" into your favorite search engine, and see the raging fire of the responses.

Not only do I think the EU's new privacy laws will be (by and large) ignored, but I think FaceBook will only pay attention if their users band together in ridiculously large numbers to complain... by making a FaceBook page about it.

The problem here boils down to "we make more money with this scheme than your piddly little fines can ever hope to 'punish' us", and "we're not even based in your country, so your laws mean precisely as much as we allow them to" ... besides, it's not like these sites are providing a public service, or coercing people's "private" information. If you want to play the game, you gotta give your name. Wanna play some more? Give us your cell phone number. Don't like giving away your "private" info to just any website that asks? Be more selective about the stuff you do online, and only transact with sites you trust and/or don't actually care about the information they want. Or do what many are already doing, and simply lie.

At what point did everyone forget that old axiom "Knowledge is Power"? Or does no one make the connection between money, power, and knowledge? Does no one realize that it is just as easy to use the equation "Money = Power = Information"?

On to slightly unrelated, and yet completely relevant discussion:

We're at a strange place in a legal sense - there are thousands of unenforceable laws on the books, most of them about ridiculously convoluted methods of acquiring things/money/information in an illicit fashion, and yet there are literally billions of people who care so little about these "minor details" that they have "illegal" music on their portable audio devices. Even the copyright-enforcement people have been caught "stealing" music and video from the original artists. (Yeah, I know, the source would seem to be biased, but it was the second result for a google query "copyright agency caught stealing music", and the first actually relevant one... interestingly enough, this article about the Dutch having this issue wasn't even the one I was looking for - the first case I heard about was in Canada).

At some point, the laws aren't going to be worth the paper the warrants aren't even printed on anymore. It's fairly apparent that it's all about an outmoded system's power grab, just like the ??AA's money grab with the copyright legislation. The danger here is that the system is getting so absurd that no one will pay attention to any of the laws, because the only ones with any actual threat of punishment are ones that they can't enforce, due to the sheer number of people breaking them.

As an example, when this new American health-care reform thing goes through, and everyone is "required" to carry health insurance, I'm wondering what the response will be if someone refuses... will they arrest them for being sick and going to a hospital? If so, the American taxpayer will feed them, clothe them, house them, and pay for their healthcare - as "punishment" for not paying astronomical fees for what amounts to legalized gambling (and what else can you call insurance, really?)

The only upside to being a "good citizen" any more, obe

http://torrentfreak.com/copyright-industry-calls-for-broad-search-engine-censorship-120127/
An idea like that would be useful for the USA. Its from "copyright holders" not some US gov group, content becomes harder to find or is just de-listed.
So terms like “mp3, “flac”, “wma”, “aac”, “torrent”, “download”, “rip”, “stream” or “listen”, “free” get pushed to the back of a few 100, 1000? pages of search results or are just de-listed.
As for secrets? If you write a book you may end up like Glenn Carle, a former CIA agent who wrote about Gitmo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B86rc2VJAio
Or if you write a paper on the "internet" as Sean Gorman did mapping fiber-optic networks http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A23689-2003Jul7?language=printer you may face new "security guidelines".
The next step is Costas Tsalikidis (Greek telco whistleblower) , Adamo Bove (head of security at Telecom Italia) - nobody will know anymore.

Universal and all of the major media labels have moderator privileges on Youtube. They don't have to make any claim at all - they just click the "ban this" button. They went so far as to ban an advertisement for MegaUpload that was legitimate content they had no right to. Watch that video. Unless UMG has been making advertisements for MegaUpload they could not possibly own any of the content in it.

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but being associated with Big Media is pretty much toxic for politicians right now.

It may be toxic, but they don't seem to care! http://torrentfreak.com/australia-us-copyright-colony-or-just-a-good-friend-120121/

Oh, and also in case you hadn't noticed, the EU hasn't actually signed ACTA yet. Technically they have until March next year, IIRC, though I expect someone will try to sneak it through in the very near future before the politicians realise it's too close to SOPA and PIPA (in some respects) and likely to cause similar grief.

