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."
From the article:
And:
Sounds like a case of buzzworditus... can one even legally install Open Source software on Cisco harware? I mean, besides the Open Source stuff that Cisco has pirated.
Does that paris hilton sex tape count as priated. my friend was wondering, not me. i swear
even a stopped clock gives the right time twice aday...
As a 48 yo grandmother, and a feminist, I am offended that this article considers grandmothers as technically incompentant.
Why are colleges going to let some outside entity install software on their networks?
You want what with that?
Infiltrate? Who's words are those? The posting makes it sound as if the RIAA is covertly sneaking this software onto campus networks. The colleges do have a choice whether to use ACNS or not. Although I am sure that the RIAA will be putting a lot of pressure on those who choose not to.
Because all they have to do is tell the universities "Let us install this and we promise we won't prosecute you if we find any infringers".
Very crafty....
How long before the *AA starts suing ISP/Unis which don't implement this for lack of due diligence?
Put identity in the browser.
if it gets the people using kazaa off of our network, I see no problem with it. More bandwidth for the rest of us.
Karma: Negative (Mostly affected by dorm trolling)
The ministry of Plenty released today that production of shoes was up 20% from the same time last year...
ok so there are legal uses of file sharing software, but those who distribute material that isn't legal haven't got a leg to stand on... and deserve everything that gets thrown at them...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
...from a virus? In my mind this is even more invasive than the spyware/adware I have to delete daily from my machine.
The MPAA seems to be targeting titles that are not available on video yet. That in itself is ok in my book. My biggest gripe with the RIAA is how do they know that I don't own the song? I obviously don't own a copy of Starsky and Hutch because it hasn't been released on video yet. I don't like the possibility of violating privacy rights, so I am naturally skeptical of the ACNS system. The article did nothing to relieve those fears.
With every MPAA story like this, you get all kinds of sheep coming out of the woodwork stating things like, "Good, downloading movies is illegal and this is just!" without realizing a lot of your rights are going down the toilet simply because some cry baby organization/company is claiming "copyright infringment" even though it's been going on for YEARS, long before the internet ever made it popular.
These Universities need to tell them to piss off. They're just gonna get it even worse once anonymous P2P hits the masses.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
Surely the following has been brought up before...
1. 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.
2. So if a high percentage (or even not so high percentage) of P2P users are downloading legitimate files, i.e. things they own or are otherwise allowed to access, doesn't this make it darn near impossible for the MPAA/RIAA/NSA/CIA/FBI to decide whose infringing and who is not ?
So basically we're back to the guilty and proven innocent mindset which is becoming all-too-common in the Corporate States of America (TM)
Absolute statements are never true
From the article:
Several studios and record labels, including Universal Music Group, have begun to standardize the tags at the bottom of their takedown notices into XML, code that allows data to be used seamlessly in various contexts. The digital tags contain the name of the copyrighted material that's been comprised, the copyright holder's name, date and time stamp, and the Internet Protocol address of the infringer. Receipt of this tag triggers the internal notification process at a university or ISP using the system.
So, if there's some college student they don't like, would hackers start creating these "standard" XML tags and sending them to university IT departments?
--- You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad- Neal (not Cowboy) Boortz
This is what I received, I've edited some of it sensitive material out. I had to acknoledge that I had stopped sharing this file or my internet connection would be dropped
:
Subject: Unauthorized Distribution of Copyrighted Motion Pictures
(Reference#: xxxxxx)
MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.
15503 VENTURA BOULEVARD
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
UNITED STATES
Anti-Piracy Operations
PHONE: (818) 728 - 8127
Email: MPAA@copyright.org
Thursday, November 13, 2003
Name: XXX XXXX
E-mail: xxx@xxx
ISP: xxx University
Via Fax/Email
RE: Unauthorized Distribution of Copyrighted Motion Pictures
MPA Case Name: directconnect://xxx:ipaddr/
Reference#: 2937735
Date of Infringement: 11/12/2003 2:28:05 PM GMT
Dear
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) represents the following motion picture production and distribution companies:
Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
Disney Enterprises, Inc.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.
