Slashdot Mirror
Automated DMCA Notices Still Full of Lies
dbaker writes "The MPAA filed a DMCA takedown notice against Superconnect, a software company. The letter is available here that demands the removal of roughly 120K of open-source TCL code that they believe to be a 'copyrighted motion pictures.' This is definitely a surprising case of the guilty until proven innocent world that the DMCA provides." And yet another: enrico_suave writes "The Entertainment Software Association falsely accuses the Interactive Fiction archive of pirating Doom 3. doom3.zip is a 114kb freeware DOS game from 1988. Reminiscent of when the RIAA sent C & D's to a Professor Usher who had an usher.mp3 file posted on his website."
Is Linus secretly working for Microsoft?
Critical security flaws in Kerberos found in Unix, Linux, and Mac OS. Windows not affected.
The thing is, that I seem to remember a day when Slashdot was open and honest enough to discuss all sides of the issues. I guess this post will get whacked by an editor and my IP will get banned. Oh well... there are much better blogs out there nowadays anyway.
Why don't all the geeks in a collective act of corporate law disobediance just start using files with the names of copyrighted music/movies/literature/software and force the record and movie labels to waste tons of their financial resources sending out worthless legal letters?
I'm half tempted to go putting up nonsence zip files with movie names just for the hell of it, see if I get any emails.
At what point can wrongfully accused parties level countersuits for harassment (if at all)?
INAL to the extreme, so I may be way off base here, but it seems like wasting peoples' time and resources like this should make you open to such suits.
This is ridiculous. The MPAA is sending off threatening legal letters to anyone who might even look suspicious.
Thank you, DMCA!
If i record covers (I play bass, my friends play guitar and sing), and then post them on my website, am I breaking the law?
OK, I'm in the UK. What about now?
I think I know the answers - but it's a cheap way to get some insight. And a good way to start a discussion. And hopefully a fight. (It's Friday night here, but I'm indoors cos I feel like shit.)
Although there are disadvantages to a 'loser pays' system, it has the one big advantage of reducing frivolous lawsuits.
If you post it, they will read.
Can't the MPAA be sued for hacking? The MPAA was not given specific permission to enter another person's computer. Why can't anyone who's been sued by the MPAA countersue using the DMCA against them?
---
IMHO, of course.
May the SOURCE be with you.
Nope. I got one... but I'm from Canada, so the DMCA doesn't pertain to me. I did try to scare my GF with the letter though, but it didn't work.
Find Nearby Indie Events
This almost makes me want to start a DMCA honeypot. I could put a whole bunch of small meaningless non infringing files with names chosen to attract what appears to be a spider run by the MPAA.
Then I could see just how many automated C&D letters I could generate!
That would be fun. If only I had the time to deal with deluge of C&D letters.
On behalf of the respective owners of the exclusive rights to the copyright ed material at issue in this notice, we hereby state, pursuant to the Digit al 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.
Anyone know how loosely interpretable the term "good faith belief" is? It seems like it would be trivial to prove (say, in court) that they obviously do NOT have any good faith belief, and that this is simply the result of some mindless spidering program. In a perfect world, you'd be able to force them into spending a little more money policing themselves, and every little bit counts, right?
What about claiming dmages for aggressive (and illegal) prosecution.
If you have nothing useful to say post as AC.
"Is ANYONE that's gotten one of these ever going to call them on this bullshit and have them sent to jail for perjury?"
The problem with that strategy is that there will be no perjury, because the whole claim will be dismissed at the first hearing.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
We had one of these letters once delivered to Postmaster and Webmaster accounts for the company I work for. After a half hour of scurrying around trying to find the offending files on the system and failing, we double-checked the IP address that they said was the server with the offending files, and sure enough, they had made a typo between the time their script found the files, and they did a lookup on the ip address. The offending subnet, completely not owned by our company, was transposed a few digits.
So, we replied back to them, told them of their idiocy, and got a somewhat reasonable apology back - but nothing like what it SHOULD have been based on the language and severe tone of their warning.
This questions what really is automated and what has at least some human intervention. Of course, they should have realized that the entire X-Files series doesn't fit in a 113k file.
Suppose after they've spun tens of thousands of these things they might realize they're on the wrong track with automating such a lame process?
That would be an interesting protest. If a whole crapload of people were to setup file structures like that on ie, free hosting providers, isp webspace accounts, whatever, it would act as kind of a DDoS attack against their process, with the two pronged effect of getting the ISPs completely irritated at having to deal with hundreds or thousands of C&D's that are all groundless - which would hopefully lead to the ISPs either ignoring them, or lobbying for some kind of law that restricts their behaviour
Speak before you think
You tell Dimitry that.
But they (at least if you were to question them on it) are referring to this part:
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.
Since it is clear from examining their own information that the material is NOT the movie their robot thought it was, whatever exclusive rights that might be being infringed are NOT those to the movie. Thus their statement they are authorized to act... is false and should be subject to prosecution for perjury.
Whoever did this has too much free time: ASCII Star Wars
Physics makes the world go 'round.
Actually, this isn't the case. There was a copyright infringement C&D that included mention of the DMCA to try to scare the ISP (I wasn't aware that the DMCA made ISPs liable -- as a matter of fact, this was a major bone of contention in a lot of attempted legislation.)
The Berne Convention means that US copyright does apply in other countries, with different time limits (a country can make something public-domain after fifty years, even if it is still copyrighted in the United States). Shrek 2 is definitely newer than 50 years.
May we never see th
The letter linked in the article asserts that the file in question is all or part of the "X Files" television show belonging to an organisation represented by the MPAA. Their assertion is NOT TRUE. The file in question is the source to a X Windows file manager that belongs to Mikko Kiviniemi.
The MPAA also states in their letter (in the excerpt shown in the grandparent to this post) that they are authorised to act on behalf of the owner of the exclusive rights to the material in question. The material in question really belongs to Mr. Kiviniemi, and I really doubt he authorised the MPAA on his behalf, so that assertion is also false.
I think that if they can't be charged with purjury then at the very least some or all of the recipients of these letters should pursue a court order to forbid the MPAA from sending legally threatening letters with blatantly flase information to innocent people. In any case, the MPAA should be banned from using a computerised system to scan file repositories and automatically issue such threats. The MPAA should be required to MANUALLY EXAMINE EVERY FILE they discover by automated means before making such bold assertions to minimise false accusations.
Reminds me of the ADV vs mirkx case. (ADV = big anime licenser in the US. mirkx = anime torrent site).
ADV's letter:
June 22, 2004
RE: http://mirkx.com
To Whom It May Concern:
This office represents A.D. Vision, Inc. (ADV) and its affiliated companies that own and/or are exclusively licensed to use the following protected work (the "Protected Work"):
Azumanga Daioh
DN Angel
Getter Robo Armageddon
Kaleido Star
Kimagure Orange Road
King of Bandit Jing
Pretear
Puni Puni Poemy
RahXephon
Saint Seiya
Through our Internet monitoring program, we recently discovered unauthorized use of our Protected Work in connection with your website (mirkx.com) (the "Site"). Specifically, the Protected Work is being offered for Internet download, copying and distribution through a Bit Torrent server, and potentially through a File Transfer Protocol server.
Our intellectual property rights are our most valuable assets. In order to promote a cooperative and beneficial relationship with fans, ADV prefers to send out written requests such as this first, rather than institute litigation or request that your ISP disable your Site. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unauthorized copying and distribution of ADV's protected works (including images) constitutes an infringement of one or more of ADV's rights under the copyright laws of the United States, Canada and other jurisdictions throughout the world. Applicable law provides for substantial penalties for such infringement, including injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and damages. ADV has instituted litigation in the past, and in every such litigation, ADV prevailed. If necessary, ADV will not hesitate to take such action again to insure that its rights are fully protected.
Therefore, without limiting any right, remedy or defense available to us, ADV MUST ASK THAT YOU IMMEDIATELY:
1) Delete and cease all further use of the Protected Work, and any other unauthorized ADV works, from the Site.
2) Remove and delete all copies of the Protected Work, and any other unauthorized ADV titles, from any other distribution channel owned, operated or otherwise controlled or accessible by you or those to whom you grant access including other web sites, FTP servers, web-based storage services, peer-to-peer systems and the like (each of the foregoing being a "Channel").
3) Remove and delete all references, pointers and hypertext links pertaining to infringing copies of the Protected Work from all such Channels.
If you are unsure of whether any other titles related with your Site are ADV Protected Works, or you would like to be more pro-active in your awareness of our licensed titles for future reference, please check with the official ADV site www.advfilms.com or our customer service department.
We also ask that you please advise us in writing within five (5) days from the date of this notice as to whether you will comply with our request so that we can determine whether any additional action will be required beyond this point. I trust this will receive your prompt attention, and if there is anything I can help you with in future, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Enforcement Team
Anti-Piracy Division
A.D. Vision, Inc.
And the reply:
Public reply from mirKx.com: (06.28.2004)
MirKx.com is not under North American's laws. It is unfortunate that this Site is available in North America, since it has only been made for Comoro Islands' inhabitants, where mirKx.com is acting from. Moreover, the referenced international copyright laws don't apply, since the Comoro Islands:
- didn't sign the International Berne Convention of 1886
- is not a state member of the WIPO.
MirKx.com is acting as an AUTOMATIC index of links, and the Protected Work you make reference to are NOT hosted on this server. If y
^_^
They tried to sue The Pirate Bay (www.thepiratebay.org), a swedish BitTorrent site.
_ mail.txt
:-)
e .txt
:-P
Here's their mail and reply:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/dreamworks
Short and to the point.