Poland is looking to sign it now. That was the reason for all those attacks, and they seem to be pushing them forward against the public wishes. http://politics.slashdot.org/story/12/01/25/0211219/piratbyran-co-founder-says-stop-ddosing-polish-sites

Also, while the European Commission (the unelected guys who seem to be behind the secret negotiations) still publicly support ACTA, whether they can get it through the European Parliament (the elected guys who recently got new teeth under the Lisbon Treaty and seem to be enjoying exercising their powers) is a different question.

That would make sense, but the politicians all over the world seem to be doing the opposite of what is sensible. Once again, the entire world of elites are ignoring the people. And once again, there will come a point where the people remind them that they are outnumbered.

http://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/

I was using Patriot Internet, but since they no longer run a VPN service I switched to VPNReactor.

https://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/

who did MU piss of really.

As has been pointed out before:

I think what really happened is that UMG realized how powerful our message was, how potent it would become, and how positively it would affect Mega's image. From rogue to vogue. They decided to stop us at all costs, that becomes clear when you see the defense strategy of UMG in court. They have nothing and they don't even care.

UMG knows that we are going to compete with them via our own music venture called Megabox.com, a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations direct to consumers and allowing artists to keep 90% of earnings.

We have a solution called the Megakey that will allow artists to earn income from users who download music for free. Yes that's right, we will pay artists even for free downloads. The Megakey business model has been tested with over a million users and it works. You can expect several Megabox announcements next year including exclusive deals with artists who are eager to depart from outdated business models.

Source

Firstly, it breaks the fundamental incentive underlying our entire economy: you have to produce value to earn money before you can enjoy value produced by other people when you spend that money.

I have two problems with this line of reasoning (not mocking yo, sorry if it sounds that way).

First, as I said before, old ways of thinking don't necessarily apply to the new digital world, where distribution and/or manufacturing costs can be 0, or negligible.

Secondly, Our society does not necessarily reward producing value with money. lottery winners, heirs, people on welfare etc. Having money by no means you have produced or contributed something useful.

Secondly, we have only someone's word for it that they would never really have paid for something even if there was no other way to enjoy it. I find that claim preposterous in many cases.

Well, that's much harder to prove. I know that a lot of the movies I downloaded there is no way in hell I would have paid for. I got them because I was curious or simply wanted to pass the time. I I couldn't download then I would do something else. There is simply no way in hell a lot of the stuff I choose to waste my time with is even worth renting for $1 from redbox. Likewise with some games I play, I have absolutely zero interest on playing online. When a game is $70 with a focus on multiplayer and I only want to play the single player campaign that is about 5 hours long, there is no chance I will ever pay for that. If they offered the campaign separately then I would.

If piracy is decriminalised, then surely there is no such thing as piracy any more by definition, so I don't know what you mean here.

It isn't that simple. If Switzerland decriminalized piracy that doesn't mean corporations in the US don't consider it piracy. You can still infringe copyright without permission from the copyright holder, even if you can't be held accountable for doing so.

You've made similar claims several times in this discussion. There are more than 150 members of the World Trade Organisation, including pretty much the entire developed world, and under TRIPS all of those have basic minimum standards for things like legal copyright protections. There are only 200 or so countries in the world. So where is it that you claim piracy is legal, and how do their creative and consumption economies look compared to places like the US and Europe?

It's It's legal in Switzerland

It's It's legal in Canada

It's It's legal in The Netherlands

Their creative and consumption economies are not impacted by piracy, as that was often the reason to make it legal in the first place.

The trouble is, as any researcher can tell you, what people say and what they do are frequently different things, whether intentionally or otherwise.

Oh, sure. Except we have overwhelming evidence that people will still pay for stuff when it is offered for free. Look at the various games or CDs released for free or without any DRM, people still pay for it. They have a choice not to and still chose to do so, to the point that the content creator can make a nice profit.

The only way to know for sure what people consider worth paying for is to give them no choice but to pay for it if they want it and see who pays. That will tell you, by definition, who really thinks it's worth the asking price.

Done and done.

They're only making those millions because of all the people who actually pay to see the movie or play the game. The pir

In that Megaupload song they say it was 4% of the internet, and what does that mean exactly? 4% of all internet users used it? 4% of all traffic?

It's more like fraud. And fraud is a criminal offence with substantial penalties in many places, because it is damaging to the victims,

You may be the first I have seen who compares piracy to being more like fraud than stealing. I don't understand your reasoning, could you elaborate?

is unfair to those who conduct their financial business legally, and can have severe economic consequences if done on a large scale.

How is it unfair to people who do their business legally? How is it unfair in a legal sense where piracy is legal? How are there severe economic consequences when piracy has been shown to have positive effects for the economy?

Well, the first recorded usage of the term in the sense we're talking about is given in the early 1700s by most etymological dictionaries, so you're only off by three centuries [etymonline.com]. Hey, at least you were close.

Wiki says at least since 1603, so at the most I was off by a century.

Well, given that Slashdot readership is obviously neutral on this issue, I'm sure that's a representative sample of the literature.

I'm also struggling to find all those studies, but I suppose it's just that my Google-fu is weak. Maybe you could help me out by citing some of them?

The slashdot readership is irrelevant, as they had no influence on the studies that Slashdot chose to report.

Some links to studies:

Do Illegal Copies of Movies Reduce the Revenue of Legal Products? The case of TV animation in Japan

Swiss Government Study Finds Internet Downloads Increase Sales

Canadian Study: Piracy Boosts CD Sales

I hope that helped. You're Google-fu must indeed be weak.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of abundant high-quality work created by people who have rent to pay.

You seem to imply that piracy will prevent the people who create high quality work from being able to pay their rent. That doesn't seem to match with the evidence. Care to elaborate?

And in the meantime they won't be competing with the record labels, connecting direct to artists and paying 90% like they proposed. Which is what this seems to be about.

Found an interview. Apparently Mega was looking to go head-to-head with the big record labels, and give artists 90%. And pay them for free downloads too.

It's here.

Forgive my squirrelly ignorance of American law, but I thought there was some kind of safe harbour law? Did they do something to void protection under such a law? Or is youtube going down next?

I managed to find this:

“Pirate websites such as megaupload.com, which obviously infringe massive quantities of movies, songs, images, and other extremely valuable copyrighted works, and directly profit from the infringing activity over which they have complete control, were never meant to be eligible to receive a DMCA safe harbor,” states the lawsuit.

I'm not sure about the legality of this, I'm not an expert in US law. Can someone please clarify?

SOPA is NOT DEAD! “Due to the Republican and Democratic retreats taking place over the next two weeks, markup of the Stop Online Piracy Act is expected to resume in February" http://torrentfreak.com/sopa-is-baaack-120117/

It's much harder to sue each user than to bring down a tracker, particularly if common sense continues to prevail.

If this law would only combat copyright infringement, I would be all for it. But it doesn't. This law is based on blocking from vague accusations just like the DMCA, and look how that law has been abused. Takedown requests generated by bots who select files which have the same words as the title of a movie/song or whatever. Takedown requests for things they don't even own. And of course, religious organizations abused the DMCA to silence critics.

Then there are the lawsuits. Suing Veoh which destroyed them, even though they won the lawsuit. Then there is Viacom v. YouTube where viacom sued YouTube, even though Viacom was uploading the videos for promotion. Then there is this video which I am not sure I agree with, but he has a point.

Then there is what happened in Denmark.

It all seems to me that the big media companies main goal is to turn the Internet into a one way TV medium which doesn't allow user content, not protect their copyrights.

If this law would only combat copyright infringement, I would be all for it. But it doesn't. This law is based on blocking from vague accusations just like the DMCA, and look how that law has been abused. Takedown requests generated by bots who select files which have the same words as the title of a movie/song or whatever. Takedown requests for things they don't even own. And of course, religious organizations abused the DMCA to silence critics.

Then there are the lawsuits. Suing Veoh which destroyed them, even though they won the lawsuit. Then there is Viacom v. YouTube where viacom sued YouTube, even though Viacom was uploading the videos for promotion. Then there is this video which I am not sure I agree with, but he has a point.

Then there is what happened in Denmark.

It all seems to me that the big media companies main goal is to turn the Internet into a one way TV medium which doesn't allow user content, not protect their copyrights.

You are oversimplifying it. There are very few radical pirates who don't believe in copyright at all. The problem is not with the idea of copyright, it's how it is implemented. Also, you seem to only view the problem from an ethical/emotional point while mostly disregarding the practical side of it which in an issue as complex as copyright legislation simply doesn't work, this topic is not black and white.

Also, what "attempt" are you speaking of? There are already tons of laws against piracy in America. The fines for copyright infringement are already irrealistically high. DMCA and ACTA are already overly broad. And you say you want even more laws, even worse than them?

It seems to me that you have fallen for the apocalyptic crap of the Big Media. They have been predicting the end of music end movies for ages. The fact is, there isn't much proof of that decline. I'm not saying that piracy doesn't exist, but it is, despite the propaganda, a contained problem. And since you like to draw analogies with theft so much, let me illustrate it to you with the example of theft. Theft is illegal, but that doesn't mean it never happens. You can't prevent crime completely, but you can contain it. Shop owners calculate shoplifting in as a necessary loss, and can still manage. It's the same with piracy: you can't eradicate the problem completely, and you can't hold the whole Internet responsible because of a few pirates. But claiming that the existence of piracy is the end of the world is a huge exaggeration. In fact, in places when there are affordable digital alternative sources, piracy actually decreases. I know that in capitalist America it's standard to view individuals as selfish money-oriented machines, but most people are better than that.

You say that "anti-piracy efforts" are really against piracy? That's what they want you to think! But, as with all similar laws, pirates are just the strawmen here, like terrorists or pedophiles were in the past. The real purpose is to stop all user-generated content. Blogs and social networks created news sources that aren't controlled by parties like TV or papers are, users of sites like Youtube have created content that isn't controlled by the Big Media cartel. Just think about it, there are independent artists sharing their music through torrent sites/netradios/digital stores making a living whithout any publisher ever seeing a dime of it. This is what they really want to stop.

"The block was for IP's too, so you can't just change your DNS. You have to use some proxy service, or VPN, which makes it harder." - by DCTech (2545590) on Monday January 09, @10:06AM (#38637358)

IF this is implemented via DNSBL (DNS Block Lists) in addition to DNS request logs, then, this MAY work also, to "get around it":

DATA FOR HOSTS RESOLUTION of DOMAINS/SUBDOMAINS, FROM -> http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-shows-futility-of-domain-and-dns-blocks-120109/

---

1.) "Ping" each of these:

www.piratebay.am, piratebay.net, www.piratebay.net, www.piratebay.no, piratebay.no, piratebay.se, www.piratebay.se, suprnova.com, www.suprnova.com, themusicbay.com, www.themusicbay.com, themusicbay.net, www.themusicbay.net, themusicbay.org, www.themusicbay.org, thepiratebay.am,www.thepiratebay.am, www.thepiratebay.com, thepiratebay.com, thepiratebay.gl, www.thepiratebay.gl, thepiratebay.net, www.thepiratebay.net, www.thepiratebay.se, thepiratebay.se, www.piraattilahti.fi, piraattilahti.fi, thepiratepay.org.nyud.net

To get their correct IP address...

2.) Then embed them "hardcoded" thus, in a custom HOSTS file, like so (e.g. with 1st one):

194.71.107.15 www.piratebay.am

(That's the IP address I get back from "pinging" them, your result MAY vary... so, test to be more sure!)

---

* That SHOULD work, depending on HOW they block it actually, such as DNSBL's (but, there's various methods OTHER than DNSBL too)...

APK

P.S.=> However, IF this is going on & NOT by DNSBL blocking filtering (data from SAME link above):

IP addresses to be blocked:

194.71.107.15
194.71.107.19
194.71.107.18

Then, HOSTS will not work either (they only work for host-domain names/canonical names for sites, not IP addresses), BUT, alternate DNS's still may though I'd suspect, @ least if DNSBL's are used for the blocking!

(That is, until the alternate DNS', legit ones that is, get what I suspect is being put into place in DNSBL's), or TOR etc. ...

* Still, it's BEST to NOT "pirate" music, film, etc. from online, imo @ least...