Paramount Pictures Corporation
TriStar Pictures, Inc.
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation
United Artists Pictures, Inc.
United Artists Corporation
Universal City Studios, LLLP
Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
We have received information that an individual has utilized the IP address, xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx, at the above noted date and time to offer downloads of copyrighted motion picture(s) through a "peer-to-peer" service, including such title(s) as:
Chicago
The distribution of unauthorized copies of copyrighted motion pictures constitutes copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, Title 17 United States Code Section 106(3). This conduct may also violate the laws of other countries, international law, and/or treaty obligations.
Since you own this IP address, we request that you immediately do the following:
1. Disable access to the individual who has engaged in the conduct described above, and;
2. Take appropriate action against the account holder under your Abuse Policy/Terms of Service Agreement.
On behalf of the respective owners of the exclusive rights to the copyrighted material at issue in this notice, we hereby state, pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Title 17 United States Code Section 512, that the information in this notification is accurate and that we have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owners, their respective agents, or the law.
Also pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we hereby state, under penalty of perjury, that we are authorized to act on behalf of the owners of the exclusive rights being infringed as set forth in this notification.
Please contact us at the above listed address or by replying to this email should you have any questions. Kindly include the above noted Reference # in the subject line of all email correspondence.
We thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your prompt response is requested.
Respectfully,
Thomas Temple
Director
Worldwide Internet Enforcement
"A diplomat is a man who always remembers a woman's birthday but never remembers her age." -Robert Frost
These MPAA narcs will stop at nothing. I had a bad feeling about that dreadlocked hackysack dude after we found him snooping around the dorm router. Also took note of the 3-piece suit under the poncho. Something isn't right here.
Getting network access as a student on a campus usually requires signing a blanket document that acknowledges that that the campus can monitor traffic that you send/receive. On many campuses, a student's choice is likely to be sign the form, or not get any access.
Of course, you could always ssl all of your connections. Hmmm...that could get ugly quickly. I wonder how that would stack up against the DMCA?
Craig Steffen
http://www.craigsteffen.net
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?
As a copyright holder (for example, I create an independent film that I want to protect), what do you think would happen if I demand access to this system to do my own enforcement? What if every copyright holder in America had access to the system as well? No, we wouldn't have access to this system. Obviously such a system shouldn't be in place, but it's presence represents an unfairness to everyone except the MPAA.
This is why we (used to) have a thing called due-process, to keep private entities from enforcing what they consider the law. But we all know due-process doesn't contribute to election campaigns.
_______
2B1ASK1
the old napster trick of the rot13 of all the file names and or the piglatin changes or even reverse naming...
hell simply rot-13 the entire mp3 file and they cant detect squat.
what will be the best trick is for people to set up garbage throwers to make the damned thing give so many false positives that it is deemed useless...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
At my college(which shall remain anonymous), we have a pretty crappy network. It isn't the physical lines or routers that cause massive amounts of downtown and lag, its the Computing Center who run hte network. However, one thing I know for sure is that the Computing Center will never implement this type of system. The big reason being: It's more work.
Installing and managing such a system is just more work for them. Lesser reasons, such as added network instability, security issues(who stops the MPAA from going too far), and apathy also play a role. Not to mention that the Computing Center staff is not so incompetent to believe that those who want to will find a way to bypass or utilize the system to their advantage. Think about it, if you could trick the system into thinking someone was sharing music or movies, you can get them disconnected and sent a letter from the MPAA. Personally, I wouldn't feel safe giving an automated system such power in a large network like my campus(12,000 students).
How long until some worm is written that uses the automatic notice/account-disabling feature to systematically cause the disabling of every account in existence?
Not long, I think.
