Slashdot Mirror
BayTSP Provides Automatic DMCA Notices
ruvreve sent in a pointer that BayTSP is promising to identify Bittorrent uploaders for the entertainment industry to file suit against. Slashdot has run numerous stories discussing what happens when you automate DMCA takedown notices - see also chillingeffects.org.
Rather than go after movie/music/software BTers by hand, they'll invent some kind of automated webspider to go through every website looking for torrent links. If it has a certain key word, it'll be tagged.
Knowing them, a C&D order will be sent out without looking at it. If its not removed, they'll pull something else equally banal and stupid.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
BayTSP, a leading provider of online intellectual property monitoring and compliance systems, announced FirstSource, an automated system that identifies the first users to upload copyright- or trademark-protected content to the eDonkey and Bit Torrent peer-to-peer (P2P) networks.
So, in other word, the new legal environment (the DMCA) is attracting more and more profiteers and schemers, like putting cheese attracts mold. It's sad that some people would want to earn a living hurting other people by leveraging a law almost nobody wants...
But the good news is: if automated monitoring of P2P protocols becomes commonplace, you can bet there will be other, new exciting development in P2P technology. Perhaps some kind of "stealth" protocol will be developed. After all, it's the Napster suit that prompted the development of central-server-less protocols like Bittorrent. So effectively the people "route around" the new legal roadblocks, and are prompted to do so because of scumbags like BayTSP and their disgusting masters, the **AA.
...misleadingly named materials in order to create false positives?
And if enough folks do it will it make resistance via auto-notices futile?
Stop the world; I need to get off.
Is this software good enough to notice the difference between a movie and 120k of source code?
Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
Lawsuit-bot honeypot. Check it out. It has a huge list of randomly generated filenames (with all sorts of well-known/recent game titles, movie titles, musicians, etc.). Designed to attract lawsuit-bots and give ironclad PROOF that the files are not real (they're just long strings of zero bytes) :)
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
I cannot see how this should impact the "serious" BT filetraders that much. Most clients used nowadays include dynamic blacklists, effectively blocking requests from services such as BayTSP to the torrent? BayTSP can't keep hopping IP's all the time without some ever increasing expenses?
If you can use DMCA so force *GOOGLE* to remove a link to a *GPL* Firmware, it has to be seriously broken...
? NoticeID=1471
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi
Got hit last month for downloading unaired Stargate Atlantis episodes that haven't been aired in USA. The C&D letter had BayTSP and BitTorrent references.
If I remember correctly, I was taught in school that the government represented the people...
For piracy, it's just another brick in the wall.
Has anyone had any success in getting the RIAA/MPAA/ESA/etc to recoup any expenses you might get dinged with while doing work to prove your innocent? I know the letters aren't an actual lawsuit, but if you don't respond, one can only assume it's a matter of time until you do get sued.
... that the cost of threatening legal action without any basis whatsoever is too low for these big corporations. The legal system has become a way for big corporations to push individuals and small companies around and basically create a parallel state were the punishment for any behavior big corporations doesn't like is litigation.
is that theres something wrong with society when society is breaking laws at such an extent that it requires an automated process to identify and punish those offenders. Yes, automated processes catch innocents, especially as some on this page have suggested if they deliberately make themselves look guilty when they arent (if they carried around a white powder in a bag, they would expect to get arrested by the police if its discovered - wheres the difference?). But then again, why should it be costly for the 'victim' in these cases to bring offenders to justice? Kazaa has well over several million files available for download, why should the RIAA/MPAA have to spend inordiant amounts of money just to defend their property?
This is all a personal opinion, but if slashdot isnt the place to voice it, then where is? Copyright Law exists, and it exists for a reason. You do not own 'Britney Spears - Toxic.mp3', and you do not have a right to give it to other people. If you wanted to have that right, make your own music, distribute that, but until then dont think you have any rights to other peoples intellectual property. Intellectual property laws exist for reasons, one of which is that it may be costly to initially develop, but cheap to manufacture.
Mod this as you will, I dont care. I know slashdot is heavily biased, and I can expect damnation. What I do care about is that I have had my say.
One quite interesting angle is that in countires with strict privacy laws (many EU countires), it may be illeagal to record IP addresses that carry pirated content. Copyright infringement is a petty crime that does not warrant home searches or disclosing communication (IP addresses, telephone numbers) unless you ask money for it.
Thus, a company that records IP addresses of file swappers could be liable under Finnish penal law facing upto four years of physically limited freedom for management.
whay makes them think they have the right to notify anyone ?
some 3 months ago the ISP i used to work for here in brasil received a notification that someone in our network was downloading "exorcist - the begining", complete with IP address. happens that a simple "whois " returned the name of another ISP, with an IP address range in a neighbour AS (autonomous system. huge IP address ranges ISPs and network operator have). we simply had NOTHING to do with that.
lucky them they were in US. if they were here with the threatening tone of the e-mail we could sue them. threatening a person or a company on an empty basis or based on false information is (IIRC, IANAL) ilegal here.
What ? Me, worry ?
Guess I'll be adding all of Bay's IPs to my Azureus Safepeer blocklists........
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
John Sauter (J_Sauter@Empire.Net)
How do I go about blacklisting American IPs?
Is there a nice range, just like for blocking out spam from eastern countries?
If I'm gonna be sued, I might as well get it from my own country.
liqbase
Bittorrent was designed for efficient transfer of files via a peer to peer network.
Bittorrent uses centralised trackers and indeed it was never intended to "go under the radar" it simply became popular for distributing copyright material when third-parties discovered that it was faster than what they were already using.
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
I think the problem here is that any normal person can see the greed of the RIAA and MPAA and thier so called piracy is beyond any form of reasonability.
They are like the 2 year olds screaming "mine, mine, mine" without any rhyme or reason.
Copyright Piracy IS when you take a movie or song, duplicate it on a media like a CD or DVD, and SELL it as if it was genuine.
Sharing a song with a friend so that friend can decide if it is really good enough to BUY, is not worng in my opinion.
What if the movie or song is just bad, rotten, trash? You cet to decide to be a "CUSTOMER" or not based on if you like the product. Having to pay these greedy folks just because you heard the horible song or watched even some of the lousy movie is not PIRACY by any rational thought process.
The RIAA and MPAA do not want customers where they have a choice, but CONSUMERS ready to be culled.
This whole thing gets too much press, and to many good people are being called thieves because of the greed of the RIAA, MPAA.
Cheers
* Carthago Delenda Est *
"I think the GP has an interesting point. Not one that I imagine would ever brought up in a legal setting of course; it still tickles me though."
Courts have traditionally recognized that evidence held against you must be obtained in a legal way. One of the defenses that can be used against the MPAA suit of a turrent user is "unclean hands". What this means is that the person doing the suing is also guilty of the same offense (that of sharing "illegal material"). Unless turrents allow downloading without uploading anything, the MPAA attack dogs are just as guilty of doing what they are accusing the ohter end user of.
IANAL and all but it sounds good to me...;-)
B.
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
this is the shit my isp sent me a month ago... thought i had seen this baytsp name before. The mpaa can go fuck themselves.. i'll be using I2P bittorrent for my stuff from now on.
> Notice ID:7957592
> Notice Date:16 Dec 2004 01:18:22 GMT
>
> Dear Sir or Madam:
>
> BayTSP, Inc. ("BayTSP") swears under penalty of perjury that Paramount Pictures Corporation ("Paramount") has authorized BayTSP to act as its non-exclusive agent for copyright infringement notification. BayTSP's search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Paramount's copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the attached report.
>
> BayTSP has reasonable good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of in the attached report is not authorized by Paramount, its agents, or the law. The information provided herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, this letter is an official notification to effect removal of the detected infringement listed in the attached report. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the Universal Copyright Convention, as well as bilateral treati
es with other countries allow for protection of client's copyrighted work even beyond U.S. borders. The attached documentation specifies the exact location of the infringement.
>
> We hereby request that you immediately remove or block access to the infringing material, as specified in the copyright laws, and insure the user refrains from using or sharing with others Paramount's materials in the future (see, 17 U.S.C. 512).
>
> Further, we believe that the entire Internet community benefits when these matters are resolved cooperatively. We urge you to take immediate action to stop this infringing activity and inform us of the results of your actions. We appreciate your efforts toward this common goal.
>
> Please send us a prompt response indicating the actions you have taken to resolve this matter. Please reference the Notice ID number above in your response.
>
> Nothing in this letter shall serve as a waiver of any rights or remedies of Paramount with respect to the alleged infringement, all of which are expressly reserved. Should you need to contact me, I may be reached at the following address:
>
> Mark Ishikawa
> Chief Executive Officer
> BayTSP, Inc.
> PO Box 1314
> Los Gatos, CA 95031
>
> v: 408-341-2300
> f: 408-341-2399
> paramount-picture@copyright-compliance.com
>
> *pgp public key is available on the key server at ldap://keyserver.pgp.com
>
> Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers.
>
> This infringement notice contains an XML tag that can be used to automate the processing of this data. If you would like more information on how to use this tag please contact BayTSP.
>
>
>
> Infringed Work: Machinist, The
> Infringing FileName: The.Machinist.LIMITED.SCREENER-VideoCD
> Infringing FileSize: 1070386415
> Protocol: BitTorrent
> Infringers IP Address: x.x.x.x
> Infringer's User Name:
> Infringer's DNS Name: x.cablecompany.net
> Initial Infringement Timestamp: 14 Dec 2004 14:11:25 GMT
> Recent Infringement Timestamp: 14 Dec 2004 15:45:09 GMT
>
>
What happenes if they knock at my door and claim that I have shared certain files and I decline? Well, I guess, they want to have a look at my hard drive. But what if they cannot read it because the drive is crypted? How are they gonna prove that there are the claimed files on my computer? Is there any law which says that I have to hand out the key?
I thought that one of the requirements for the DMCA takedown notices was that the party making the claim about copyright infringement had to declare, under penalty of perjury, that the works were being copied in violation of copyright.
If someone deliberately put up a safe/public domain file with a misleading name and get sent a notification, could the people running this auto-DMCA service be hit with perjury charges?
I expect that would shut it down pretty quickly. I thought that a perjury penalty was put in there to make sure that it was only invoked when absolutely justified.
I can tell you for a fact that BayTSP is already offering this service. If you use BTEfnet to obtain your torrents you may have already been identified. Right now they are only looking at very new torrents, so if you wait a couple of days then you are likely safe. The way I know this is that PeerGuardian has been picking up BayTSP quite a bit on fresh torrents but not at all on older torrents.
Now making it difficult for BayTSP to identify your IP is quite easy. First, use a proxy to connect to the tracker, next do not allow remote conections (yes that isn't friendly and cuts down your speed, but what are you going to do), finally use PeerGuardian to block your client from connecting to BayTSP. Now you don't exist on the tracker (you used a proxy remember) so if you do accidentaly connect to BayTSP and are identified you have plausible deniability as that could be spoofed and they never conected to you (although if you keep your PeerGuardain defs up to date hopefully you wont conect to BayTSP at all).
Is there any law which says that I have to hand out the key?
First of all, only people with a warrent have the power to enter your home and search your hard drive. If you let someone else in, it's your problem.
In most juristications, you can be FORCED to hand out the key to your encrypted partitions, but only if the judge sees a reasonable reason suspicition.
There's an easy work-around though, but it has not yet been technically implemented in GBDE, CFS or other crypto filesystems: use multiple keys for different purposes. If you provide them key1, you'll get at something irrelevant. They'll see that you're cooperating and will give up harrassing you. Once you're safe again, use key2 to decrypt the bits that really matter.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
This just highlights the need for corporate IT personnel to secure their open Wireless Access Points. Because, as you know - with the cheap cost of portable computers and old hardware - someone might end up leaving a Peer-to-Peer node running over an open AP and shift the liability to the AP owner. Think of the real risk given the amount of bandwidth available to most corporations and how long a rogue node could go undetected.
It is clear that those motivated to seed the BT networks of the world could very well end up costing your company in legal fees. So you better set that MAC filtering up right now.
BayTSP is in Chapter Nine.
Please note: the full-text search works, but the aautomatic links do not ... you can search, but tthen need to go back to the index page and click oin the appropriate chapter. (sorry! And apologies for the MSWord thing ... since offering it for free, I have not had the time to go back and change the search program code or get rid of the microsoft evil-format. Open with OpenOffice.
