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."
Damn that's some nice gzip compression, where can I get some of that?!
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Oh, wait.
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?
That they are not as smart as you think. They probably dont even read or listen the content or compare the size.
WE'RE WATCHING YOU - doesnt sound as scary, especially if they really dont know what they are seeing.
Like it or not, they can't file "charges" because they have to get a REAL prosecutor to agree with them.
That begs the question, have they EVER filed real charges, like "in-the-ass-prison" charges or just civil suits? Don't they take years to resolve anyway?
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.'
In other news, proof of life on Alpha Centauri was found on a Bazooka Joe bubble gum wrapper yesterday.
Yeah, makes just about as much sense as motion pictures in code.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
This also reminds me of when the BSA tried to get a university to take down unlicensed copies of MS Office that were, in fact, copies of Open Office. Link here.
Seriously, you'd think these people would bother to at least give files a once over before sending out cease-and-desist 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.
Overseas, at least here in the UK, if you lose a court case you generally have to pay the other parties court costs. I can understand why you want people to be free to sue, but it seems that these days this is more a tool in favour of the big boys rather than a safety net for the little guy. Not that I expect the law to change, just making an observation.
This is ridiculous. The MPAA is sending off threatening legal letters to anyone who might even look suspicious.
Thank you, DMCA!
Someone with mod points mod this down, and don't go to the link... it's a troll and not safe for work
Go away, or I will replace you with a very small shell script.
"Also pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we hereby state, und
er penalty of perjury, that we are authorized to act on behalf of the owner
s of the exclusive rights being infringed as set forth in this notification..."
Is ANYONE that's gotten one of these ever going to call them on this bullshit and have them sent to jail for perjury?
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
The collective neural network of the entertainment industry seems to have its feedback and error inputs turned off for a very long time. Exactly how much intelligence does it take to realize randomly harrasing customers alienates them ?
The curious thing here is the dog that isn't barking. Where is the legal action against these companies for consistently, repeatedly and in the face of overwhelming evidence perpetrating the practice of harrasing legitimate users ?
Infringement Detail: Infringing Work: X-FILES, THE Season 1-7
There is nothing on their website that I could see that discusses an "xfile" as anything other than some organization software and certainly not any "seasons." These folks are very arrogant in their assumptions that the word "xfile" will always mean the tv show of the same name.
Cheers,
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
Mistakes? Fine. It's still fucked up to send threatening letters to people and companies who have done no wrong.
The fact that their poorly-designed automated pirate-hunter software made the mistake doesn't alleviate them of responsibility.
doom3.zip is a 114kb freeware DOS game from 1988 I knew Doom3 was a dupe!
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.)
...that no upcoming movie becomes named "stdio.h" or we're all screwed.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
I suggest we all hide random, public domain crap files in hidden or obfuscated links on all of our web pages. That way we can get back at the ??AA and ESA for spoofing files on P2P networks.
Yeah, that "master plan" they found was merely an upskirt shot named WMD.jpg
Like it or not, they can't file "charges" because they have to get a REAL prosecutor to agree with them.
That begs the question, have they EVER filed real charges, like "in-the-ass-prison" charges or just civil suits? Don't they take years to resolve anyway?
Ummm...Ths is total garbage. For one you can't prosecute on copyright disputes. It's a civil issue only.
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.
How come all the posters at the movie store say "Own it now on DVD?" If I own it, I can do what I want with it. I guess the posters should say "Own the licence to view the material in the privacy of your own home without making any sort of archival copy...on DVD!"
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.
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?
Any casual look at the content of this 113kb file is enough to determine without a doubt that these are NOT infringing files. There should be a law against this type of harassment without so much as a glance at the facts.
The reply letter included these gems:
I usually operate on the "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity" principle, but here I'm thinking "Malice AND Stupidity"
What about claiming dmages for aggressive (and illegal) prosecution.
If you have nothing useful to say post as AC.
Could I take a VIDEO TAPE (no deCSS, hence no violation of the DCMA) of a movie I own, encode it into , then encrypt it with some sort of trivial method and post it to a website with filename NAME_OF_MOVIE.xxx. Then wait to get a C&D from the MPAA.
At that point could I demand how they are CERTAIN it is indeed a copy of their IP. If they actually decrypted the file and checked it wouldn't they be in violation of the DCMA? If they didn't wouldn't their claim be baseless, and hence perjurous (sp?) under the DCMA?
Just a thought I had during my last 5 minutes of work...
Rob
I'm actually pretty jealous they get these kinds of things. I should put up a page on my site with some old junk files, like resumees or code from old projects tar'd and gz'd and see if I can attract one of these fine letters. I feel it's important to be the first one on my block to receive and frame one of these masterpieces, before all you other weasels realize what fun this could be and set up your own web pages with likenamed and structured directories and files.
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?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
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.
Isn't anyone worried that it may soon be illegal to have a file with a name like a copyrighted work? The ones in the 'article' may have been just coincidences, but if you start intentionally naming things after copyrighted works to get their bots' attention... well, who knows what depths of stupidity they could sink to? I think it's worth worrying about, and maybe even a legitimate legal question. Even if it is completely stupid.
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.
I'm tempted to put some 1x1 pixel transparent gif images up on my site and link them to 0byte files called doom3.zip and stuff to see if I start getting some letters...
3. Sue MPAA for unlawfully accessing your FTP server. (profit)
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
You are doing an ASCII transfer of what is supposedly a binary file. Various combinations of 0x0A and 0x0D in the binary are not guaranteed to survive that kind of treatment intact (in ASCII transfers, line breaks are represented as CR LF regardless of the representation used locally at either end of the transmission).
Let's just start sending C&D letters to the RIAA. Or more specifically their ISP which seems to be Verizon (ironic, eh?)
After all. I have a copyrighted image file named logo2.gif. Coincidentally, the RIAA seems to be hosting that very image. At least as far as I can tell, right? The filename matches, and I certainly can't be bothered to compare the contents of the file. Just fire off a letter! Damn, I just did some more checking. The FBI stole my banner and put it at http://www.fbi.gov/homeimag/banner.jpg. Bastards! I better send off a letter to their ISP as well!
http://madonna.nick.music.stodge.org/ This is a PHP based tarpit of confusion designed to annoy the ??IA enough to stop spidering your server. You need to be able to run apache virtual hosts, but do not need any database (it all runs of config files). You can read all about this tarpit on my wiki. Patches and improvements are welcomed.
It exists!
o f+ Confusion
http://wiki.stodge.org/index.php?page=RIAA+Pit+
You can see an example here:
http://usher.nico.music.stodge.org/
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.
I should have them handle my new and upcoming movie, "Index.html".
Do you really think that the XXAA is EVER going to run out of resources?
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.
With companies like that backing them, how the HELL will they run out of money? That's just a partial list of their clients I'm sure...
EVERYONE: While it would be fun to get your own autographed letter from the MPAA or RIAA and frame it in your cube, it's pointless. The "machine" that is the recording industry won't run out of postage or stupid ideas any time soon. We need a dramatic paradigm shift in societal thought patterns or legislation for any real change to occur.
"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
I don't think the fact that they didn't bother to make sure they had CORRECTLY identified the files should excuse them from this. When you make a statement under penalty of perjury, it is your responsibility to have your facts straight. The MPAA has obviously failed to do so.
Perhaps there should be a penalty for knowingly or carelessly making a false accusation?
You know, instead of just filing a counter-notice, victims like this should take a different approach. Copyright law has penalties for trying to usurp or interfere with another person's copyrights. When a blatantly false notice like this is filed demanding the material be taken down, the victim should treat it as an ordinary attempt to falsely claim ownership of their copyrighted material and pursue it as such. Put the RIAA and MPAA on the receiving end of a copyright-infringement suit for a change.
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
..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."
"Dear idiots,
http://sc.com/~dbaker/dmca.html
You're all stupid.
Affectionately,
Charles"
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
"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.