.@.
Do it or we'll see you in court. Yeh, that's some choice alright. As for the covertness, how many staff and students do you think know about it?
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
A friend of mine once got an e-mail from a company that was hired (presumably by the MPAA) to search P2P networks for copyrighted material and send a cease and desist e-mail.
/. previously), there is just no way to be sure. Downloading each track would suck up a ton of bandwidth. And other methods might show false positives (Not that the **AA care about the truth, otherwise they wouldn't be on this anti-P2P kick). If my college cut me from the network that I paid to use on a false positive, I'd be seriously pissed.
Basically, my friend had downloaded one of those 2 hour trailer loops thinking it was a movie, then forgot to delete it after he realized it was not the movie. The company sent him and e-mail, having looked at the title and not the content. He wrote them a pretty mean e-mail back.
So, how does the software identify copyrighted music on P2P? Presumably it could do an MD5 hash against a master, but that would vary if, say, some time was cut off the end. They couldn't possibly account for all possible variations on a file. They could check ID5 information that is provided through the P2P metadata, but that can be wrong frequently. Finally, they can check the file name. But what if I took a liking to misnaming some of my own music?
Without downloading the song and making an aural comparison (there is technology available that could discern, as AT&T Wireless is apparently using it, as was reported on
In other news, automated cameras have been installed, issuing tickets to those who run red lights in the middle of the night when there's no other traffic, including police, around.
Vehicles have been equipped with "black box" devices, recording operations without the driver's knowledge or consent.
Eavesdropping equipment has also been installed in new vehicles, giving the ability to listen in on the occupants at any time.
Law enforcement uses special equipment to "see through" walls and observe the occupants inside a building, without a warrant because it's observable from the street.
I started this post attempting to be sarcastic, but every terrifying example of surveillance I could come up with has already been implemented.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.
All these "programs" only run on M$ [ding!] Windoze [ding!] anyway.
2 points.
If you are luser [ding!] enough to run something as lame as Winblows [ding!] for your P2P trawling, you deserve whatever happens to you.
2 more points.
Me and my linux boxen [ding!] [ding!] will be happily working with no interruption.
Boxen! That's worth double.
Later on, M$ [ding!] suckas!
7 points total. Well done.
As a long term ISP and University network admin, people that let themselves be caught are a pain in my ass to enforce. They cost me money and time in terms of following up on these damn letters from the MPAA/RIAA, and they make me sit in meetings with worried lawyers regarding company or campus policy.
As one who has also run a streaming media server since 2000, has downloaded mp3 since 1996, and ftp'd media around since 1992, all I can say is you people are idiots if you keep getting caught, and you're making my job hard, and I have no problem with laying the smack down.
Figure out how to stay under the radar, AOL'ers and undergrads. That way everybody's happy. Your problem is you've had p2p file sharing handed to you on a platter since Napster and you expect it like a right.
As much as the MPAA might suck, and as much as I'd hate to see this kind of technology employed in commercial networks, this would absolutely kick ass at my school.
Finally, they'd be able to cut off the bandwidth caps and packetshapers. Finally, I'd be able to install Gentoo, download a free SHN-encoded album from archive.org, or grab the next OpenCD without waking up the next morning to a disabled network jack and having to bitch and moan until it's reopenned. Finally, I'd have a solid enough connection to get a decent round of UT2k3 in after class.
Allowing network use policies to be enforced in a content-specific rather than cutting off legitimate uses of big chunks of bandwidth is a terrific idea.
Let's say I own a movie on VHS tape. Here at school, I don't have a VCR, so I can't watch my VHS movies. It is within my fair use rights, however, to format shift those tapes so that I can watch the movies. If i am too lazy, or don't have a VCR, I can simply download the movie. If people are not allowed to share the file, whether or not they actually have a legit license to it, it impedes my fair use right to format shifting under current US copyright law as established in "the betamax case"
Let's see what this means in minus-Internet terms:
Let's say a school receives a complaint from the copyright holders that students are videotaping movies off the screen during routine movie shows in student theaters.
Would it be right for the school to let the copyright holder send goons over to monitor the theaters with "anti-piracy" equipment and haul off offenders and slap him with a huge prison/fine sentence?
Or would it be more prudent for the school to tell the copyright holders to fsck off and let them handle the situation on their own - and suspend the student or dole out a more suitable sentence - according to the school policies?
This move by the MPAA stinks of highhandedness and interference with the school's internal matters - in this case - usage of the school network against Usage Policies.
AFAIK most schools have very formal and complete network (or general campus facilities) usage policies which detail the punishments for misusing them. Why do we need MPAA and other corporate entities to police the campus when the school and campus law enforcement have been doing it very efficiently for the past few decades? Assholes (*)
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Actually, commercial services use a format with digital rights managements built in either AAC (iTunes) or WMA (all the others). On the other hand, if you ripped your files to those formats, you might be less susceptible to detection.
In any event, I don't think they're looking at drive contents as much as they're looking for file sharing behavior. My guess is that you could still sneaker-net a CD-R of mp3s to your buddies on campus.
I could just write something that generates a false positive, perhaps by reverse-engineering the kazaa search mechanism, and spoof it from every IP on campus....I could shut down the entire campus network in 15 minutes. :)
But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
The MPAA are justified IMHO in worrying about p2p use on campuses. There is really no argument that movie downloading is a problem for traditional cinema and DVD sales.
But this attitude of "War on P2P" is a failure: it's a failure because framing the discussion in terms of right and wrong misses the point, it's a failure because it will alienate a generation of consumers and artists, and it's a failure because it will get in the way of developing long-term business models based more accurately on what people actually want and are willing to pay for.
It's impossible to force people - through policing, through DRM, through marketing - to pay for something they can get for free. I can't think of any examples where this has worked. It's like the many laws that try to mandate what people can do in private (sex, drugs, rock'n roll). The laws sound fine, but they fail.
The movie industry (like the music industry) must move to models of higher-volume, lower prices, and (most importantly) much lower internal costs. There is no reason why this business should have fatter profit margins than - say - retailing.
The media industries will say that the risk and cost of promoting unknown artists or failed movies means they need fat profits on successful ones. But this is a circular argument: using the new distribution and promotion models that the Internet affords makes it _extremely_ cheap to produce and promote new talent.
Anyhow, the pattern is classic: the industry will scream and kick, blackmail and sue, get government and industry support, and finally collapse as new young rivals (probably from other countries where vested interests form less of a barrier) storm the market with products that the consumer _really_ wants.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Wouldn't it be far cheaper and easier to train a bastard operator to remove the files and hassle the users?
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
CNS allows them to automatically restrict or cut off Internet access for alleged infringers on notice from a record label or movie studio.
It's nice to see no trial is necessary to make every student guilty. Guess that constitution thing doesn't apply unless your a corporate executive.
Wow, how long do you think it will be before this is abused.
Enter one Melvin P. Thornowsky, CS major, geek with taped glasses and pants a little tight around the armpits. Of course, our hero has a HUGE crush on Miss Bambi Vanderbilt, sophomore member of the local Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority. Melvin finally gets the nerve up to ask the beautiful, yet not all that smart Bambi out. Of course, he goes down in flames.
As revenge Melvin hacks Bambi's brand new laptop that her Daddy bought her and adds a nice pirated copy of "Flesh Gordon". Next time she hooks up to the campus network to check Cosmopolitan Online the MPAA Storm Troopers show up and take her to Jail. The whole Vanderbilt family is embarrassed, Bambi is disinherited and has to move in with Rocko, her secret boyfriend from the wrong side of the tracks.
MPAA - ruining lives one campus at a time.
Find coupons in Greeley
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.
Come now. Let's not disparage monkeys by saying they'd have relations with the MPAA.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
I do have to agree with your observation but I don't agree with what the *AA are doing. Reason being is that I share files but the ones I share are from legitimate local bands that let thier stuff be shared. Many of the mp3s I actually downloaded fromt the bands website. Would they cut me off for that? I am breaking no laws. This is a gray area in their implementation that makes me nervous.
Evolution or ID?
Okay. Where can I download the source code? Coz acns.sourceforge.net and acns.freshmeat.net don't seeem to work.
The article is mentioning the loss of billions of dollars to piracy. Again it looks like the assumption is if it wasn't pirated, a legal sale would have taken place. I have a nephew who was in school and is now in the military serving in Kuait. I have seen his MP3 collection. If each track was a $1 sale instead of piracy, the assumption is he would have spent more on music during his stay at college than I spent on my new car. When I was that age and bought LP's and Tapes (Pre CD's by many years) my collection never even aproached the value of the 10 year old beater I drove at the time. I would have liked to buy an albun a week, but price was prohibitive and still is. I bought about 1 record every 2 or 3 months at that age. That's only 4-6 /year. After a decade I had my modest library of about 50 albums (1 boxful). I don't know many people who have invested over $200/year in CD's with or without piracy. Most people I know have a modest CD collection of 100 or less titles for a lifetime collection of $2,000 tops.
College students don't have the money in four years to outright buy new car that I have to get a loan for of many years. Piracy is an opentunistic act of copyright infringement, not theft. A college student with several thousand MP3's is not the theft of several thousand dollars of original recordings. They are cheap copies, not originals taken from rightful owners. Killing piracy of 1,000 tunes does not create the sales of 1,000 tunes at a buck each or create 1000 tunes now on the store shelves that weren't there for sale before. I doubt no matter how many copies iTunes sells of any song, they will have a sellout. Cost of duplication is cheap. The spin folks and the marketing folks both know this but are in denial.
Other than the spin on the financial loss, the article was interesting in the war on piracy.
I personaly buy less CD's now because I'm afraid of getting a non-returnable deliberatly defective disk. I look for the Compact Disk logo for compatibility with my rip-mix-burn setup and portable devices. There are very few CD's anymore with the Compact Disk logo. It makes shopping for a CD like panning for gold. There is lots of shiny stuff out there, but finding the real thing is getting harder as the supply dwindles. I now visit the DVD section instead of the useless CD section. It's money better spent.
I'm currently enjoying Old Time radio which is now in the public domain. It's free.
The truth shall set you free!
The biggest problem of anonymous p2p is that if the *perception* becomes that its 'only used for illegal activities', then it can be cut off totally. This would kill legitimate use as well..
Since they cant monitor who is doing what for verification of 'acceptable content', the ports just get closed at the firewall for everyone.
If you move ports to something thats harder to block ( like port 80 for example ), they just look for above average bandwidth use to 'non official hosts', and cut their MAC address off...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
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.
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
Terribly sorry. We were talking about the other grandmother on Slashdot.
Please help metamoderate.
One of the tricky and devious ways that Slashdotters judge the competence of message posters is whether or not they can use a Spell Checker program.
Once the worm is released that jumps from computer to computer, using the MPAA software to disable it (after spreading of course) the university admins will have to weigh the cost of fixing all the computers against hiring a lawyer to fight the MPAA.
This 'hustler' mentality of the RIAA and their obsession with tracking down and punishing song traders is not in their best interest.
Considering that there are only five or so corporations that 'own' the world's commercial cultural product, it's not like someone else is going to get the money if someone buys record X while someone else downloads record Y. If there were still hundreds of independent record companies, then this mentality would be reasonable. But there's not. And the media executives should grow out of the 'hustler' mentality that was the way the music business used to work when they were coming up through the ranks. Things are different now.