While Bittorrent's problems are becoming clear Freenet and Tor are gaining momentum quite rapidly.
Freenet is an anonymous encrypted system that allows you to post and share files completely anonymous: http://freenet.sourceforge.net
Tor protects your privacy and security while browsing the web and downloading files with your browser anonymously: http://tor.freehaven.net
Enjoy!
They have to be able to download it from the bittorrent network first in order to ascertain that it actually IS their copyright material... more and more bittorrent networks are going "members only" where you have to actually join and log in to the server in order for your IP to be authorised for that torrent... Any sensible network runner will have several clauses in the joining procedure where the prospective new member will have to be reccomended by an existing member or else they'll have to declare that they are not acting for or as agents of RIAA/MPAA etc.
All they're gonna do is drive users with any sense underground... whilst only the newbies with no sense will get picked on...
Expect to see more closed torrent networks springing up... rather like speakeasies did back in the old "Prohibition" days... Prohibition didn't work very well now did it... all it did was make normal people lawbreakers and give an opportunity for organised crime to fill the void created by the lack of easily available drink.
In fact, all the RIAA and MPAA members have got to do is to actually take advantage of bittorrent, and create a perfectly legal means of people getting their hands on movies early in the distribution cycle by making them available on pay per torrent servers, where you actually pay for the privilege of getting the movie first, well before it hits the cinemas.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
There was massive carnage predicted when the national 55 mph speed limit was raised. The Roads Would Run Red With Blood.
As I recall, the death rate dropped significantly. It's climbing again, but that's due to the number of passenger and vehicle miles climbing. If we're honest with the numbers the death toll would skyrocket if we went back to double nickel limits.
Anyone who has driven across the midwest or intermountain west could tell you why. At 55 mph your attention wanders and you'll miss something important. At 75 mph you'll pay more attention to driving. You don't know boredom until you've driven I-70 across western Kansas, I-80 across the Great Basin or I-84 through central Oregon.
A secondary effect is that traffic now travels at about the same pace. There's some spread, but on a rural interstate (outside of mountains) I'ld guess 80+% of the traffic is within a 10 mph band. A lot of drivers ignored the posted speed limit in the double nickel days and the same 80% band would have been over 20 mph wide. That meant you had a lot more passing and a significantly larger difference in speed as cars passed.
Does that mean that the speed limit should be 75 mph through urban cores? Or 40 past elementary schools and parks? Of course not. But the argument "slower speeds mean lower deaths" is not borne out by the facts. Accidents, when they occur, tend to be more severe. But the accident rate is lower... and newer cars are so much safer that people often walk away unharmed from accidents much more severe than the ones that would have killed everyone a few decades ago.
BTW, a while back I read that the Colorado Dept. of Transportation does monitor actual speeds and will adjust speed limits accordingly, if possible. (US highways often have restrictions.) Their position was mentioned by the GP - the overwhelming majority of drivers will travel at an appropriate speed.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I think it was in the early 1980's that people were suing the light-aircraft manufacturers Cessna and Piper for causing injury to people who walked into spinning propellers!
This action, while completely stupid in every sense, was successful and effectively stopped Cessna and Piper from producing light aircraft for a number of years.
But how could Piper or Cessna possibly be responsible for accidents involving third-party operation of their aircraft??
The phrase "Only in America" seems apt.
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
IP blacklisting is not technically viable. This fact should be obvious to slashdot readers, and we need to stop modding these posts up.
BayTSP can trivially acquire new IPs. I bet they could even get a few in the same subnet as PeerGuardian's web server. Until you figure out what IPs your opponents use, you are fully exposed. In other words, PeerGuardian and others rely on continual sacrifice of their 'sheep' userbase to figure out what IPs are being used by the 'wolves' to prosecute illegal distribution.
Another problem is that PeerGuardian blacklists a huge amount of the IPv4 space (~20% IIRC), which means there are many high performance "allied" nodes it won't be able to access.
IP blacklists are not acceptable over the long term and basically doesn't even work over the short term. Please stop modding this stuff up.