... apk

All it needs is one domino to fall.

Too late; they already gave in.

Website Blocking Law Implemented By New Spanish Government

All it needs is one domino to fall.

Too late; they already gave in.

Website Blocking Law Implemented By New Spanish Government

I know Crysis has no demo, and BF3 only had the beta; I believe none of the top five games pirated has a demo.

It would be interesting to compare games with a good demo, and those which have none; I'd bet there would be quite a difference.

Also, interestingly, Crysis 2 is only present in the top 5 for PC, and does not appear in the Xbox top 5, which would led some credence to the benchmark argument.

BTW, the original TorrentFreak article is here.
http://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-pirated-games-of-2011-111230/

http://blog.eset.com/2011/11/15/sopa-and-pipa-and-dns-an-open-letter-to-congress

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"SOPA and PIPA have serious implications for DNS"

Also - what's "DeSOPA" (the FF addon being discussed) do? Here's a quote of that much as proof:

"Firefox Add-On Bypasses SOPA DNS Blocking" from http://torrentfreak.com/firefox-add-on-bypasses-sopa-dns-blocking-111220/

---

QUESTION (one I already answered in my previous replies no less): WHAT DOES NSLOOKUP DEPEND ON?

ANSWER = DNS SERVERS!

---

So, your usage of nslookup, vs. SOPA DNSBL's (DNS Block Lists)? Like you, it's STUPID & LIMITED!

(Especially IF this passes into law, because then, every legit DNS server will have to implement it from ISP/BSP levels!)

---

Not only THAT, but again also?

The OP (original poster) WANTED TO BYPASS DNS SERVERS - your method, using nslookup? DOES NOT! See my 'p.s.' below in regards to THAT!

(He's actually either lucky, OR, right as rain on it/rightfully so)

Yes, you'll have to bypass DNS due to those DNSBLs, in order to obtain information about blocked out ones, & ONLY WAY TO DO THAT? You guessed it:

REVERSE DNS INFORMATION gained from the 2 TLD's I noted (that maintain CNAME to IP Address pointers records!)

* Yes, this was the consolidated "Final 'coup de grace'" on your ass...

APK

P.S.=> To establish that NSLOOKUP has DNS dependencies, look no farther than this, right @ its outset:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nslookup

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"nslookup is a network administration command-line tool available for many computer operating systems for querying the Domain Name System (DNS) to obtain domain name or IP address mapping or for any other specific DNS record."

AND, that "all said & aside"?

Again - since DNSBL's will be being used, that's when nslookup "won't have a clue" even, because those records WILL BE "GONE WITH THE DAWN"... but the TLD's that maintain the reverse DNS records won't be simply because of some DNSBL being implemented!

"Here endeth the lesson"... & You? YOU HAVE BEEN ROYALLY "Pwned"...

... apk

Cheezburger network CEO Ben Huh may pull over 1000 domains from GoDaddy in protest of GoDaddy's support for SOPA. Gizmodo has a list of companies supporting SOPA. Jeff Epstein has instructions for bulk transfers away from GoDaddy.

Adam Savage has also warned that SOPA could destroy the internet as we know it. Reddit concurs that SOPA could destroy them.

Two congressional staffers, Allison Halataei and Lauren Pastarnack, who helped write SOPA/PIPA become entertainment industry lobbyists

looks like you could catch the RIAA
https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-homeland-security-caught-downloading-torrents-111217/

This news is old, and the ISP has said that it will stop, but the point I am making is that it is technically feasible to do this, and the Powers that Be don't care if the internet is usable or not by the little people (you and me).

GameBoy, you should take back your apology.. people like Blue Stone are common where they make-believe that just 'saying' something is suppose to make everyone believe it, and act on their empty statements.

Two reports on how CleanFeed is NOT working (because of the work-around created by Newzbin-2 new client apt, which is more thorough than the browser plugin, for this particular web interaction (ie. news-feeds)).

http://www.thinq.co.uk/2011/11/3/bts-newzbin-block-circumvented/

and

https://torrentfreak.com/newzbin2-release-encrypted-client-to-defeat-website-blocking-110914/

The next link explains about proxies in general and transparent ones as well..