What the RIAA/MPAA doesn't seem to realize is that their biggest long-term problem is not that people will 'steal' their product, it's that people will become so uninterested in their product that they won't be able to give it away even if they tried. Creating an atmosphere where consumers are threatened with prison and property confiscation for listening to RIAA product will go a long way to creating a subliminal distrust of commercial music. Eventually people will go out of their way to avoid exposure to RIAA product simply to avoid the possibility of arbitrary legal harassment.
When the RIAA customers are gone, it will be really difficult to get them back. Because the techniques that they are employing now will destroy any trust that people have in the RIAA. Trust in this case meaning that people believe that what the RIAA say's is legal use, will actually be legal use.
As far as the MPAA product is concerned, it is absurd to harass downloaders. They need to cut their costs for film production and promotion. Then they need to cut the admission prices for going to the films in theatres. Few people will download a 1 gigabyte movie when they can pay $2 to see it in a safe, comfortable theatre with quality projection and large screen.
An example of this is the Valley Theatre in Beaverton Oregon (a suburb of Portland). Built in the 1960s, they now show second-run features on a giant 50 foot screen and have started a 20 admissions for $20 pricing policy with $3 for single standard admission. Who wants to spend 10 hours downloading a DivX of LOTR when you can see it on a big screen for a dollar?
All the RIAA/MPAA problems have reasonable solutions. Their big problem is that they're not reasonable people.
The only thing close to legal authorization for copyright self help came in the now doomed UCITA model law (Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act). Only two states (MD and VA) adopted the law, and even then (my understanding is) both of them amended it to not include the self-help provision.
Even under UCITA, it required express consent by both sides. End users would have to agree to this remedy (which I suppose won't be hard in the university situation - because the campus ISP is the only game in town). If that happened, the act would authorize the content owning company to remotely shut you down, to prevent you from infringing. The idea was to let software vendors shut down dead beat software buyers who didn't pay up. Nobody seemed to like it (self help thankfully isn't too popular in general).
Anyway - long story short, since most, if not all states expressly rejected this kind of industry self help - I wouldn't be surprised if a court took that to mean that the legislatures are not exactly on the self-help bandwagon (yet).
That's how I'd fight this.
Ryan Kennedy opposes comm
If a university has spent the money to build a infrastructure that's worthwhile, and also have people to monitor it, why not save time and money for everyone and just have them use existing software to monitor what sort of traffic and activity is moving on their network? It's likely they have the software already, but simply don't have anyone checking it.
It seems simple to me. Reports indicate that there is Kazaa activity on Port 123, you turn off that LAN port. The user no longer has LAN access, and must call someone to get it fixed. At this point, they're reminded that P2P activity is prohibited by university policy. This is their first warning. The next time they're caught, they'll have their port shut down for a month, and the third offense will have their port turned off permanently.
If universities feel they have to play hardball in this area, doesn't this seem like a more logical, and wise way for them to do it, opposed to allowing someone else into their network, who has an agenda that doesn't match that of the university?
(And on a side note, many universities have grant money for doing military research. I'm certain that the DOD would not apprecaite the *AA having any sort of 'monitoring' going on of potentially sensitive research data that might be travelling on the university network.)
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
Who's forcing you to live in a dorm? Parents? Take up your beef with them. If economic neccessity is forcing you to live in the dorms, then boo-fucking-hoo. It's still school property, and school rules. If you don't like it, get a bigger grant or loan and move out. Don't like school bandwidth policies? Transfer to a different school. Most states still declare colleges In Loco Parentis, so you're NEVER going to have the kind of freedom in a dorm that you'll have in your own apartment.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
The second that my university decides that the RIAA and the MPAA should be administering the network to decide if any violations are made, is the second I transfer to another university.
I don't pay a huge "technology fee" just to have the wolves guarding the hen house. The MPAA and RIAA are a modern mafia, complete with government support.
Attention Universities: Some of you should realize that there is a market for a bastion of freedom. I'd gladly pay a legal fee in my student fees/tuition if it meant I could be protected from fucking cartels like the RIAA and bullshit legislation like the DMCA.
since not enough people are dumb enough to pay full (inflated) prices for the material
And can someone explain to me why recorded music is valued by the medium it's delivered on and not on its artistic merit or market demand?
I haven't heard the argument that book prices are "inflated", because ink and paper are cheap technology. How many folks are OCR'ing a $25 hardcover of the latest King novel and throwing a text file up on P2P?
Is a Monet only worth the paint and canvas? If so, I wonder why museums have so much security?
What was the $45 I just spent on a live concert for? I mean, sound waves are free--aren't they?
UCLA Helpdesk: Sup?
Student: Seems my Internet is down.
UCLA Helpdesk: Room?
Student: 201
UCLA Helpdesk: Hmm, lemme have a look.
UCLA Helpdesk: Ah, yeah, says here that Jack's Car Shop's FAC-U system has detected a copyright infringment on your computer.
Student: What? Jack's Car Shop?
UCLA Helpdesk: Uhuh
Student: So what's this FAC-U thing?
UCLA Helpdesk: Friendly Automated Copyright-infringment Underpants.
Student: Ex-abuse-me?
UCLA Helpdesk: Just an underpants targetting system that checks for copyright infringement.
Student: So what kinda copyright of Jack's Car Shop am I violating?!
UCLA Helpdesk: Uh, I dunno. Don't worry, an expert from Jack's Car Shop will soon be over to have a look at your computer.
Student: What's he gonna do?
UCLA Helpdesk: They usually come with a USB key and need a little time alone with your computer.
UCLA Helpdesk: You probably got nothing to worry about.
Student: WTF? That's crazy. Are there any other companies that have such systems running here?
UCLA Helpdesk: Doh, are you kidding me? Of course! Every company that owns intellectual property has one.
Student: So Jack's Car Shop has intellectual property?
UCLA Helpdesk: That's what he says.
Student: And you just take his word?
UCLA Helpdesk: Listen son, these systems seem to be working quite well, at the moment we have 2,314 infringments pending.
Student: Dude, there's only 2,315 students here.
UCLA Helpdesk: Yeah that's right, the other guy doesn't have a computer.
...why the p2p technology is so weak. It should not be so hard to implement the stuff with those security precautions:
- all direct traffic encrypted
- grant direct connection only to trusted peers
- for non-trusted peer, a connection negotiation with the help of the trusted peer chain only
- random proxying: non trusted peer receives via randomly selected node, who acts as a proxy, effectively hiding IP of the origin
There you are, staring at me again.
VERY good point.
Actually, I did read the Harvard study and I found it fascinating. But I suppose that is part of my point... we could get into a he-said/she-said pissing match about how much it hurts sales, what the net effect is, etc. But that's entirely incidental, isn't it? There's a number of different ways you could spin this all. You could point out that people have a fairly fixed amount that they are willing to budget for entertainment. If they find tracks that they really want from a certain artist, sales will go down on these particular tracks but they'll still have that much more money to spend on harder to find tracks. The aggregate effect might be neither an increase or a decrease in overall sales but this doesn't take away from the fact that money that would have been spent on the one artist is now going to a different artist. (Say what you will about how little artists might make, with our current model their contracts/future contracts are based on sales. If you cut into that, you hurt them. Period.) You could point out that a lot of filesharing is done by under-20somethings with a limited budget who would not have otherwise made that purchase. But simply because they would not have purchased the thing doesn't make it right for them to suddenly have a copy in their possession...
