Slashdot Mirror
New Kazaa Lite Protects Identity
Denver_80203 writes "Found this story about the new Kazaa K++ 2.4.0 and it's new sister program which claim to protect your identity while sharing files. Any of you folk know how legit this could be? We all knew it wouldn't be long... is this the war or just another battle?"
Hurrah! It's about frickin' time that this came out... Now let's just pray the developers didn't make a deal with the RIAA and are sellign our identities to them with this new version. So, what's the verdict on it, fellow geeks?
That's what I needed : something to hide my fake identity
If you're going to first post, at least do it without spelling 'shrubberies' wrong in your sig.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Just in time for the next move in this move-countermove chess game. . .
Begun, this copyright war has.
I've used this app a couple times, but still have the feeling that someone is looking over my shoulder...
Who wants to bet that the news won't report that filesharing has jumped back up %15, and then some with the advent of this.
I don't know if Kazaa K++ can hide your identity, but what I do know is this: Kazaa K++ is an excellent program. It is so much better than vanilla Kazaa. No ads, spyware, many cool features make it a great program.
#include "sig.h"
From what I have seen, it just has a list of ips of law enforcement and record industry computers. Not a very fool proof method, but better than a tin foil hat.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
I stopped using Kazaa for a while, or only briefly. Now I can go back to being a file whore and stop using those unreliable BitTorrent sites.
~S
Why not K++0x? ;)
is protection from R*AA, not identity protection.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Don't they have laws now about hiding your identity?
... oh wait ... we are already headed in that direction, they can't be taller than 6ft.
Next we won't be allowed to have privacy fences in our back yards
Well K++ edition bascially contains a wrapper on the Kazaa application so that one can modify the memory accessed by Kazaa easily, and thus those who use K++ edition automatically has the K-Lite Master (1000) ranking on Kazaa. Its simply a matter of manipulating the values at the memory address.
I would think that extending on that principle, they could write protect or just dump gabarge into the memory space where idenities are stored.
Of course, I don't have the K++ source, so how would I know, it's just a theory.
for pushing us to come up with ingenous ways to screw them. When the heck will they wake up and realize whatever they try they can't subdue filesharing. Why not just make it easier and rake in some money (read profit. anything more than 0 is...). sheesh. is the org run by a bunch of retards or what?
I trust the "fake identity" functionality about as far as I can throw my system. I personally don't share.
Both Kazaa K++ and Kazaa Lite, two very similar modifications to the Kazaa file-sharing system by Sharman Networks, now contain hooks to the PeerGuardian database of IP addresses
Database of IP addresses is going to protect us ?
Cmon now. What prevents RIAA from using anonymous IP blocks that they can purchase legally for use?
Siggy Say, Siggy Do
Is there an alternative I am unaware of?
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
Blocking the IP address or range of addresses that they suspect the RIAA is using. Yeah, that'll stop them. No way they'll be able to scan from a different IP. I feel safer already.
Not letting people see what other files a user has might be a bit more useful, but I don't think either of these measures is going to do much to stop the RIAA from prosecuting people.
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
...Mainly because you can use it against people you don't like :)
KappaStone
Interesting. Since I know 0 about PeerGuardian, I suppose this may be effective (or not). Does anyone have a documented analysis of how this works instead of some vague news report?
Also, I don't mind sharing the music on my hard drive (it's all indie and OK'd to be there), but that said, do firewalls protect your IP identity or are they useless for that? Unclear about what tools may be used in conjunction with p2p to cover your identity.
Peace.
that's because you're a paranoid little bugger.
run along to your psychiatrist, now, poor buck. everything will be ok once you've been given your pills.
People protecting their privacy!
How dare they! People actually exercising personal liberty and freedom?!?!
This must stop! Horrors!
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
From the article, all this seems to do is some basic housekeeping to ensure that your search history is not stored, and interact with a database of IP addresses known to be used by the RIAA
:)
This doesn't seem to be anything revolutionary, or, interesting.
If the services went through some kind of anonymizer, that would be cuter. Of course, the bandwidth demands would be huge.
What may be an alternative is to produce a collaborative download system. I request a download, which is proxied by another random user (provided I return the favor). Even if you had RIAA sniffers, all that could be proven is that MY IP address downloaded something, but not the ultimate destination of the data.
Of course, if I have illegal music on my PC, then I am still screwed. But I leave solving that problem to the reader
Everybody stop downloading this! This guy has a feeling!
:-)
You mean I can't practice hand-eye coordination with K++? Stink, back to those darn violent games...
"I'm only downloading $GOODIES that I own." or "I'm doing nothing wrong!" ? While I love these new features, it's an overt attempt at blocking the RIAA/MPAA. If the sharers really think they're doing nothing wrong then why use these new mods in the first place?
That said, I'm downloading the new KazaaLite to home.
Trolling is a art,
Protecting your identity is one thing. But protecting your orginating IP is another. If they want to track down who you are they can get the info from your ISP no? -joe
... they announced that: Filesharing Traffic Drops After RIAA Threats
I didn't know they counted traffic caused by ads in that survey
Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
Yeah privacy must be a top concern for a guy giving us his zip code in his uid.
so now riaa/mpaa employees will be unable to download music at work....
As legit as sharing copyrighted files? ;) IANAL, but I doubt that the Recording Industry Ass. of America can use existing laws to prevent this being done (although I doubt that'll stop them trying).
If the Kazaa guys have done it right they may even be able to wave the good old DMCA under the Recording Industry Ass. of America's nose if they try to crack the system as well (oh the irony!)
But this is just the latest volley in what is going to be a very drawn-out and bloody Information Cold War.
It looks interesting, although I'm not quite sure about breaking standards (by spoofing the packets) in favour of privacy...
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
I already protected my identity. I am John Doe at 123 Abc St. My email is JohnDoe@kazaa.com. How could they possibly find me?
*knock* *knock*
Umm.. yeah.. I'll finish this post la.. *ouch* Not so tight with the handcuffs.
The new feature that blocks users from seeing ALL files, however, is VERY smart. All 50 million users (pulled that number out of thin air, should be close) now appear to be sharing only the ONE file you searched for. Makes hiding in the sea of users fruitful.*
* Disclaimer: Don't steal music. :)
How can you hide your identify on a Peer2Peer system where other users get your IP when they connect to your machine to download stuff (for backup reason of course)?
:P
I doubt there is a way... netstat kills your privacy
--
One by one the penguins steal my sanity...
The new versions contain several features designed to foil scanning attempts. PeerGuardian attempts to catalog a range of IP addresses used by or suspected to be used by labels, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, and other agencies. The database is built by contributions of individual users, although the methodology used to determine and verify the IP addresses is unclear.
Stop trying to flood my P2P network...
Now we have blacklisting and whitelisting (through Sig2DAT). Though both of these methods together would seem to defeat P2P "spammers", the easiest way for them to get around this might be to spam the whitelist. The next move in the P2P wars remains uncertain.
Webmaster Wanted - Entropic Reactions
First there was napster, which was shut down through the courts, so people made kazaa (ok, I'm skipping a few steps) which is harder to shut down through the court system, so The Man decided to go after individual users... so kazaa made it harder for them to do that...
It's just going to go on and on and on.
To bad kazaaa can't patent the communication protocol, and not license it to RIAA... <SARCASM>Maybe we should enact a law to explicitly enforce these patents</SARCASM>
(1) There wasn't so much crap on the fast track network. (Although it can't be beaten for mp3s)
(2) Other, better, P2P software followed their lead. [Shameless Shareaza Ad]
Well, I installed an older version of KaZaA Lite a month ago on a brand new hard drive and one thing I noticed compared to the original KaZaA is that you do not have to create a profile/login name to start downloading stuff. So in a way, it protects your identity. Am I right?
damn, now that would kick ass...
dl lots and lots of pr0n...
i know, troll....troll...flamebait...flamebait...any other idiotic terms in the slashdot dictionary?
Well...you should tell whoever it is in your house (spouse, parents, children, roommate) to leave you alone while you're on your computer...that and get rid of Kazaa and Gator. hehehe
NeoChichiri
http://www.neochichiri.net
Blubstar claims to be anonymous already. Does anyone know how much to trust this, or any of the details?
will you marry me?
"Users of the latest versions of Kazaa Lite and Kazaa++ also have the option of disabling a function that allows remote users to see what other files the user has. "
If everyone did this, wouldn't that kill P2P file sharing? Isn't that what the RIAA wants to happen anyway?
<a href="http://www.winamp.com/news.jhtml?articleid=<nobr>1<wbr></wbr></nobr> 0000">Nullsoft has an article</a> that says Gnutella and other such networks are now <b>legal</b>. So once KaZaA <i>finally</i> gets the axe, we can all migrate to Gnutella and like ourselves all the better for it!
"I feel it is my duty to look at the porn that kids download before I delete it, to be sure what it is."--School Admin
What is to stop the RIAA from using machines in public libraries, or worse, machines connected to large ISPs with pools of DHCP addresses that could correspond to home users? I'm not convinced that every machine they could possibly use for their "nefarious" purposes must come from a particular set of ranges, which seems to be one of the underlying assumptions inherent to this method.
...but the RIAA can easily get around this block of 'known' IP addresses.
To borrow from the other scourge of the internet, They'll just pay people to work from home for $1000s a week!
All they'll do is pay some one who wants money to run their program using their home DSL, Dial up or Cable Modem. Then the blocking of RIAA's 'known' addresses would become as big as every high speed residential network on the planet.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Is this a new euphemism for "ownz0r3d and h4X0red out of existence, again"?
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Using Proxy should have been done a long time ago by all Filesharing programs.
If there is anyway to make filesharing programs use servers like Napster did ,that would make filesharing more reliable and would make more files available.
This is a nice idea, and one way to approach things. I'm just not positive that it's effective.
The RIAA won against Verizon in court, and can now request IP addys, logs, and user contact info. So, this doesn't really slow them in that sense.
Additionally, what's to stop the RIAA from getting a bunch of DHCP home accounts under a subsidiary's name instead of their own? The possibilities for playing catch up here to add more IP ranges are endless.
This is a neat little effort, but doesn't fix the greater problem of balance in copyright law/infringement/fair-use.
It's the proverbial finger in the hole in the dam.
Lulu.com- publish your stuff! Creative commons compliant.
In other P2P networks. Freenet and GNUnet both offer crypto and anonymity. Freenet isn't a P2P app in the pure sense. It's more of an underground www. GNUnet has better anonymity (theoretically - due to it's ability to resist traffic analysis attacks), but it is a younger project.
When it's time to retreat from gnutella, these represent the next stage in the information war.
Not very...
You're using a peer to peer network...
One of your peers starts downloading a file from you...
They type netstat -na (either on windows or linux)...
Hey presto... they've got the IP address of every connection to their machine.
Can't hide that.
If you want to get really advanced, you could run iptraf or etherape and you can even match up the KB/sec that your p2p clients says it's getting to the right stream...
I've done this in real life to proove to people that they can't hide..
As far as I know.. the only sure way to hide your identity on the internet is to buy a pay-as-you-go mobile phone in a shop with no cameras... Then use an AOL cd with a fake credit card number to get a free trial... Stand in the middle of a field to make sure you can see them coming... That's how proper covert internet ops get done.
create garbage files, of similair size to mp3's and movies, and offer them up. Get a few hundred thousand people to do that, and figure a way to trick the scanners, while normal downloaders can determine the difference, and piss of the *IAA and anyone else doing generic searches.
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
"Here in the lab for instance, many of my colleagues have been releasing their scientific papers onto Kazaa instead of through more established journals such as 'new scientist'."
Does this mean it also skips that messy peer review step?
OD
s/scientific papers/pr0n
Yup, the point still holds!
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
The moderators gave you a +5 Interesting for this? MAYBE you should get a +5 Funny. You're telling me that scientests you know are foregoing journal publishing for Kazza publishing? I call shennanigans.
You know sooner or later, the governments are going to pass a law to make these programs illegal. I use them because I can, if I couldn't so be it....
So if I were you START LEECH'EN!!!!!
CS
Next Weeks Poll: How many file-sharing programs do you have in your home directory? I just tell it like it is...
Ban all IPs.
... for backup purposes only" seem to work so well.
Make a website with the following:
You can have your IP address added to the list of acceptable IP addresses only if you are 150 years of age or older, and can balance 15 apples on your forhead.
Enter IP Address:
Add Me
Because those "not allowed unless
Here's a project for a good developer to take up...
1. Develop a proxy for file sharing applications. The box has to be clean, no illegal content.
2. Allow anybody to create a numbered account. No authentication of "genuine" users or not, no logging or confirmation of email addresses.
3. Money (along with a reference number) is placed into a bank account(s) of people that operate these proxies. Just an over the counter payment, with a reference number which matches your account. This pays for the consumed bandwidth, nothing more.
People may log on to this anonymizing application using their ID and password to download whatever they want. if they forget their password, tough shit - that's the price you pay for anonymity.
There's no trail for the money, the server may download illegal or copyrighted content on behalf of members, but never persists the data.
The risk is a takedown order on these proxies, but provided they were made multipurpose (ie were not solely for the use of downloading copyright content) then I presume they would be safe.
All any inquisitive person would find is that proxy located at *IP* accessed this system and downloaded *xyz*. No easy way to track down the person requesting the download.
YHL
HAND
when was the last time a paper was published in NS? NS is effectively a jobs notice board with a populist science news digest bolted on the front.
I know of almost no decent universities who wouldn't gladly provide bandwidth for publishing papers. Bandwidth is seldom the issue - normally its the ownership of the IP belonging to the Uni (your employer) that stumbles this.
If your colleagues are bypassing this legal step by dumping on Kazaa instead of the more natural uni / dept website it is no more legit than sharing MP3s!
Of all the trolls on slashdot you are the only one i put an extra modifier on since your trolling is one of the best ive seen so far. Please dont keep up the good work.
True ravers don't need drugs
Here's a question that popped into my head while reading this story:
/is/ in that legal grey area and isn't clearly illegal, isn't it a really stupid move regardless? It seems like by hiding the people pirating the distribution-prohibited music, it helps give the RIAA /more/ reason to jack up CD prices and impose arm-bending DRM practices.
/cause/ that they can wave around like a flag in the newspapers and on TV news programs that don't do the proper amount of research into the issue.
:-/
Is this legal? If so, should we really advocate it?
If people are stealing music, and a company attempts to block the people from whom the music is being stolen, with the intent of protecting the identity of the pirates, isn't there some line that's being crossed somewhere?
And even if it
No, I don't think music piracy is the big reason why CD sales are falling. It's a larger issue than just p2p apps, but it gives the RIAA
I digress.
This is really stupid of KaZaA to do, bottom line, I'd say.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
Here in the lab for instance, many of my colleagues have been releasing their scientific papers onto Kazaa instead of through more established journals such as 'new scientist'. Because p2p is such an efficient way of sharing information(hence why it is so good for pirating mp3s) this means that the work we are doing can be shared with scientists all over the world simultanously and for free. We can also get feedback on our theories from other kazaa users.
Couldn't you have just posted the papers on a web page? You'd have the ability to make a better searching/indexing system for the papers and I dare say it would be a bit more convenient than searching around on Kazaa. Sharing papers on Kazaa seems a bit pointless. What's that you say about bandwidth consumption if you use a web page? Would it really be that much (how big are these papers anyway)? Would it really waste more bandwidth than the usual large amount sucked down by simply connecting to the average P2P server?
The only problem is that some scientists have misused the system and are trading papers that have come from other scientists without their consent.
This speaks for itself.
Would firebombing the RIAA count as self defense?
MLDonkey both runs on Linux, and supports multiple P2P protocols, including FastTrack (which Kazaa uses).
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
I'm far from tech-savvy... and this may have already been mentioned... but couldn't the p2p software programmers just do some sort of IP masking in the software? To hide the IP addresses from the users? Yes... there has to be a way to decode it to transfer files within the program, but if the **AA reverse engineers the encoding to get the actual IP's; Could the software owners slap a DMCA'ish lawsuit on em?
I don't have a sig.
Baaaaad troll. .html part may go down for an hour or two, Who cares????).... :/).... nice isn't it??????
BitTorrent sites are far from being unreliebale. From here, we may already suppose that you've:
1) Never used bittorent.
2) Trolling around.....
I've been downloading a lot of stuff with BT lately and I'm still wating to see a tracker fail, so forget about unreliable sites(if you meen that the
Anyway, there's a problem, with bittorent and that's the fact that a lot of people don't bother to share AFTER the download. With kazaa when you download something, all you usually have to do is leave it in the dir and it's being shared. With bittorent, you should not close the dialog and when you reboot you should set up the torrent again, a lot of people don't bother to do that........ I've been stuck on a 98,3% with a 650 ISO only because the only seed decided to cut it off(at the end we're 20 something people waiting for a seed to come out... it didn't
However, bittorent certainlyt has a LOT of advatnages over traditional file sharing.... for those who are not at all comfortable with bittorent a nice link collection is : here
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!
... be a specific pattern to those who only use the network to scan for content? As opposed to those who use it to download. Perhaps one could one could change the network so you could only search say 5 times pr hour?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Just curious... :-)
-Laz
Wouldn't something like Triangle Boy work in this case?
At post time, the RIAA.org site was not responding.
Hacked again then.
--
My favorite is mldonkey, which hits a whole bunch of different networks, including FastTrack (which Kazaa uses). The gui is separate from the p2p application, so you can turn off your workstation but leave your downloads running on your server in the basement.
I'm utterly impressed with it. Very easy to use, and I really like being able to hit all the differnt networks at once. It's also pretty cool having native guis available for linux AND windows.
"... if I have illegal music on my PC ..."
Last time I checked, the mp3 format was still legal.
Can't recall the names of any songs banned in the last few years, either.
lol this is such bullshit, I can't believe you got modded up +5.
People, if the ISP's *MUST* cooperate, forget about privacy, OK???
Furthurmore, it's impossible to prevent all monitoring networks to access your folder, as it's obvious that not all IP ranges are known.
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!
When the fuck did New Scientist become an "established journal"?
Let us say that instead of putting a file in my "Shared" folder, I run it through a program that splits it in little chunks, mark them in some way and send most chunks away to peers agreeing to host chunks. At the same time I am hosting chunks for other files. So, on the top of the sharing network you have now a distributed storage system.
A search here would also not elicit a direct response. It would only tip the network managing peers to "store" a certain kind of chunk in a certain computer. When all chunks are available they are copied away from the shared space and re-assembled into a whole file.
I never send more than a small piece of a file to any computer. I never shared a whole file. I never received a whole file.
The BitTorrent system works more or less like this, but you only share what you get.
I run PeerGuardian's list on my system (either with its standalone program or through using its list with Sygate Personal Firewall). I've contributed IP blocks to it as well. So, unlike the sanctimonious among /., I know what I'm talking about here.
What I can't understand is why so many people here seem to be down on it. Here is a project that's free as in beer, free as in speech, receiving a great number of contributions from a tech-savvy community, helping to maintain privacy rights, and is making a solid attempt to send a message to the **AAs. This sounds like something the Open Source community would jump on as an example of community action to solve a problem. The fact that K++ is offering it will increase participation among users.
(By the way, the list is not only being constantly updated, a number of times a day, but it's being continually scrutinized for bad or inappropriate ranges. Congrats to eremini, dingdongding, and c00kies2000 for some great work on getting rid of inappropriates and dupes.)
It's not perfect, but it's a good stopgap until a better solution can be found.
The Spie
If using Linux is about choice, how come people complain when I choose to use Windows?
From this perspective something like a proxy for file transfers is not so important (not to mention fairly impractical). If other users can't see your full library and can't see your IP address in their search results (the latter might enable smart bots to "guess" what your library contains), the only way they can determine that you are sharing massively is to download tons of files and see which IP addresses crop up. This is because they will only see your IP when they actually start downloading.
All this to say that with the latest changes in K++ and Kazaa Lite, even big time file sharers can probably rest easy.
Peer Pressure
I gave up on KazaaLite a month ago, since 99% of my searches ended up in no results, or the ever-so-trendy "More sources needed". Why don't they fix that?
I'm on WinMX now, with somewhat better results(I just have to wait in cues a lot).
The last truly great P2P program I used was AudioGalaxy. That had just about every obscure 80s tune availble to me that I could think of.
I agree, keeping the PL at 1000 is damaging. I use Kazaa Lite myself, and I turn it off from the options. The PL idea does NOT force people to share files. If you have a PL of 1, you can still download as much as you like. What it DOES do however, is to reward those who DO host and manage (manage in terms of assigning keywords, ratings, etc.) a lot of desireable files. Now, in an ideal world, this would not be necessary, but the world is far from ideal and it is. IIRC, when two people are downloading a file from the same person, the one with the higher PL gets the most bandwidth. This seems like a good idea to me, it rewards those who share, thus keeping the system alive. Now I have heard people complaining that they have a slow connection, so they cannot compete with people with broadband connections, as those people can upload much more and therefore achieve a higher PL in less time. This is true. However, if you only have a 56K modem, the PL should mean little to you. As I understand it, since 56Kers can only get a maximum download speed of ~4KB/s anyway, if you have a PL of 5 zillion, your download still aint going to come very fast. With broadband, the percentage of someone's bandwidth you are allocated could make much more of a difference. Basically, I think the PL is a good idea, and I would appeal to everyone who uses Kazaa Lite or whatever to turn PL = 1000 off. Thanks.
the fling project - if those guys ever finish it, it's game over for the RIAA.
I partially responded in the reply to the post before you but trackers do fail with some regularity and the powers that be have succeeded in shutting down a fair number of sites. If the HTML portion goes down long enough, no one else can get the torrent and begin downloading from a seeder and eventually the current seeders bow out and the seed is dead. I do like BT, I was being sarcastic for the most part. Your mileage may vary.
~S
This would be interesting if it weren't for some trolls I've seen you post on slashdot before in other stories...
Sorry, can't remember where I saw it, but it was pretty pathetic.
Besides, if I'm a scientist, why in the world would I publish scientific findings to a no-name, not-well-established, not peer-reviewable media source like Kazaa instead of New Scientist or the like? Maybe it's because your colleagues are undergrad students publishing their hijacked copies of term papers to Kazaa???
Having said that, I'm an avid defender of P2P, but just wanted to point out that you're full of shit to the slashdot newbies.
The recent versions of K++ (not sure about the basic KazaaLite) will let you jump supernodes, and keep hitting 'search more' until you run out of local supernodes. I'm finding it much easier to get matches on obscure stuff with these options.
Bittorrent trackers do fail quite often. I am sure you haven't used the program enough for that to happen yet. This is a problem especially for larger .torrents. Think of one 800Kb file being downloaded 10 million times, like when the Matrix reloaded was released. 800 x 10000000 = 8000000000 or 8 billion Kb or 8000 GB of bandwidth. Now, can your fileserver sustain 8000 GB of bandwidth in tracker files, not to mention the initial few seeds? We are talking serious server-rot.
We're only gonna die from our own arrogance, that's why we might as well take our time...
Are the RIAA limited to legal methods for gathering evidence of filesharing? If so, why not encrypt the packets sent by the programs with something very simple (heck, rot13 might do) and claim that everything transmitted is your own IP? To prove that you are illegally sharing files, they'd have to defeat the encryption and thereby violate the DMCA. Wouldn't that make all incriminating data inadmissible in court? IANAL, could someone clarify?
-- Language is a virus from outer space.
Sanity check, anyone?
Life is like surrealism: if you have to have it explained to you, you can't afford it.
- it (currently) has a relitivly small user base - with a total share size something like 7,000Gb last i remember compared to Kazaa's 900,000Gb. (correct me if I'm wrong)
- It only runs under windows - no Linux or mac version
:-(
Thats my new alternative for K-Lite and gnutella-spud_gunner
It aint gonna work. The reason is simple : The rules have changed. Distribution of music is now much easier and cheaper than before and a large chunk of the old distribution network is *no longer necessary*. This is totally irrelavent as to weather or not this new distribution model is legal or not. It is happening. It probably cant be stopped(I mean the software industry tried and failed thru the 80s/early 90s)
So now the RIAA have several choice.
1. Try to roll back the technolgy that enables this new distribution channel. This is possible but not very likey.
2. Use more draconian law enforment techniques. Posibble but I mean whata ya gonna do... start sending colleage kids to prison ? For what stealing a Brittney track ? Is this what we want ?
3. Try to adapt to the new medium. Be creative and come up with new profit channels that take advantage of the medium.
Personally I dont think 3 is very likely either... I think RIAA is going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
As most ISP have transparent web proxies, what about using those, to break the "find IPs via netstat" feature ?? :-)
I'm shure someone could patch squid to do that sort of thing easily.
Then we can have TBs of files online hosted by ISP companies; which are currently covered by a legal disclaimer about being allowed to cache data.
Also, are there any gateway boxes to allow searching between the various p2p networks??
If not why not??
then we can have a p2p NAT'd network
What we need, is a P2P service that can tunnel through SSH and bounce off multiple connections.
Seems the article is giving a false sense of security in saying the versions has anonymity and encryption features:
"Freenet, another network, was also designed to allow anonymous, encrypted sharing of files and other information"
Nowhere does it state that the versions would offer either anonymity or encryption.
Freenet has it, that is true. But not these releases Kazaa.
This is certainly not the end of the war. I don't know if this thing will work or not, but even if it does, it's at best a battle won. The War (TM) cannot be won.
Don't become a regular here, you will become retarded. -- Yoda the Retard
What I really want to see is for all of the copyright infringement to stop on P2P networks for one month.
Why? So that we can see P2P traffic drop way down (it can still be used to share the "legal" stuff) and record sales to remain flat.
As long as the RIAA member companies can keep pointing at the P2P sites and say "this is why our sales suck" they'll get away with it. If we break their fictitious chain of cause and effect then they're going to have to step up and realize that they've got some serious problems. (Or at least their stock holders will realize it.)
So, c'mon folks. Do without your music fixes for awhile. Heck, just take some time to listen to what you've already d/l'ed. and leave it at that.
As long as P2P traffic is high then "voting with your wallet" can't make a statement.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
I just don't see the RIAA having a bunch of volunteers rushing for this job....that said, how would the RIAA ensure that their little tattle-tales are giving them correct data? I see too many plausible scenarios where this would be too much of a liability...
Besides, many ISPs aren't exactly happy now with the RIAA in light of all the takedown notices they're being made responsible for...think about the bandwidth use/over-use fights right now...
"...we dont care about the economics; we just want to be able to hack great stuff."
> The new feature that blocks users from seeing ALL
> files, however, is VERY smart.
The problem with this feature is that it takes away one of the major advantages of Napster-style P2P networks. Whenever I find a song I like from a user, I look to see what other songs the user has. If I notice more than a few good songs (that I know) on that user's machine, I sample other songs.
I've discovered several songs and bands that I wouldn't ever have heard of if it wasn't for this feature.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a case of recordable DVDs... people will swap in person if they can't do it online. The genie is out of the bottle, folks!
Actually the thought just came to me that an interesting way to fight back would be having filesharing software somehow totally blacklist access to suspicious networks at the PC level (meaning not only filesharing - everything).
...
The blacklisting should be done at a higher level than machines only - the whole network of the ISP providing RIAA with access should be blacklisted if one or more machines in the network are being used by RIAA (or related entities) to scan for filesharing.
Also, the user of the filesharing program should be given a choice - "Do you want to block access to and from networks where RIAA is scanning filesharers (Yes/No)?"
My basic idea goes down to a bit of social engineering - please follow me on this one:
- RIAA contracts with an ISP to provide it with network connectivity to the Internet.
- RIAA then uses machine(s) over that network connection to scan filesharing networks.
- Said activity is detected (exactly how i don't know)
- The whole network for that ISP (or at least a significant portion of it) is blacklisted in millions of machines (all those running the filesharing app). This can be scalled up to bigger sub-networks (the ISP of the ISP) if needed.
- Other entities hosted on the same ISP are also in practice cut-off from some of their (potential) customers. Mostly their websites are ineccessible from millions of machines. This is especially bad for online shops and ASPs.
- They complain to the ISP.
- The ISP, faced with the choice between keeping RIAA as a customer and loosing several other customers or simply dumping RIAA will find that the choice that makes more business sense is dumping RIAA.
- Eventually, RIAA and it's associates will become persona non grata to most ISPs (as in, they choose to not take RIAA's business).
The nice thing about it is that it's all absolutelly legit:
- Each individual user chooses to accept an autometed cut of contact with those networks that provide access to filesharing scanning. Everyone is in their right to do so.
- ISPs choose to not sell their services to RIAA. It is their right to do so.
Now, this whole theory has some holes in it, and a couple of weak points (not to mention no solutions for the technical problem) - still, a distributed, voluntary system that makes it bad business for ISPs to provide access for companies that do filesharing scanning would leverage the power of those "hundreds of millions of users" of the filesharing apps.
Comments please
My only experience with freenet was that it was too slow, but certainly that's just "a problem left to the student."
But I'd think something in the direction of freenet would really get the RIAA's panties in a bunch because of the plausible deniability. Although it could still be possible to prove that you participated in transferring such-and-such a file at a certain time, given that you aren't personally aware of what freenet sends across your wire or saves on your hard drive, I don't see how you could be any more liable than your ISP.
I didn't pay attention to politics until my country started to scare me. Recently.
(With many apologies to Paul Graham)
What Kazaa Lite has now is equivalent to blacklists of spammers and spammers domains. We have already determined this strategy alone won't solve the problem.
The next logical step is to combine the lists with a distributed statistical filter capable of identifying RIAA hosts by search pattern and IP pattern. Since it is happening in a connected network, each peer filter can then broadcast its guesses and receive other peers guesses. Locally you can build a trust list based upon the likehood of search comming from a RIAA host.
Obviously this have problems.
One problem is the lack of significant search samples to make decisions. We would have to see an implementation to discover if it is mathematically feasible.
RIAA can also start trying to close down sharers by broadcasting their IP as "riaa-like" from a great number of peers. The way to avoid this is having all peers checking "the evidence". If the sharing IP and its searches do not match RIAA pattern, the call is probably bogus and those IPs broadcasting it are probably RIAA's. Backfire on them...
Another danger is RIAA using a range of IPs large enough to endanger the network connectivity. This is probably too expensive, but RIAA is probably too rich too.
Anyway, my point is that since the data is there (RIAA is searching the networks for the sharers), one can always analyse this data and try to extract as much information as possible from it.
I hope it is a war.
-GW Bush
mldonkey.berlios.de can do Kazaa (leeching only ATM).
The files you have originally are still elesewhere in your computer. They are just not shared as a whole by anyone. Obviously there are enhancements to be made. One must build redundance (a given chunk must be replicated across some hosts so it does not disappear when part of the network goes down). The point here is to make it very difficult to determine and prove a certain file was shared by a certain person, nothing more.
Let's see... is freenet a good, safe alternative to current P2P apps? Let's consult the Freenet FAQ:
Is Freenet searchable?
No search mechanism has yet been implemented.
Bzzzzzt! Sorry, you lose. Try again!
The thing is, the RIAA has subsisted all along on being the middleman. They don't really DO anything. Sure they promote new albums.......oh wait, no they don't, they have ad agencies and their ilk to do it. I know, they press cds......oh wait, no they don't, they outsource it to record pressing companies.
The RIAA(meaning the record companies) only exists because the artists and the consumers haven't really questioned their existence. Artists stand to make a lot of money without the RIAA in place. Why not make all music free? If you want to brave the p2p networks for different quality mp3s and such help yourself. OR, you can pay $5 directly to the artist to download the cd from their website.
Artists can make MORE than enough money from licensing their music(think movie scores, and commercial soundtracks), and live performances. Without having to pay large portions of their income to the record companies, artists stand to make a LOT more money, once the RIAA is gone.
The artists you see fighting p2p etc, are the ones that NEED the RIAA to survive. I'm talking about the sell-out corporately manufactured groups that wouldn't last if the RIAA wasn't there to spam their name all over the radio and mtv every 10 minutes. Those are the only artists that NEED the RIAA, and if we lose them, frankly, here is one slashdot poster that could care less.
It's not that I mind paying for music, but isn't it about time for a paradigm shift? Natural selection has provided an easier and better way to get new music and the record companies are a dying breed.
I have a couple thousand mp3's on my hard drive that I didn't pay for, but I also have heard a lot of new artists that I will jump at the chance to see live, or buy merchandise from.
I'm a bit of an aspiring dj, and I buy records from artists that I've heard and liked through p2p. If it wasn't for p2p those artists wouldn't have had my purchase.
The problem doesn't lie with the consumer.
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
Recently, the file trading networks have been having some limited success by using the argument: "If there are significant other legitimate uses, a technology cannot be shut down because of its possible uses for piracy."
K++ is touting as a major feature being able to block law enforcement's (you think the RIAA won't play it as their lawyers attempting to do the work of the police?) attempts to crack down on its illegitimate (yes, yes, I know everyone thinks it's legitimate but the law doesn't) uses.
Surely they've just handed the RIAA a victory? They've said, "We've been sneaking in by claiming we have legitimate uses, trading all types of file - and now we've proved that our real purpose was piracy all along."
Yay. In one step, you've got 15% of users back for the couple of months before the policy offers the RIAA all the justification they need to shut you down entirely.
Heh, if you really want to get paranoid, you have to realize, someone *is* looking over your shoulder. It's all a matter of time before someone takes a look at the logs. = Seriously, KaZaA Lite is a great program, none of the annoying popups, and no Gater spyware. KaZap's a good addition to it as well.
Julie Moult is an idiot.
It seems as though it might be arguable to say that because the RIAA put something online for you to download, knowing it was illegal, might constitute entrapment. It seems like it would go the other way as well.. Because they are not a law enforcement agency, by them soliciting a download from someone they are thus committing an illegal act themselves. You really think the RIAA keeps that Yanni CD around so they have a legal license to download it... I think not.
I installed the new version of Kazaa-lite and it apparently turned filesharing on even though I had disabled it previously. (Note: I say "apparently" because I did not check the setting immediately prior to the installation and it is theoretically possible that some other process had turned it on.) This was done despite the claim on the website that "You can just install this on top of a current Kazaa Lite installation. That way all your settings will be remembered."
While people can debate the ethics of not sharing, how it affects the viability of P2P networks, and so forth, it should still be an individual choice.
Turning on filesharing without the explicit permission of the user could put the user in violation of the policy at their ISP or their work. It could put them in violation of federal, state, and local laws. It could open up a big security hole, causing the user to share files that they never intended to share. This is not something that should be done without the user's knowledge and permission.
Oh sure Justin and Britney and Lars might not sell as many copies of their new singles, but who cares? Fuck Justin and Britney and Lars.
br P2P will never kill music sales. Besides, recorded music sales have never been a way for an artist to make much money. Concerts are better anyway.
http://yetanotherpoliticalrant.blogspot.com
In Soviet Russia, KaZaa trades YOU!!!
ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
Protecting your IP address while browsing the web is easy with programs such as Anonymizer which block your IP address. However using p2p programs anonymously is more difficult. P2P relies on people's ability to connect to your machine, and to do that they generally must know your IP Address.
There are some methods out there that attempt to address this.
Programs such as FreeNet have been around for some time that blocks the location of the traffic. However, there are easier methods than FreeNet out there to protect your identity.
While it certainly doesn't hurt to block IP ranges known to belong to the copyright cartels, I doubt it helps as much as people seem to want to believe.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
We're all criminals in the eyes of the RIAA anyways, who really gives two shits?
The point here is not to make sharing copyrighted material legal. Just to stay one step ahead of the pursuers, the same way the faster zebra will defeat the lions everytime. Make the race for survival a bit harder for them and funnier for the rest of us watching from afar.
If 20 second clips are allowed why not just make you whole downlodable collection of mp3's 20 second clips. For example Metallica - Shit Song cut up into say 9 20 second demos. Then use a file spliter to put them together.
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 1 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 2 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 3 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 4 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 5 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 6 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 7 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 8 20sec.mp3
Metallica - Shit Song Demo 9 20sec.mp3
http://wwww.futureassassin.com
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Judge Richard Posner, a highly regarded Seventh Circuit Judge recently wrote an opinion upholding the Aimster injunction that tends to suggest that identity protection for file sharing is more likely to support a claim for contributory infringement of the vendor than not. The opinion, while troublesome in many respects, is probably the most intelligently written articulation of the 9th Circuit Napster reasoning we are likely to see, and will likely be deemed a persuasive authority by most District Court Judges. That is, until and unless the Supreme Court speaks clearly on whether they meant what they said when they wrote in the Sony Betamax case, that regardless of evidence of wrongdoing there can be no contributory liability for distribution of technology that is capable of a substantial noninfringing use.
My problem with the Napster, and now Aimster, opinions is simply this: the 9th Circuit adopted a broader view of the liability of a technology manufacturer in the Sony Betamax case, essentially a "substantial infringing uses occur means infringement by vendor" test, which was discredited and reversed in Sony, which adopted the "substantial noninfringing use possible means no infringement by vendor," almost the very opposite result. It is hard for me to understand why, when the 9th Circuit essentially brought back the same analysis in its Napster opinion that got "sent home" in Sony, that Judge Posner would so freely adopt it here. To be fair, he explains his reasoning very, very well -- I just don't find it persuasive in view of the law and its underlying policies -- contribution isn't about expanding copyright to permit technology regulation.
To me, the question isn't whether the technology is being used poorly -- even by most users -- if it is capable of a substantial noninfringing use -- in which case there should be NO liability for contribution. (To get a sense how far the Supreme Court went, there was survey evidence before the District Court showing that 50% of the Betamax users were doing some infringement.) The question should be whether the technology vendor was affirmatively and actively inducing others to engage in infringement, as was the case in Napster and, arguably, Aimster.
Time will tell. But until the Supreme Court gets to this, it looks like the Posner account of Napster will be the final word on this question of law. Note, however, that his remarks on identity protection as indicia of wrongdoing are very troubling -- one of these days, perhaps in a few more years, perhaps, if we don't have any more tall buildings hit by planes, we really need to affirmatively try to get the courts and the Congress focused on privacy again.
If people would just put half the effort into a JOB as they do in trying to get music without paying for it, they'd be rich enough not to care what the music costs.
And, please, no righteous rants about the evil RIAA. The adults on this board, esp. those with teenage children, recognize it as childish rationalization.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
I don't like to admit it, but your statement rings so true for me. Damn it, just when I was comfortable in my petty rationalizations, you come along with your plain-talking sense and moral fortitude and reveal what an unsustainable lie my life is. I must atone, starting today, and hope that someday perhaps the RIAA and our politicians will give me half the respect that they have earned by always looking out for me.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
There is no way to hide from your ISP (or the RIAA). If you've read the articles about the lawsuits going on, you know that Verizon was providing the names, meaning, even if you get a dhcp address, they know what user was logged on to that address at a particular time (namely YOU), if you have DSL, pppoe makes it even easier, it requires authentication, and they don't even have to lookup you MAC address. So, you all saying that you use Fake Names are silly to think that that will protect you. They only need an IP address to find you. (Unless you're stealing a connection, in which case I digress)
Speak for yourself.
If I remember and it was some time ago that I installed Kazaa-lite, actually installing it is an infrigment of Kazaa's copyright. It blocks spyware and browser highjacking pop ups and Kazaa dont like it. So Dont complain that it might put users in violation, installing it is a violation.
Watch me build my house
dipshit.
when I click on the kazaa link all i see is a page filled with
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
what is that?
Ave Molech Setting
Why don't we put a EULA in the new Kazaa programs, which say something like this:
I don't belong to any organization related to RIAA.... I won't use any information obtained from the use of this program, or the study of the way this programs works, to sue others users of this or related program... I don't suck
And then require, from some point in the near future, that everyuser of kazaa has accepted this EULA
IANAL, and I don't know how an EULA like this would stand in a court, but should work for a time at least.
In the worst case, if the EULA doesn't stand in a court, it would provide a good case against crazy EULA's
It's a win-win!!
If you have a direct connection between machines during the transfer you can still get the IP ( and thus the user.. ).
Does it address this fundamental issue?
Can anything really address this, short of a centralized 'anonymouizer' that handles the connections via a proxy, which then becomes the target of *IAA?
Even freenet has connections that in theory be tracked back to the 'offending' party.. True its harder to track what they are getting from you.. but the 'trail' is still there.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The two developers of the program once worked together, but have decided to release different versions, according to postings by the two authors. Neither are affiliated with Sharman Networks. Freenet, another network, was also designed to allow anonymous, encrypted sharing of files and other information.
Now, I like Freenet but what in the hell does it have to do with that paragraph??
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
I think I've mentioned this a long time ago but I didn't really hear many responses.
What about a system where you sign in and the server assigns you a buddy. You submit a search which goes to your buddy who then executes the search and sends you the results. If you download something it actually goes through your buddy first and then to you. If your buddy gets a search request, he actually queries your files and sends a response. If you don't get a response from a budyy in a reasonable amount of time, you send a message out requesting a new buddy.
I know it would be less efficient but wouldn't it make it much more difficult to trace an individual user?
Darcy
Pretty much works the same way as Security Through Obscurity if you ask me.
Although it blocks users from browsing your files and blocks queries from known malicious IP's It would not stop the RIAA from downloading from you from a not yet known malicious IP, Proxy, wierd "Save the Music Industry" Campaingn where they pay you to hunt down P2P Users, ETC.
Basicially if they do a search for "St. Anger" on Kazaa, Download it, and verify that it is "St. Anger" they have an IP going to somewhere. And that IP now has a big red Bullseye on it whether it's a proxy, a user or whatever else that could obscure your idenity.
The only way to truthfully be anonymous is to be encrypted, swarmed and stored all over the place by hundreds of users like Freenet does it, and even that gives them an IP to paint a target on with the excuse that even though you dont know what your PC is sending thats no excuse to infringe. Although the courts would have to decide that.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
They only need an IP address to find you
And what the fuck do you think this hides, moron?
the RIAA exists because traditionally it has been very expensive to break into the music business.
now that the wall is being torn down, the RIAA is going out of its way to try to ensure its relevancy. (payola, tighter distribution contracts with artists, destroying the credibility of digital distribution, etc) it sucks - but it's all legal.
all that aside this is about theft. downloading mp3s for material you haven't paid for -is- theft. whether it -should-be- or not is debatable. but under the law, it is. bummer.
so this little arms race may be between the good intentioned hackers vs the big bad corporation - but legally it's just pirates against copyright holders.
the fault -doesnt- lie with the consumer, it lies with the pirate. if you've noticed, not even the RIAA is saying 'p2p is bad' anymore. the specific practice of illegal distribution of music is what they're fighting now.
they logistically can't (and don't even try to) sue -you- for downloading. it's not obvious from the information available within a p2p app whether or not you are downloading a song you have fair use rights to (if i own nevermind, i can legally download the mp3s for that album) - and it would be financially prohibitive to even try to figure that out.
-however-, sharing the files is absolutely illegal. the RIAA -owns- the distribution rights for signed artists, and you are infringing on their copyrights by pirating that right.
sure, maybe some day the artists will wise up - but until then, you -are- breaking the law. get used to it, get an ipod, or uninstall kazaa. check your justifications at the door.
and whether or not p2p affects CD sales is irrelevant. discussing that is like trying to justify theft from a profitable business because they're still profitable despite the theft. sure - it's a neat little communistic self-delusion - but it's still theft under our laws.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
How does the anonymity provided by Kazaa Lite compare to that of Freenet? (Reference: http://freenet.sourceforge.net/)
BTW: the very same security features are offered by my own program:
31337 M4573r 3000 r0X0r
It has the following great security features:
How touching. Someone is concerned about Kaza-lite "put[ting] the user in violation of the policy at their ISP" and "[...]in violation of federal, state, and local laws." I'm so glad someone's concerned about trying to obey the laws and legally binding contracts!
I'm sure you're just using it to put up scans of your art work you've put in the public domain, get the latest linux, and share open source PHP scripts.
Right?
You're not trading music, warez, and other stuff you don't have legal rights to.
Right?
At least the pr0n people havent gotten involved - p2p with no music is ok, but no pr0n?! :)
Kazaa's next version will be K++0x.
"This is called entrapment!"
"No, this is blackmail. Entrapment is what cops do to thieves." --Sean Connery, Entrapment
adaware doesn't block spyware and adware, it removes it. i think adwatch will tell you if something is running, but it comes with AdAware pro, which you'd have to pay for or pirate.
EVERYONE, download spywareblaster (www.javacoolsoftware.com). it disables the activex controls for autoinstalling spyware. update it and protect against all items. i have never had trouble caused by this program.
spybot - search & destroy (security.kolla.de). update it, and under Immunize, click the immunize button. then tell it to block all bad pages. as far as i can tell it uses a blacklist, so it won't block friendly pages or popups. you can have it do it silently, or if you don't trust it, have it pop up a message whenever it kills a page.
sb-s&d is stronger than adaware removing spyware.
also at javacoolsoftware is spywareguard which is an app that runs in realtime and protects the ie hosts file from change. with all three programs installed, i went to xupiter.com with no adverse effects.
its a great group of programs.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
MLDonkey is like the overlord of p2p networks, with access to Overnet, Bittorrent, Gnutella, Gnutella2, Fasttrack, Soulseek, Direct-Connect and Opennap, supporting multiple downloads, a backend daemon with multiple frontends (web-based, gui, etc). Kind of a pain to get up and running though.
http://www.nongnu.org/mldonkey/
P2P downloader named "Spalding": I want some mp3's, I want some movies, I want so porn!
RIAA Rep named "Judge Schmels": Spalding you'll get nothing and like it!
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
If I remember and it was some time ago that I installed Kazaa-lite, actually installing it is an infrigment of Kazaa's copyright. It blocks spyware and browser highjacking pop ups and Kazaa dont like it.
I believe that you are incorrect as Kazaa is open-source and what they "like" has no bearing on copyright. Whether or not a Kazaa-Lite user is infringing in the manner that you claim, it is none of your business. You don't own copyright to Kazaa. You don't own the user's computer. You don't pay for his Internet connection. Your job isn't at risk for violating the no-filesharing policy at his work.
So Dont complain that it might put users in violation, installing it is a violation.
I'll complain if I want to. The two things have nothing to do with one another. The RIAA is not going to sue some college kid out of his life's savings for violating Kazaa's copyright. An ISP is not going to terminate a user's broadband connection for violating Kazaa's copyright (but they sure will if the RIAA says that the user is trading copyrighted MP3s). There is simply no comparison between (allegedly) violating Kazaa's copyright and having your personal and private files, possibly with credit card numbers, medical information, and bank accounts, made available for download without your permission
Why? I really am curious. Why to you think the RIAA not only will loose, but also that they *know* it.
Think of the test case. Somebody has downloaded, what? 500 songs? 1000 songs? They've traced the IP numbers. Go to a judge, get a civil order to raid the defendant (it is done all of the time in trademark knockoff cases), seize the computer, and find the 500 or 1000 songs. And you are so confident that the RIAA will lose. Based on what?
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
They could just send 'cease and desist' to each single user.. and request letter to the corresponding ISP to shut the user down.
:(
One file is just as 'illegal' as one thousand..
Only costs them a few pennies to send it out. Then prosecute for big bucks the people that don't obey the order.
Not much different then the old days of mass mailing US-mail Spam.. I bet they would eve get a bulk rate
---- Booth was a patriot ----
No, thats wrong.
Simply get the binaries pre-compiled for your platform, sire.
Alternatively get them here.
I believe the next major advance in P2P technology will be the inclusion of reputation management / trust relationship technologies.
How do you know which IP's to blacklist? How do you know that the file you're downloading isn't a trojan?
I don't think the answer is in a centralized database of 'evil-doers'. That's an arms race that can eventually get everybody censored. Especially with dynamic IPs.
What needs to happen is you have to earn a reputation before you end up in those search results. You do this by people vouching for the quality of your files and not being a mole. Trust is gained by WHO vouches for that person and their metric of trustworthyness.
There should also be an option to restrict access to a given file to those within your web of trust so when the death squads in your country are looking to kill people serving up books about democracy, they can't just do a search real quick.
After we achieve a trust framework. I believe the next step will be dealing with traffic analysis. However, I'll rant about that when the time comes.
"Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
In order to reliably move data from computer A to computer B, computers A and B need to know each other's IP address. Once they have your IP address, they can simply subpoena your provider for your name and address, and presto, you end up with a cease-and-desist or worse.
The method described in the article (ignore connections from known RIAA IP addresses) only gives a false sense of security. The RIAA is able to use new IP addresses faster than people can update the software. The only reliable way to keep them off your back is to not engage in filesharing in any way.
I'm so glad someone's concerned about trying to obey the laws and legally binding contracts!
Did it ever occur to you that what many people are concerned about is being sued for tens of thousands of dollars by the RIAA and losing their broadband connections?
I'm sure you're just using it to put up scans of your art work you've put in the public domain, get the latest linux, and share open source PHP scripts.
What I use it for is none of your business and it is totally irrelevent. The writers of Kazaa-Lite have no right to put anyone at legal and financial risk based on your assumptions about what the software is used for. They claimed that installing over older versions maintains the settings when, apparently, it does not.
Take your morality play elsewhere.
Jury nullification.
This will be, as you noted, a civil proceeding. The EFF lawyers will paint the defendant as a regular guy who likes music and the RIAA as the greedy bastards they are. Rules of evidence are a lot looser in a civil trial. Look at the OJ criminal and civil trials.
Frankly, I don't think the RIAA will *EVER* go to trial. They know if they loose once, their threat goes bye-bye. They will try to settle or, failing that, drop the case due to a "lack of evidence".
So you installed a P2P file sharing app, and it turned ON file sharing?!
Those BASTARDS! This is a conspiracy of machiavellian proportions!
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
I don't see how they can get anybody who uses multiple source downoad--emule, kazaa, gnutella, etc. If they d/l that song from many people, including you, won't they have to 1)Identify the piece they got from you 2)Verify that it is a part of a copyrighted stuff 3) Prove in court that splitting and then stitching copyrighted work gives you the original copyrighted work (basically they will have to show how kazaa multiple-source d/l works). This might just work under the "I am too dumb to know what I am doing" defense, kinda like some previous posts about using unencrypted WiFi--"I don't know, some neighbor punk hacker kid must've done it." The problem is they are not interested in going to court, they just intimidate and push for settlement to shut you down. Another problem, you need to be able to shred your entire disk very quickly. Since software methods are very slow, I wonder if a small pyro charge might do the trick. Just make sure you don't put your coffee on that red button.
And when your Credit Car expires, how do you plan to cut it up? You'ze better get some mighty big scissors, pal. :-)
Couldn't a third party "proxy" be used to add privacy to the mix? A third party that can be used for many things (and therefore is not designed soley for file sharing). ???
No Linux version, but no spyware either: Filetopia.
Having spoken to afew of my friends who are not "computer people." They had no idea that the RIAA was even doing this. These are also the people who leave many files in the share-able directory. This also means people who might benfit from the dubious security of K++ arn't even getting the products. Which also means that the RIAA isn't going to be getting Geeks as much as regular Joe-Smo.. Reactions?
Your tires will have embedded RFID tags. They'll know who to charge, don't worry...
Holy shit, I did it! I thought for sure that subscribers would have beat me to it. Uh... now I can die a happy man or something. Shruberies is a pun. Just kidding, I'm just dumb. Hey that rhymes. 8^0
Moderation: +1 pwnage
when it is time to retreat from gnutella. Any good indicators?
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
This is probably a silly question, (aren't they all...) If several adults live at an address (DSL drop) and "someone" is downloading files, who gets sued by the RIAA? Or would they just sue everyone? ("Kill them all and the devil will know his own...") Can I really be blamed for what another adult does? And how do they prove it was one or the other? Especially with the DCMA, what if its a minor who is breaking the law?
The threat of being accosted by the RIAA is reduced significantly when one has a dynamic IP. Even moreso, when one has a dynamic IP that changes on an hourly basis, and is not tracked by the ISP providing IP services. One feasible way to foil the RIAA's plans to track down users based on IP, are for ISPs to band together and establish a new "anonymous" internet access standard. ISPs which don't keep logs of which IP belonged to which user at which time, and then forcing a new IP on every user on an hourly (or hourly + random number of minutes) basis.
.. the proxy network needs to be depolyed as an anonymous internet access service, it needs to be marketed like that, and if need be it needs to be defended in court like that.
Then when the RIAA with their lawyers and their hounds and their warrants show up on the doorstep at SomeISP.com, SomeISP.com can shrug and say "Sorry, we don't know who was using those IPs at those times; we don't log that information. Oh and those IPs that you're curious about aren't unique to a single user from one hour to the next, either."
Although such an extravagant system is hardly required if ISPs will just...not keep logs of who has which IPs at what times. That right there is really all that's necessary in order to put a stop to the threat of the RIAA. If they've got no way to "lookup" your IP and "resolve" it to your name and address, they're up the creek without a paddle. heh. Unfortunately I think that this kind of tracking is required by law. =\
An intermediate proxy layer is probably required to protect peoples' identities while maintaining responsibility to the law. If no data were transferred directly from peer to peer, but all data passed through an anonymizing proxy service, then there would be no way to track individual IPs to individual users. The proxy service would have a range of IPs that it would block from using the service; mostly overseas numbers and government agencies. But the proxy service would have to be generically available for any level and type of data transfer on the internet, so nobody can say "That proxy network that soandso developed is just there to make piracy easier!"
To make an analogy, creating this proxy service is much like becoming a gun manufacturer. People will show up on your doorstep (the RIAA, their hounds, their lawyers) and proclaim loudly that you are irresponsible and you make only tools of destruction (destruction of their capitalistic heirarchy which dictates that they get boatloads of cash and the music creators themselves get jack). But when you refute their claims you need to make sure that you do so from a platform of freedom and independence, a platform of neutrality that doesn't advocate breaking the law, but one that does acknowledge that it may be possible for the law to be broken through the use of its products. Care must be taken to portray the proxy service as a simple anonymizing service without advocating any one single use or purpose. Smith & Wesson don't say that their guns are only good for killing people; but they do say that they make damn fine guns. It's all in the marketing and the picture you paint for people to see.
Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
1. Ripping MP3s of your music is fair use. 2. Occasionally CDs are lost or stolen. Thus: no one but the computer operator of any particular PC can know the true legitimacy of MP3s on that computer. Don't allow anyone to convince you that you can be busted for the MP3s on your computer. You cannot be.
The flag just makes more sense than the constitution. - Judas Gutenberg
Why don't we build a password crack for the closed sharing port, release it and publicize it, share it on our drives, and then close all our ports?
Then when the RIAA uses it to see what files we're sharing, they will have technically hacked their way in.
That, I think, would be actionable.
Well the new protections are no silver bullet, but they are a start. I don't buy into the IP-blocking idea. The RIAA can hire just about anyone to scan the networks for snippets of evil contraband.
The blocking of requests to see all the files a user has is a much better idea. Notice that the RIAA has only been going after the "big offenders", people with 1000's of MP3's up for download. This is exactly how they find them...Pick "mp3sh4r3r" out of the list and if they have more than 2000 MP3's send them a nastygram. That's much more difficult to do if said sharer's computer denies them the list.
The only way I can really see past that is if they did a Kazaa search for every single known filename and see what comes back...Record the IP's that return files and build a file list based on each IP based on the search results. Needless to say, that would not be an exact science. It appears the ball is in the RIAA's court again.
-R
K++
K++
K++
K+++ATH0
NO CARRIER
It's really very simple. Regardless of the actual situation, most discussions on /. and elsewhere about P2P services have a basic assumption that they can be used for legitimate purposes, and frequently people here act like legitimate transfers are the majority of P2P traffic. By actively blocking **AA scanners, that assumption doesn't even hold the thimbleful it once did.
Want to send a solid attempt to the **AAs? Download only content you have a right to download. Share only content you have a right to share. Let them sue you. Go to court with proof of your right to copy/distribute. Get a legitimate P2P use into case law. It'll be expensive and it'll suck, but at least it doesn't border on aiding/abetting like this shit does.
I would have already done so by now. The Verizon ruling would have been my motivation, were I running an illegal node at the time. I personally do run a very active mutella node, but it's 100% legit.
The courts sided with grokster and morpheus because they merely wrote p2p software and had no control over what users did with it. By including IP blocking technologies, the courts may interpret that as contributing to copyright infringement since this software actively prevents searching by entities trying to detect copyright infringement. The result is the court may shut down and fine Kazaa Lite, PeerGaurdian, or both.
Vote for Pedro
Let's say I sit down and type in the latest Harry Potter book (that seems to be a common example in IP-related threads lately, so I'll go with it), and I wind up with a big text file called harrypotter.txt. If I were to place harrypotter.txt on my website, that would quite obviously be copyright infringement. I'd have a copy of someone else's book available on my website for the public to come and download. We all will probably agree that's a no-no.
But what if I encrypt the file first? The contents of the file are no longer the copyrighted writings of J.K. Rowling, the file is now made up of seemingly random bytes. If I put the encrypted file up on my website for anyone to download, am I still guilty of copyright infringement?
How about if I don't make the password available?
How about if I name the file foo.bar, don't mention anywhere that it's an encrypted copy of the latest Harry Potter book, and nobody has any clue what the ciphertext decrypts to?
Suppose harrypotter.txt comes out to around 5MB in size. I then create a my own literary masterpiece comprised of 95MB of
If J.K. Rowling's publisher visits my website, downloads the PGP'd ZIP file, and cracks the encryption to determine that I'm distributing harrypotter.txt, isn't it true that the publisher has circumvented an access-control mechanism to access my copyrighted material? Recall that 95% of the archive is my work...
I guess what I'm really getting at is that I wonder how much ownership one must have in the contents of a particular encrypted file in order to be able to seek relief under the DMCA. Surely, in the latter scenario, Rowling's publisher _would_ have a case against me. But wouldn't I have one against them, as well?
I realize that all of this is a bit of a stretch, but it's certainly plausible. Abstracts such as these - which cannot possibly occur with physical property - are one of the reasons that I believe we will never be able to effectively legislate intellectual "property" in a manner which is fair to both sides.
Lions and tigers and BearShares, oh my...
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
Actually, the folks at UDPP2P had an interesting idea in this regard. The client negotiates through the search network to find a server, but doesn't gets that server's IP. The server sends the data via forged UDP packets, encrypted, with some extra code to correct for out-of-order and dropped packets.
/. a while ago about a similar method of sending data; you take a big, not quite square matrix M and multiplied the data file by it, getting a bunch of rows; you send these rows along with row IDs; once the receiver has enough of these rows, he can construct (using the row IDs) the inverse of the submatrix of M that spawned them, and derive the original message, even if the rest were dropped or corrupted. VanderMonde matrices work for this, although I imagine there's a sparser solution.
..AA can still set up a fake server which logs you, since the server knows the client's IP, unless you proxy, which would cost in bandwidth. Or, you could send it to someone on the receiver's subnet and let them sniff, which wouldn't entirely give away their location.
I think there was a paper on
Of course, your ISP/firewall wouldn't necessarily be happy about sending out all those fake UDPs, and many university networks throttle them. Also, the
Perhaps one should point out that this is practically a new internet protocol, requiring root access and stuff... it might be better for them just to use IPSec with address hiding.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
calm down gringo!
Jury nullification is very rare. It is certainly not something you can count on to say with 100% certainty that "the RIAA will *LOOSE*. And they know it."
With all due respect, I think you are engaging in wishful thinking.
This also isn't realistic. If they lose one at the trial court level, it isn't a binding precedent. (Particularly if the loss is due to jury nullification.) It isn't like they can't afford to file more suits. All they have to do is keep trying until they find a jury that actually follows the law (which shouldn't be that hard to do) and then ruin somebody. Then they will have their headlines and their head on a pike.
Anyone who thought they were safe after a single case of "jury nullification" would be an utter fool.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
The RIAA is like a big loan company. They load you money in order record your music, promote it, and in the meantime let you live like a rockstar. You don't get back all you've earned because the RIAA loses a lot of money on bands they've done this with who go nowhere. Its very much like any type of loan, except the artist doesn't have to pay anything back if they tank.
It sounds like a great deal, but it really is a catch 22 as even if you get prettys successful you still make shit. The only way to make money is to become a megastar.
Photos.
> Kazaa is open-source
I'm pretty sure that Kazaa is not open-source.
TANSTAAFI: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free iPod.
they could flood the p2p nets with fake mp3's,
just loops of that annoying-ass Billy Mays
maybe he could be thrumpeting the joys of RIAA/MPAA compliance...
Then again, maybe not..
I don't care if you two keep arguing, just quit spelling LOSE wrong...
Both Overnet and eDonkey have Linux clients, and they are two of the best P2P networks out there.
Linux:Windows::Overnet:Kazaa
Yeah more likely you'd want to hide a computer in some place inconsipcous, like seal it in the wall or bury it in the basement and then access it by wifi and put all your files on that. Then as long as all your other systems were clean and assuming they never found it what you're saying might be pratical.
After all, they are handing out felonies. Can you get a felony from civil cases?
By the way, the real reason I wanted to respond was to point out that they WILL raid your home. All they need is their dail-a-warrant, and then some night while you're sleeping in the nude, they will have the ATF/Swat/ team break down your door with weapons drawn. Confiscate you computer and anything looking like evidence, and you will be busted. You are correct that they will probably only press for lawsuits that they know they can win, but that only cements the idea that they will raid your home with a warrant.
(By the way, please quit spelling "lose" wrong)
I used to use aproxy all the time, and all that happened was that my fingers stuck together.
It's the proverbial finger in the hole in the dam.
Perhaps. Except that in that story, the random passerby putting his finger in the hole (actually, I believe it was in a dyke) prevented it from eroding and widening, thus saving the entire village.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
Oh, and thanks to everyone who responded. I will be taking a look at your suggestions.
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
The fact that a user (RIAA) could not search a specific user's shared files is actually a great feature.
They say that they are going to prosecute users who share large amounts of songs. With this new feature they would be lucky to find more than one song from the same user.
Before this feature anyone could see who shares a large number of songs. Now the task of finding 'generous sharers' has gotten a LOT more difficult.
Logged, your IP address was
Maybe "IP Blocking" isn't something that hides your IP address, but rather keeps the RIAA from coming after you by preventing you from distributing someone else's Intellectual Property. :)
n/t
Jesus, dumbasses like you make me sick. You spend all of your time (evidently) correcting spelling errors. What are you, a teacher? If so, teachers are here to educate, not criticize.
Be kind to your students, or they may come to class and shoot you in the head.
get a life, and/or get off slashdot
BTW GEORGE W. BUSH IS A FASCIST PIG
New for the Feds!
KaZaA Tracer: the RIAA edition!
Give us legal immunity, and we will give you the key to deciphering the identity encryption!
Why give us only 10-15, when you can now fine thousands of users for millions each?
It already exists.. Its a box you glue to your windshield or something, lets you at a toll booth with out stopping, or auto pay for fast food..
Scary if you ask me..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
As I just did this 30 minutes ago....
d ll. dll
/mnt/cdrom/win98
/a /l c:\windows\system win98.cab comdlg32.dll
.wine/fake_windows/Windows/System
.wine directory with
.wine/config in the right place:
First, get the newest version of wine.
Next get these files from a win98 installation
or cd:
comdlg32.dll
ole32.dll
shdocvw.dll
commctrl.
oleaut32.dll
shlwapi.dll
ntdll.dll
shdoclc
urlmon.dll
Note: if you are slick, you can use the
extract.exe command on the windows cd using wine
with a mounted win98 cd if you copy extract.exe
to your fake_windows/Windows directory.
example:
cd
wine extract
should extract comdlg32.dll from the cab file, and
pop it into your
folder where you want it to be.
After getting those files in your system folder,
Download the registery hack from frankscorner.
You can get it HERE.
Replace the registery in your
that one.
After that, add these EXACT LINES to your
[AppDefaults\\Kazaa.kpp\\DllOverrides]
"*" = "builtin, native, so"
"commctrl" = "native"
"shdoclc" = "native"
"shdocvw" = "native"
"shlwapi" = "native"
"comdlg32" = "native"
"ole32" = "native"
"oleaut32" = "native"
"ntdll" = "native"
"urlmon" = "native"
I put them at the bottom of the file right above
#
After that,
wine kazaa_lite_kpp_edition_240_english.exe
Do the install. Pick whatever options you want. After it's done it autolaunches the k-lite config crap. You might as well cancel out of it because it's going to bomb. run kazaalite by changing to the install directory, and typing wine kpp.exe. That's it. Make sure to visit the setup options and set important stuff.
For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
perish the thought that one day the RIAA gets the ability to enforce their own copyrights or even worse that the gov't takes tehm seriously enough to devote some amount of law power to their assinine crusade to turn back the clock 10yeras when they could have done something about it
/.er knows not only how to change their ips but probably has more than one card they could use to do it .. yea i know that your cable modem has a set MAC but if there is no record of a lease after it's 'expired' how are they going to trace it back to your modem? also unlike ashcroft's nazi league of anti-terrorists the RIAA would most likely need to get subpoenas and a variety of other legal ducks in order before they woudl even be able to do anything about it
people talk about ip tracing, my question is how long does the typical ISP keep a list of what mac address got what ip? cuase if they keep none i can switch my ip daily and the RIAA will only know that a lot of people on my subnet (read a 12 or 15 mile radius at least around me) are using these services.. i would assume the average
and all that tracking and lawyering is expensive.. i wonder how many people they will litigate before they bankrupt thsemlseves trying to get legal fees
The GNAA ain't gonna crush nobody because they will be a bloody pulp at the end of my baseball bat when I'm through with them. Stupid mutha fuckaz!
If you can't handle simple instructions like that. Best stick with your wintel machine so you can call up friends and annoy them when it bluescreens.
why don't they just block the RIAA from using their service? Can't they legally put in their EULA (which everyone loves anyway) that the RIAA, any RIAA affiliate, any agency working for the RIAA cannot legally use Kazaa?
I mean, if you can't win through better technological advantages, win with litigation. I mean, hey, it's only what the RIAA is doing.
Data piracy not theft. Check your definition. ( really piracy is the wrong word too, but its a commonly used term now due to marketing )
Data piracy is illegal, I agree. There is where we can get into a discussion.