Whoops, here's the reply:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/dreamworks_respons
I quoted the parent so you don't need to mod it up if you were thinking about it; not trying to karma whore by splitting my messages up.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Then when a takedown notice comes along from one of these organizations, and the MP3 is played in a court case showing it isn't one of their songs, it becomes a bad faith takedown notice under 17 USC 512(f) for which the party demanding takedown is liable for damages due to any injury caused by the takedown as well as costs and attorney's fees. If it can be shown that all that would have been necessary to show it wasn't infringing was to examine the file and see (say by file size, or by playing it) then it is obvious bad faith and actionable.
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
I wrote a quick script to make up files filled with garbage (streamed, created on the fly) with names from a text file...
c gi
Take that, MPAA!
http://www.scovetta.com/projects/mpaa-trap/index.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
The ESA sucks balls when it come to actually finding legit stuff. When they "suspected" someone was sharing the Spiderman video game, my university got a takedown notice:
[Blah blah blah legal stuff]
Infringement Detail:
Infringing Work: Spider-Man
Filepath: Spiderman 1988.torrent|Regular/
Filename: 03 Spectacular Spider-Man - #134.cbr
First Found: 24 Aug 2004 22:04:36 EDT (GMT -0400)
Last Found: 25 Aug 2004 06:04:42 EDT (GMT -0400)
Filesize: 12,076k
IP Address: 156.143.133.64
IP Port: 6881
Network: BTPeers
Protocol: BitTorrent
Infringing Work: Spider-Man
Filepath: Spiderman 1988.torrent|Regular/
Filename: 06 Spectacular Spider-Man - #135.cbr
First Found: 24 Aug 2004 22:04:36 EDT (GMT -0400)
Last Found: 25 Aug 2004 06:04:43 EDT (GMT -0400)
Filesize: 11,664k
IP Address: 156.143.133.64
IP Port: 6881
Network: BTPeers
Protocol: BitTorrent
[and then a bunch more files]
The network admin noticed something was up, but not enough to stop from posting the message on the campus's e-message boards. The file was on a computer on the main backbone of the network, not the student network.
Then he discovered it was in the CCLC, also known as the FURMAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. So, we've either got a really smart guy doing P2P in the library where he can't get busted, or we've got a bum infringement notice.
Going back up to the filesize info, you see that the files are miniscule, NOT the size of the Spiderman game. D'oh.
We're guessing they are copies of the Spiderman comics from the late '80s. Perhaps someone is copyright-infringing, but the ESA is *not* the one who should be concerned.
Needless to say, they still got their way--the computer was disconnected from the Internet for at least a little while, as is usual for takedown notices. I'd be extremely pissed if they did that to my computer, and I'm now tempted to make and upload a "doom3.zip" bogus folder, just to see what happens . . .
..for hosting a little site that featured mirKx's RSS feed being processed by PHP. I'm not really up to date on IP laws, but being in the US, I took it down.
If anyone's interested, I have the letter and my reply up.
"An infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never make a good program."
A human would surely have asked "how come its so small".
Obviously you're not familiar with people employed by the MPAA.
If they were fired and the work outsourced India it would result in higher quality. These people are incompetant boobs who get their jobs because they know someone who knows someone, or are someone's nephew, and similar "qualifications." Then won't get fired no matter how horrifically they do their job due to those political connections.
Perhaps then we should set up an automated system to fire off DMCA take down notices for every file that even remotely looks like it could be infringing on some copyright.
You can only do it in relation to your own copyrights. If you're creative it wouldn't be hard to arrange to file such a notice against pretty much anyone, a senator, the MPAA, the RIAA, whoever.
Get obnoxious enough
Try it once against pretty much anyone and you should be fine. Intentionally get 'obnoxious' and file multiple obviously frivolous notices and a judge will rule that you failed even the absurdly low threshhold of "reasonable belief" to justify such a notice and you'll get smacked down.
If you're willing to accept the consequences you could drive home how seriously fuxord this law is by filing a takedown notice against Bush's and/or Kerry's entire website a few days before the election.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
"The Entertainment Software Association falsely accuses the Interactive Fiction archive of pirating Doom 3. doom3.zip is a 114kb freeware DOS game from 1988. Reminiscent of when the RIAA sent C & D's to a Professor Usher who had an usher.mp3 file posted on his website."
A lot of people have posted comments about nailing the RIAA/MPAA etc. for purgery or liable. I have another idea.
When "they" repeatedly do stuff like this, it lowers their credibility.
Does even the spider download the actual files?
It seems to me that if someone was actually hosting infringing material, after getting a Cease and Desist letter, they can just change the file. Use the same filename, but replace it with something silly, like a tarball of your slashdot journals, or an mp3 of yourself reading the fair use clause of the US Constitution.
And if lots of people put out files like this that were not infringing in the first place, then it would make it more difficult to determine who actually was infringing and who was acting as a decoy.
At the very least it would force them to have a human being confirm that a particular person is really infringing, and to save the evidence, before they start sending threatening letters, and I think we can all agree that would be a good thing.
I hate Liberals and Conservatives.
If you are a Liberal or a Conservative, then HAVE A NICE DAY!
Courage.