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Proxy_server#Transparent_proxy

and a discussion on the legal decision

http://www.francisdavey.co.uk/2011/10/newzbin2-order.html

As far as those with only 2 brain cells, fighting over who is boss, who call themselves 'Authorities', banning ip addresses, even temporarily... well.. they would have an impossible time doing that with ip6, with the almost infinite amount of numbers, where someone could hide from these kooks.

Good ALWAYS wins out in the end.

-- I will gladly lose all of life's battles.. if thats what it takes, to win the war...

“It could be that a few members of congress are just not tech savvy and don’t understand that it is technically not going to work, at all. So here’s some proof that I hope will help them err on the side of reason and vote SOPA down,” he adds.

*sigh*
T Rizk: "Excuse me, Congress? SOPA is ineffective because it has a gaping hole so just forget SOPA, ok?"
Congress: "Oh T Riz! Bless you you for enlightening us! Uh, we won't prosecute you for hacking. Really."

It may be free for me and you, but it so happens that we aren't google's clients. In fact, we are google's product. Just like facebook, these companies rely on us to grant them "eyes" for advertisements and our personal information for them to profit as they see fit.

As a more sinister aspect of this monopoly, if everyone relies on a single private company to access information then they also control what we can and cannot access. For example, google currently censors our search results in order to bury sites which google doesn't want us to access, sites such as the pirate bay, isohunt and 4shared. If we keep relying on them to access information then what today affects only harmless download sites, tomorrow may also cover sites on political parties, corruption scandals, disasters and whatever they see fit. And, of course, potential google competitors.

So, a monopoly affects a lot more than our wallet, and google is currently placing itself as both the knowledge gatekeeper and big brother. You bet it poses a serious danger to humanity.

If it is "user generated" why would anyone take it down?

Ask Universal Media Group, since they did just that less than a week ago.

After all, by your logic, cleaning yourself up is "fake" as well. Humans don't naturally smell "clean" without the application of soap and water. So, if you're going to argue that women who use makeup are "faking stuff", since they don't really look that way naturally, by the same logic, so are people who take a bath. Or brush their teeth. Or trim their toenails. Or cut their hair.

Not everyone wants to go around looking and smelling like this guy.

First up is Sony Pictures Entertainment. As shown below, on this single IP-address alone a wide variety of music and movies have been downloaded. And this is probably just the tip of the iceberg, as YouHaveDownloaded only tracks about 20% of all public BitTorrent downloads. Another Hollywood studio where it’s not uncommon to download music, TV-shows and movies is NBC Universal. The employee(s) behind one of the IP-addresses at the Fort Lauderdale office in Florida downloaded the first season of ‘Game of Thrones,’ some trance music, a DVD of ‘Cowboys and Aliens’, and much more. And then there are the fine upstanding people at Fox Entertainment checking out the work of a competing studio. Perhaps downloading ‘Super 8 can be branded as “market research,” but in this instance actually paying for the DVD might be more appropriate. After all, when Fox notices that one of their own movies has leaked online they quickly contact the FBI to get the offender jailed. Ouch.

Frankly I think these pop "artists" make Megaupload look far worse than anyone could. Let's see, we've got a whore, a plagiarist, a cornball, a whiner, a wannabe gangster, a woman beater, a drunk, an unknown with rotting teeth and an unfunny "comedian". Yeah, what a glowing endorsement they've got going.

This isnt difficult; if the request is bogus as Kim claims so vehemently, all he has to do is counter-file a claim under the DMCA. At that point, if the video truly is infringing, it is on Kim to defend and take the heat, not Youtube.

They did dispute the takedown, see https://torrentfreak.com/universal-censors-megaupload-song-gets-branded-a-rogue-label-111210/

Now when I check a few YouTube links the message have changed to a terms of use violation instead, convenient for UMG's spin control, eh?

More likely, hes full of crap, and the artists signed agreements with UMG that means they really do hold the copyright(s).

Nice try, but the artists in the video don't get any copyright in the video, the guy holding the camera does. The only thing the artists can contract away to Universal is a promise not to appear in a video production not sanctioned by Universal. If they did it anyway, it's a contractual dispute between Universal and the artists, not a copyright issue.