I buy what I have downloaded if I continue to listen to it. IS that wrong? Perhaps technically, but since I then purchase the right to listen to that track, it becomes moot.
If I don't keep the track because its crap, then its gone. I don't waste the space for crap. In that case, ill argue that NOTHING was lost in the transaction, therefore no crime was committed.
They are one of the few industries that wont guarantee quality of their product. Even in a bookstore you have a chance to return a bad book.. And don't give me 'its different, you cant copy a book easily'.. ever hear of a scanner?
I have NO issue paying for what i want, but until they get a clue they cant expect me ( and many others ) to risk $ on something that may be crap, and then are stuck with it. They need to understand the basic laws of consumerism and not piss off their customers.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Empower people, free up the market, and the need for the RIAAs and the MPAAs of the world decreases dramatically. That's where we stand in this broadband Web-centric, PC-oriented universe. It's not designed to bolster or perpetuate bloated oligopolies.
They only need an IP address to find you
And what the fuck do you think this hides, moron?
As he clearly stated, it doesn't necessarily hide anything.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
Is there a big difference in sound quality between a song played from a CD and the same song played from a digital radio receiver?
If the difference is not much, then what is to stop people from digitally recording straight from digital radio sources?
I suppose there might be some problems, as some radio stations tend to overlap the beginning and/or the end of songs with chatter and various radio ring-a-dings.
That happens mostly (on my fav analog radio station) during the morning show, but not during the evening "hour long commercial free non stop music" features...
Say the RIAA suspects that you're a big file sharer, don't they need some type of real evidence that you (and you specificaly) actually posess and are sharing copywriten material? Wouldn't they have to eventually have the cops confiscate your drive? This would place the burden of proof square on the RIAA. If you get threatened about getting sued ... ask for proof. Something more than your IP... people can hijack IP's .. people can break into your house and plug in their laptop into your LAN to do all sorts of evil things like download music. Yeah so the ISP says that you owned the infringing IP at that particular time .. that's not proof that YOU committed a crime.
Low level format takes too long you say? Especially when the feds are breaking down your door? Darn right it takes too long. That's why you get yourself a peice of software that acts as a hard drive and encrypts your data using 256 bit Blowfish. Ths type of software is amazing. I use it all the time to encrypt my documents and sourcecode. .. and if someone should happen to breakdown my door .. i just have to power off my pc or log off from the encrypted drive. This takes less than 2 seconds when adrenaline pumps in your veins.
Without the password there are no files no matter how hard/long someone tries.
I buy my music... well the stuff that's good. I don't want my privacy invaded and to be sent to court just because there's some mp3's on my hardrive and that I happen to have Kazaa.
Go bust some drug dealers .. and artists, if you're that great and talented ... go independant. You don't need the RIAA.
Are you ... trolling? If you're downloading a program of which the express purpose is exchanging files it's not too much a reach to think that filesharing would be on by default. The problem would be if you can't disable it.
gnaa is meat! ho ho ho. how do you like being nowhere near the top, were you too busy doing gay thing to each other to post? meat!
What I'm saying is, the RIAA is trying to make a point, they aren't trying to winn anything. It's all about publisity and the meedia. They want to scaare you into not trading.
A single loss in court, which a jury could very well inflict on them, would blow their whole scare caampain out of the water.
The RIAA, or rather their laawyers, know this. They don't want trials, they want sheeep to settle, admitting guilt.
(all spelling nazis can blow me)
Nope, they want to sue.
The RIAA can't (yet) bring criminal charges. They can gather evidence and pass it to the DA, though.
With the RIAA trying to find a way for a leg up, why would anyone trust a closed source app? Not that I am condoning copyright infringement. However if you are going to do it, I would think you would have to be just asking for trouble to trust a closed source app that connot be peer reviewed for correctness. How hard would it be for the RIAA to pay Kazza some cash under the table to have Kazaa send them IP's of the biggest traders? Kazaa has already tried to get in bed with the RIAA.
Closed source P2P, use at your own risk!
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
Mods: Parent is a troll / flamebait!
If the RIAA is going to be sticking it's nose into every stream.. why not compress the data files on the server side?
.zip extension could have _any_ content in it. Such a system would at least make the RIAA eat the cost of decompressing *every* download to audio fingerprint it.
I bring this up for a couple of reasons, if a user downloads an mp3, it's pretty obvious it's a media file. However, IANAL, but wouldn't compression give some sort of relief to the downloader? A file with a
Of course it's not a perfect solution. It isn't even that great of a solution (it does work better than you think for the same reason Open Source development works: lots of eyes looking at the problem from their own unique perspectives). But it does send a message to the **AAs that P2Pers aren't going to lay down just because they say "stop". And you can see that there are people willing and able to contribute to frustrating their draconian behavior.
The motives may not be the best, but the actions are something to praise.
If using Linux is about choice, how come people complain when I choose to use Windows?
All it does is block IP's using the PeerGuardian database, and some other minor tweaks. Won't this just force the RIAA and other protectors of copyright to change their location from time to time? This isn't a huge deal, nor even a small step. What we need are new P2P apps that completely hide identity and content.
(1) All users must register their filesharing client.
(2) The first thing the client does is upload a VERY SMALL "guilt file" to which kazaa, napster, or whoever wrote the client, has EXCLUSIVE rights. The user is now in cahoots before he ever downloaded anything. Before a client downloads any single file, he first uploads 2 "guilt files" to the sharing user. This verifies that the requester has implicated himself. So he is guilty but not to be punished.
(3) User must click "I Agree to Terms of Use."
(4) Term of use 1:
"I recognized that I have already violated a copyright just to launch this application. I understand that I will be sued, if and only if I decide to press charges against anyone on this network who violates my own copyrights on this network. I agree that the terms of settlement will be as follows: any spoils I achieve by copyright lawsuit, or by settlement, using this network, I agree to pay in double to kazaa, napster (whoever wrote the client). 75% of that will be returned to the original victim of the lawsuit." So it actually PAYS to get sued.
"I understand that for each file I have downloaded, I have, myself, illegally shared TWO files. I understand that I am pardoned of my offenses, so long as I pardon everyone who has offended me." ("Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.")
(5) Term of use 2: "I am not using this software as a third party agent." i.e. I am not a private investigator, lawyer, snoop, cop, stool pidgeon, etc., I'm just a joe using this client for his own purposes.) This term reduces the risk that RIAA hires a little kid to do the download and then films it as evidence.
Neat huh? I want to see it! Those laws (that the RIAA has democratically bribed our politicians for) would work against them SOOOO harshly here.
SWEET!
-The REAL Sam
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
Kazaa by Sharman is seperate from Kazaa Lite and K++. Kazaa the original program, along with being stuffed with spyware et al is also being touted as a legitimate program for distribution because of their partnership with a company which provides such content. K++ and Kazaa Lite are unauthorized versions of Kazaa with the spyware and so forth removed, and with this new RIAA-proofing. This shouldn't affect Kazaa proper's legal argument.
Aren't all battles a subset of a war?
As I was reading the License Agreement for the aforementioned software (yes, I read them) I felt I should point out section 2.4 - "...You agree not to use this Software to: ...Forge headers or otherwise manipulate identifiers in order to
disguise the origin of any data transmitted to other users..."
The "breaking" in breaking and entering does not refer to breaking an object. It refers to breaking the "protective seal" of the dwelling.
If you open an unlocked door to enter a dwelling that you have no right to be in, you are breaking and entering.
Trespassing just means you are on someone else's property without permission. It has nothing to do with whether you are inside a building or not.
Doesn't seem to slow them down any.
Are you ... trolling?
No. Read on...
If you're downloading a program of which the express purpose is exchanging files it's not too much a reach to think that filesharing would be on by default. The problem would be if you can't disable it.
That's fine for a new installation and I'd have no complaint. But the program claims "You can just install this on top of a current Kazaa Lite installation. That way all your settings will be remembered." *IF* it is turning filesharing back on without warning the user, that's a major problem in my book. Suppose a user chose to put all of the downloaded files in the "My Documents" folder with every other document that he ever created. Because he has filesharing disabled, his personal files are not being shared. Now he installs a new version and now every file in there is available over Kazaa. That's my gripe in a nutshell.
the billionth feeble minded conflation of theft and copyright infringement. ("it's still theft under our laws").
How long till somone gets less lazy and either does a fully ssh implementation for all the data channels or just writes an amazing frontend that utilizes Freenet?
Then I might trust supposed secure measures.
This is slightly off-topic for your discussion, but on-topic for the article:
From the Kazaa Lite 2.1x EULA:
"Please note that installing this software is ILLEGAL and is in violation of the Kazaa Media Desktop Terms of Use. If you do, however, install the software contained in this package, you agree to take ALL responsibility for your actions."
- it is = it's
- it (posessive) = its
Examples:Your chin is sprouting hair out of its tip.
I can't believe it's not butterscotch!
What about IP spoofing?
get here http://p2psafe.tripod.com
get k-lite here http://p2psafe.tripod.com
Let us review, Pedant:
It's "possessive".
Examples:
They possessed great obsession with spelling.
They did not possess any memory of the topic.
I can imagine setting up a "spoof-ability" analysis server: Send it a spoofed packet with your real IP as the data, and after up to 31 attempts (using more and more bits of your real source address) you can determine how "spoofy" you can be, based on which packets generate replies.
I'd bet they'd find a ton of people who are looking for work right now that are still unemployed thanks to the dot bomb.
wanting to copy CDs vs. feeding your family, people will feed their family. There are a small minority that would rather eat ketchup packets instead.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
That case ( once lost ) gave private companies that power..
The government already had that due to the patriot act.... ( previous laws required some sort subpoena )
---- Booth was a patriot ----