Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Infiltrating Campus Nets with Software
unassimilatible writes "CNet is reporting that the MPAA is starting to infiltrate college campuses with automated anti-piracy software. Known as the Automated Copyright Notice System (ACNS), the technology promises to make copyright enforcement easier on peer-to-peer networks, saving schools and Internet service providers (ISPs) time and money. ACNS allows them to automatically restrict or cut off Internet access for alleged infringers on notice from a record label or movie studio. Though not specifically ACNS, a similar system is set to go live Monday at the University of California at Los Angeles, one of the nation's largest universities with 37,500 students. UCLA's Copyright Policy page makes no reference of this system being implemented."
In fact, UCLA has even published a letter to their students directly addressing file-sharing which states We are writing to alert the campus community - students, faculty and staff - to the personal risks involved with illegal file-sharing. It is important that you understand these risks, not only because of the possibility of disciplinary action, but also to protect yourself against criminal prosecution and the initiation of civil litigation by copyright holders. We would like you to be very aware that initiation of legal action by copyright holders is becoming more of a reality every day..
With ample notification of monitoring and a termination policy in place, why should UCLA need to explicitly state that they are turning on a new monitoring system any more than they would notify students that their P2P bandwidth was being throttled by something like Packetshaper?
I believe if it is content you are legally entitled to posses you are not breaking the law by downloading it.
That doesn't change the laws that prohibit the person sharing the file from distributing it.
If I'm downloading copies of song which I already own on CD, then I'm not infringing, am I? Maybe I'm just too lazy to rip my own disks. I can think of other reasons why I might do that.
Gray area for you because this kind of case really hasn't made it to the courts... however, the person you're downloading from is definitely in trouble. MP3.com's "locker" service where they allowed people to stream MP3.com's copy of a song after proving that they owned a CD with the song on it was what ended up bringing down the whole company, and forcing it to sell out to RIAA-interests.
It's been my experience that the MPAA and RIAA aren't going after downloaders. They're going after the uploaders. Unfortunately, you can't use BitTorrent (unmodded) without uploading data.
.torrent you have, and looking at the status of every file and the IP that has it. That's how they got me on a couple Stargate season 7 episodes I downloaded with BT (of course I also BUY the DVD box sets of every season when they come out). The problem wasn't that I downloaded it (I could watch it on TV), but that I was also sharing it at the time (I'm also not allowed to run a TV broadcast station).
They can see what you're sharing by opening the same
I'm sure there's a few programmers out there more than willing to take an open source file sharing system like BT and write a client that simply catalogs IPs and files shared.
If they connect to the torrent file that you're downloading from, they can tell:
What IP's are downloading
How much they've downloaded
So, all they have to do is find the torrent, which is pretty easy. BitTorrent works through a tracker, which your computer connects to regularly. These trackers usually have links to the torrent files they are tracking. They could then find your ISP and send them (or you) letters and lawsuits.
IANAL, but wouldn't a due dilligence suit have to come from their shareholders?
They will never stop until somebody makes the
The RIAA isn't going after people for having copies of mp3's. Whether you own a legal copy of the song is not important. The RIAA is looking for people sharing the songs, and if the mp3 is copyrighted, it is infringement. "Fair Use" does not include downloading or sharing "backup copies" of songs that you once owned. They don't care if you own it or not. While the DMCA gives some shelter to the ISP or school, they still have to follow up on complaints to be compliant. Thats why people are getting letters about sharing movies online. For repeated offenses, the ISP in question is under legal obligation to shut you off. Your defense is to dispute the complaint, but be prepared to hire a lawyer and only if you are innocent. This seems like a way to help the school ISP's save time by blocking as much traffic on p2p as they can. I have a feeling they are really caving into pressure from the *AA's. There's tons of legitimate uses for p2p, but we need to get it out of our heads that it's legal to download/share copyrighted material for "backup" purposes...that is clearly copyright infringement. /listening to my que of 4500 "legally obtained" mp3's right now ;)
Tech News, Reviews and Tutorials
...and if I like the movie (which is more often than not), I go out and buy the DVD once it comes out - not because I want to be legal about it (I really don't care if the movies I have are legal or not), but because DVD's offer substance for my dollar (commentary, deleted scenes, out-takes, etc).
The downloaded version gives me a nice taste (ok, a full meal) of the movie and the MPAA (usually) still gets their money. Example - downloaded The Rundown before going to Best Buy to shell out my $. Liked the movie, bought the DVD, MPAA got my money - even though I'm one of those terrible pirates they hate.
Someone really should have trademarked the term "Open-Source". It would lend a little bit of weight for going after those who abuse the term.
Open Source Initiative has made available the OSI CERTIFIED mark to refer to programs published under approved licenses, all of which match the Open Source Definition.
Friendly News Release
ICARUS FAQ (check out question #12)
A news story covering ICARUS
And lastly, The Slashdot story covering it.
But how do I feel about ICARUS? When there's a will there's a way, that's what I say. It's a pain but hey. As an RA I get people continually banging on my door about no internet connection problems. It was HORRIBLE the first two weeks when people were moving in cause NO ONE knows what they have on their computers. Kids would come, plug in their computers and within 30 seconds their port would be killed and they needed to call the Help Desk. Help Desk was overloaded with calls but they'd finally get their ports on again and they know how to clean their machine (or didn't care) and BAM! kicked off again. AND WHO DO YOU THINK THEY COMPLAINED TO!?
ICARUS = devil
Have all the p2p applications use a one-byte XOR bitflip at each end... the SAME one byte. Since you've now encrypted your digital information, it's illegal for anyone to break the "encryption," despite the fact that it stops no one from copying or wiretapping anything, because of that wonderful law that all good patriots support, the DMCA!
:)
Thus, if anyone tells you that you've been sharing, tell them that it's illegal for anyone to decrypt your digital transmissions without your permission. If anything, it's a perfect way to demonstrate what a bunch of bulls*it the DMCA is.
If someone with a pair actually does go to court, they can simply point out that the (RI || MP) AA were breaking the law and that their case is therefore null and void. And you say that no good can come of it?
Hateful responses? Death threats? Please direct all of them to my image consultants, the RIAA