Like it or hate it, the owners of the copyright on these works are the ones who get to determine who gets to listen. If I am hosting a concert and the hall isn't at capacity, should I be compelled to overlook everyone else sneaking in the door after 8PM until the hall is filled just because there are empty seats? Does your sneaking in make it OK? (No one else was hurt, the seat was just sitting there.) There is the much larger question of the right of companies to license their product to individuals as they see fit. This is a question of property rights. I know it isn't popular to talk about property rights on Slashdot. But it is important to look at the historical context of ownership and look at what happens in counties/cultures where those rights are not respected...What happens to innovation and what happens to the capital? And there are important counter-question about the rights of individuals in this context, too. These are the questions that should be addressed/answered. The other ones about the money made/lost are distractions. Debating the question of money lost won't get us anywhere. Debating the larger questions will allow us to reach the consensus that we (all of us) will eventually need to...
I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
Darn right. The RIAA, the NMPA, and the MPAA make up the Music And Film Industry Associations of America (MAFIAA).
sig:
The solution requires to be implemented on the level of the clients; wrap all the TCP connections to SSL. Passive wiretaps of this kind then become useless.
I remmember at least in freshman year, I knew at least 4 people that had recieved notices in their mailboxes about how they had been busted for sharing and to stop immediately, if not their service would be disconnected. This had nothing to do with the RIAA but for violating the campus policy about doing illegal and non-educational activity over the network. I dont know why more UNI's just dont do that. This year, 2 years later, I see opinions all over our campus paper about how students are now recieving automated emails that their service will be cut, and it has. Maybe we have this implemented already and dont know it. In any case, maybe campus's should just police their own network for the sake of keeping their networks clean and to prevent bandwidth sucking from those sharing, thats why it was done here to begin with.
As a follow up, i forgot to add, a friend at another Uni had also recieved a letter telling him to report to court. When he arrived he realized they were charging him with sharing movies, of which they had a list of which they scanned their network for. They just told him to immediately remove them and all would be well. Then again maybe this was back in the more lenient days of the crackdown. He also added though that after him, a student came up who had been busted with just about every app MS makes and they were actually fining him and he could be facing jail time. It appears many uni's are handling this in their own way, no need to intervene
UCLA: Is this legal?
MPAA: I will make it legal!
What the RIAA/MPAA doesn't seem to realize is that their biggest long-term problem is not that people will 'steal' their product, it's that people will become so uninterested in their product that they won't be able to give it away even if they tried. Creating an atmosphere where consumers are threatened with prison and property confiscation for listening to RIAA product will go a long way to creating a subliminal distrust of commercial music. Eventually people will go out of their way to avoid exposure to RIAA product simply to avoid the possibility of arbitrary legal harassment.
Either that, or people will become so fed up that they remember that it is they, and not the **AA's who elect the Congress that sets the copyright terms. Can't sell your movie in a year? Oh well...public domain.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
What MPAA and RIAA should really do is write a virus or worm to work its way across the entire Internet and send them a complete file listing of every infected computer. But then claim that they were victims in this tradgedy. And then sue everyone.
Kicking out people who sneak into a show is hardly invasive. Tracking your downloading habits is quite a different issue.
Here, you and I couldn't agree more. I think the lengths to which the RIAA and MPAA have gone to track and blackmail people accused of violating copyright is alarming...and I fear the worst is yet to come.
I think it is fair to say that wholesale, widespread theft (sharing without the express consent of the original copyright holder, whatever you want to call it) of a product might call into question the distribution method an industry uses to get to market --the **AA ignores this at its peril. But it in no way excuses the action of individuals taking a product without the copyright holder's consent. I think the concert hall analogy is valid in that the owner of the establishment is in the right in asserting that you should not be taking their product without paying.
I mean, isn't that at the heart of this? Honestly admitting that individuals should not be taking this product does not give the **AA carte blanche to do whatever they want to go after offenders. If you're stealing a CD from Wal-Mart, they can't shoot you... there are limits. Defining the limits is part of how the issue will eventually be resolved. For the discussion to be fruitful, we should focus on the actual issues at hand and not try to defend something that, in the end, is indefensible.
Just my two cents.
I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
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