/greger

Let's just keep it at illegal to produce. Open them and their entire families to civil lawsuits with crushing fines by any and all victims (and/or families thereof). Execute them if you feel the need.

However, any law that restricts possession or broadcast of *any* data, no matter how revolting or dangerous it may be, should be avoided at all costs. The only exception I can think of involves governmental secrets, but only because those who share them voluntarily obligated themselves before accessing that data.

That way, you don't have as much collateral damage against innocent websites, folks who stumble across the wrong search result, or folks who aren't technically inclined enough to fully encrypt their wireless access points against strangers. ...and as a bonus, you don't need to push anything down any slippery slopes, and can get rid of any bad precedents.

Let's just hope that the file-sharers who have been disconnected have the tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds needed to bring an action against the ISP. Particularly as, these days, it seems you only have to try to intervene in a file-sharing case to get threatened with significant legal costs.

Every other country has noticed the same thing. What is now holding back is US. In fact, even the Russian Deputy Minister of Economic Development said it's impossible to police copyright and noted US's hypocrisy in the issue as US itself doesn't do anything about the blatant piracy of Russian films and music. However, I doubt US will change their views about it and if I were them, I would be worried too. Much of the US industry comes from immaterial things like copyrights, patents and artificial restrictions. This is true for both entertainment industry and things like drugs and medication.

But lets not forget that back in time, this is how US got its power - they blatantly ignored European copyrights. Now others are doing the same to US, and they're suffering. What goes around.. Comes around.

Lol, what?

and they support the decriminalization of non-commercial file sharing

On second thought, your just wrong...

http://torrentfreak.com/swedish-pirate-party-fails-to-enter-parliament-100919/

P.S. p2p isn't criminal, I'd just love to hear your response to this post rofl. or are you just trolling?

well he did actually!
he said the Music Industry does not need to come back for a court order to block any new "Newzbin2" sites.
quote from http://torrentfreak.com/uk-isp-bt-given-14-days-to-block-newzbin2-111026/
"
According to the Judge, the MPA and BT were in conflict over the extent of this flexibility.

The MPA preferred the block to encompass “any other IP address or URL whose sole or predominant purpose is to enable or facilitate access to the Newzbin [2] website,” but BT wanted “and any other website whose sole purpose is to provide access to the Newzbin [2] website.”

The Judge agreed with the MPA and noted that the studios should not have to “return to court for an order in respect of every single IP address or URL that the operators of Newzbin2 may use.”
"

And while we're at it, revoke all rights from US to touch domain names. Shut down ICANN as it has constantly shown willingness to fuck over US and other nationals and US isn't shy to hijack domains belonging to other nationals.

The Pirate Bay has also already registered a domain specifically for those in Belgium, to work around the censorship order. http://depiraatbaai.be/ (Flemish Dutch for "The Pirate Bay")

This is not listed in the domains the court ordered to be blocked. TorrentFreak has the full story.

Strike 1: http://gizmodo.com/329648/mpaas-university-toolkit-taken-down-for-violating-copyright
Strike 2: http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-steals-code-violates-linkware-license/
Strike 3: http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=95638

BOOM!

No more MPAA! They're offline forever! After all, the law is just and equal and fair and blind, right? And the MPAA -- the people who, let's face it, basically *wrote* this law -- should be held to the highest standard themselves. They, more than anyone else, cannot call it a youthful mistake, or a silly error in judgement, or ignorance or anything else... they have zero excuse and so accordingly they will be punished for their obvious and flagrant transgressions!

Right? ... right?

Oh I don't know maybe like this or this, or maybe even this

Is it me or is https://torrentfreak.com/major-usenet-provider-ordered-to-remove-all-infringing-content-110929/ untrusted? My Mozilla's SeaMonkey v2.0.14 web browser says:

"torrentfreak.com uses an invalid security certificate.

The certificate is not trusted because it is self-signed.
The certificate is not valid for any server names.
The certificate expired on 2/9/2011 6:43 AM.

(Error code: sec_error_expired_issuer_certificate)"

ELinks v0.12pre5 says "SSL Error".