MPAA Looks to Sniff Internet2 Traffic for Sharers
Danathar writes "It looks like the MPAA is pretty scared that Internet2 users are able to trade movies at high speed without them being able to know what's being traded, since you have to be a member of the Internet2 network to have a connection. As a result, they are asking to become a member."
All it's going to do is get a bunch of researchers pissed off to the point where they'll set up honeypots filled with all sorts of mis-named files.
In any battle of wits between the MPAA/RIAA and researchers, it doesn't take much brains to figure out who will win. We're not talking about a bunch of AOL-ing grandmas here.
I've got about 300 DVDs, and I probably buy at least 1 per week (if not more when I visit the Wal Mart $5 bin). It concerns me that they focus so much attention on the few who download movies. I would prefer that they.....say.....spend that money to develop enhancements to the DVD experience (something that isn't included in an encoded pirate version of any particular movie).
,like cockroaches, will ALWAYS exist) could be better spent to enhance their own industry....or (more likely to peak the interest of the MPAA) line their own pockets. Litigation isn't cheap, nor is computer/network forensics.
/. crowd would stop hating us"
There have been times that I've downloaded a movie from the Internet, enjoyed it, and purchased that movie from a local store so that I could watch it in higher quality and benefit from the additional DVD features (Southpark Movie). Other times, I've realized that the time spent downloading a particular movie (Blair Witch Project) could've been better spent playing solitaire.
Sometime soon, I hope, the MPAA will realize that the money they spend sniffing out pirates (who
Somewhere, there is an MPAA representitive reading this article who is thinking "Hmmm....he's right...I could get a raise and people like Trey Parker and the
"Lame" - Galaxar
The DMCA was used to threaten Ed Felton and his students into silence when they was about to present a research paper on the weaknesses of digital music security. The case sent a chilling tidal wave through the educational system.
With the spirit that Internet2 is designed for educational and research purposes and the precedent set by the Felton case, Hollywood's membership request should be denied in about three nanoseconds.
They are not welcome.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Internet2 is a hotbed of IPv6 as well.
:-)
Wait till they get a taste of "privacy enhanced addresses" on IPv6 and find out some of those machines can change their addresses at random and not be tracable (only tracable to the subnet and no address server required or logs kept). They'll have to track'm down by MAC address (assuming no one is spoofing and morphing MAC addresses - how long will that take?) and wire by wire, switch by switch, once they're on the subnet itself, with the "cooperation" of the local techie staff. That's not even counting the really wicked stuff you can pull with multiple addresses (thousands, if you like) and different client and server addresses). BitTorrent already has IPv6 patches and some v6 BitTorrent seeders and servers.
Hmmm...
Internet2 + High Bandwidth + IPv6 + Privacy Enhanced addresses = good time to buy in stock in antacid vendors.
The MPAA and RIAA and going to make for a run on their wares...
Oh... This is gonna be good...
Yeah, I download "illegal" stuff. But I pay much more for stuff that I actually like.
Why? Because as the consumer, I've the right to choose what I like, before buying. And the new medium lets me exercise that right - to see if the content is worth buying.
If it's not, I simply do not buy it. That is why it hurts the **AAs - they cannot shove any jackshit down anybody's throat, without a choice.
I download 20 songs off an album, and realize that there is just ONE good song in that album. Why should I pay $25 for that one song? Instead, I'll just get it off iMusic. If it's not available, I'll just keep that one song that I like.
There are some bands, of which I own _every_ single album. Why? Because they make good music, and I would not want to cheat them.
Remember - give the consumer good quality and do not try to rip them off. And they will be happy to help out the artists.
We get complaints every once in a while from the MPAA or their lackeys, claiming that some host on our network is sharing copies of movies -- The Matrix, Harry Potter, Star Wars: Revenge of George Lucas's Crack Pipe ... you name it.
Here's the funny thing: they're all wrong.
Every one of them. Wrong. I have never received an MPAA copyright-violation complaint that even had the slightest chance of being correct.
Here's how I know: We have a ridiculously big IP allocation, several times more than we need. Most IP addresses in our space are not used, and have never been used. Like, say, X.Y.1.1, or X.Y.64.64. And yet it is for addresses just such as these that we get complaints.
As far as I can tell, the cause of it is that shitheads somewhere in the world abuse our IP addresses behind NAT, instead of using RFC1918 private addresses as God intended them to. And just like with SIP or any other protocol that uses IP addresses in the protocol level to name hosts, file-trading protocols leak NAT addresses.
The abused addresses get published onto file-trading networks as places to get files. The MPAA's drones pick up these leads, and -- without checking -- give them full credence, and fire off complaints to us. They do not even bother to ping the host and listen for our router screaming back, "You blithering fool, there's no such host. There isn't even such a network!"
Any network operator who still gives any credence to these complaints is a fool. They are all wrong. Even if I got one for an address that actually had a host on it -- or, at least, had ever had a host on it! -- I expect it would also be wrong.
Every once in a while I get a complaint from these losers on a slow day, when I have some spare time and am feeling bored in the office. So I put on my slowest, laziest "I've been working a cushy, do-nothing public-sector IT management job for years, I don't know my ass from a router" tone of voice and phone up the MPAA lackey whose number's on the complaint.
I'm oh so very concerned. There's a pirate on our network? Is he breaking the law? What's his computer? You know -- what's his computer? Yeah, I mean, his eye pee. How do I connect to his eye pee and prove he's got these files? Do I need kazz-uh to do that? Wait ... can I do that legally, or am I breaking the Constitution? What's a pee-to-pee anyway, is that some kind of sex perversion?
You get the idea. I thoroughly encourage every other research and educational site network operator to do the very same. Waste their time. Get your stupid out. Stall 'em, stymie 'em, but be very concerned that you don't want any of them Internet pirates pirating your Internet. (Or ask if they know where to find hot lesbian porn.) Most important -- keep the stooge on the line; the MPAA is probably paying him hourly.
Well as it seems to be time for another Slashdot "*AA debate" I'd just like to add my tuppence worth to the debate.... as in the future there won't be just "the internet" ( or indeed "the internets") to contend with.
What about networks of bluetooth enabled phones/portable MP3 players/car stereos that each hold several gigabytes of music and which can automatically connect to each other ?
You want a particular song ? You want all songs by a particular artist ? You're interested in a particular genre ?
Put search criteria on your devices wanted list and when you come into proximity of another devices that holds what you're looking for it transfers it over while you walk past/are drinking at a bar/are in a club/are sitting in a traffic jam etc. etc.
"Walkabout" short range P2P.
And for added social interaction then if someone elses device show the same sorts of preferences as yours it give both of you a little beep so you can start up a conversation.
Also how about "slightly more powerful than today" local neighbourhood wireless LANS ? Even if you're not part of the full time local network their might be guest channels/log ins/local broadcsts so when you drive through a neighbourhood you join in the local "neighbourhood swap shop".
But the best is yet to come. How about when storage capacity is available on something approaching, or even on, a nano scale ?
Maybe someone will create a "smart sticker" which is slightly thicker than todays regular sticker but which holds several gigbytes of data plus a small, solar powered, short range, transmitter.
Pop that up in a public place and everyone passing can pick up what's on it (so long as they have a compatible device). Guerilla marketing at it's best and a killer way to advertise new bands "come see us at club x on x and here are a few full tunes to whet your appetitie"
Who knows maybe this "fantasy tech" could even be incorporated into clothing, beer cans, grocery cartons, bricks... you name it.
So these *AA imbeciles can legislate, bribe and sue until they're blue in the face but they are simply pissing in the wind.
If they think they're having a hard time with todays technology, then think what the future will bring.
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !