Slashdot Mirror
Was the Lokitorrent Suit a Hoax?
kamhp writes "Recently earthreactor.com published an article
stating that the whole Loki Torrent suit was a fraud and that it was all staged to collect donations toataling in the tens of thousands then sell the domain.
"It seems that the owner of LokiTorrent decided to take the donation money and run, and to cover his tracks, scare the hell out of the entire p2p community. The scare tactic was probably nothing but a decoy to convince intelligent people not to ask the right questions" "
If I recall correctly, wasn't there a Paypal donate button? Fairly sure they can find out each and every person that donated to that POS. Glad I didn't give him my $0.02.
Shoot him.
I've been looking for a good example of pure capitalism to follow. Now I have my new religion :)
If it's such a hoax what exactly do you call this? (Google's HTML Version)
"The MPAA's efforts to date have resulted in a 40 percent reduction in the number of servers that continue to operate. One such site that will no longer exist is LokiTorrent?one of the largest BitTorrent host servers. The operator of that site, Edward Webber, agreed to not only pay a substantial settlement with even greater financial penalties for any further such actions, but by Court Order must provide the MPAA with access to and copies of all logs and server data related to his illegal BitTorrent activities, which will provide a roadmap to others who have used LokiTorrent to engage in illegal activities."
The premise of the article is based entirely on the fact that there is no documentation from the MPAA--but indeed there is such documentation. I know we'd all love to believe the MPAA created that release to capitalize on this so-called hoax but no doubt that would be subject to legal action for such blatant lies.
The article also states "If LokiTorrent.com had been sued in Dallas Federal Courts, then some type of public record would appear. NO ONLINE RECORD APPEARS WHATSOEVER!"
So...if it's not on the internet, it must not exist right....right!?
Did anyone bother contacting the MPAA for a comment on the Lokitorrent case rather than providing more fire to the rumor mill?
...There's no honor among thieves.
Don't take a knife to a gunfight, or even a knife to a knife fight. Take a gun to a knife fight.
Where can I find these intelligent people? I have a bridge to sell to them...
The owls are not what they seem
Purveyors of Bittorrents can be unscrupulous?! WTF!! Where's the honor amongst thie^^^^H content aggregators!?
"Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
because in teh internet ur anonymus & supr leet.
Its disgusting as to how some people make money by stealing from the very people who decided to help them out. I'm yet to do my research on the authenticity of this news bit.
fuvoo: watch something
I think its smart knowing that the MPAA or RIAA will come after you next and just cut your losses and quit there. I think its really decietful to claim you are being sued to raise money so you can live in the Carribbean. A mixture of knowledge and deciet. He sounds just like a corporation.
LOKI TORRENT LAWSUIT :: A HOAX
:: Sedo.com
:: Explanation
Written by: SharePro
At the end of December 2004, the RIAA and MPAA began an international rampage in efforts to close down major bit torrent and ed2k file sharing sites.
Some sites like Suprnova.org, Youceff.com, ShareTv.com, and others went down without a fight while other sites, including ShareConnector and Releases4U were closed down by authorities.
The lawsuits set off a wide spread of panic and dismay within the p2p community as many of the veteran ed2k and torrent contributing societys soon found themselves "homeless" and their works "confisquated" by investigative authorities.
During the turmoil, one such MPAA targeted Bit Torrent site claimed it was willing to stand up against the evil powers of motion picture media thugs by fighting the legal issues in a court of law. LokiTorrent.com began accepting donations from the p2p community to support what they called "necessary legal fee's".
According to a Slyck.com - January 3, 2005 (Slyck.com promoted people to donate to Loki Torrent), within two weeks (5 days public) of announcing their fund raising campaign, Loki Torrents was only $710.00 dollars away from reaching their initial goal. At the time of writing Slyck.com's initial article, Loki Torrent claimed to have raised an impressive $29,290.00 from the p2p community.
Today, just weeks after the initial Slyck.com interview with Edward Webber, owner of LokiTorrent.com, the entire p2p file share community is back in turmoil.
Quote:
A) Are the logs of Lokitorrent.com in the hands of the MPAA?
B) Where is the money that was donated to the legal fund?
C) Can P2P'rs who uploaded / downloaded torrents be tracked down via the logs.
The above and more were the initial questions most p2pr's had in mind when news broke that the MPAA had gained control of Loki Torrent.
As the writing of this article began to gain momentum, many inconsistencies began arising that clearly show that Lokitorrent is not in the hands of the MPAA (At least not because of a court order), nor we're the owners fined a million dollars.
1) LokiTorrent never provided the name or details of any lawyer representing the internet site. No federal judge's name has been listed anywhere throughout the so-called proceedings. Texas courts have no record of any filed judicial proceedings on behalf of the MPAA against Loki Torrent and/or Ed Webber.
2) During the same period of time that Loki was making tens of thousands of dollars monthly via donations, the owners of Loki Torrent were also actively trying to sell the domain. LokiTorrent.com for Sale
In effort to convince p2p'rs to continue donating and not to believe Loki's intent to sell, this is what the owner published in his defense:
Loki Torrent's Selling on Sedo.com
Quote:
If some guy offers me $75K for the domain name, he's more than welcome to it, and I'll simply move the site to a different domain. Selling the entire site will never happen. I have way too much of myself in this site to sell it for any price (well, 2 million could get me to part with it, lol.. but let's live in reality).
3) The only reports of this so-called "law suit" are based entirely on the front page of the LokiTorrent.com internet site. The MPAA and Texas Federal Court list no public record of a lawsuit nor is the MPAA or the courts willing to back up Lokitorrent claims of being ordered to hand over webserver ip logs and pay a 1 million dollar penalty. J. Borland of News.com (and other related news resources) apparently based their entire news articles by information received directly from Mr. Ed Webber (the owner of LokiTorrent.com). This information was received by calling Mr. Webber directly at telephone number (207) 752-3481.
4) Was LokiTorrent ever actually sued by the MPAA? According to the initial reports published via various websites, most people were led to have believed that the
Bit torrent sites are set up to help people steal other people's property (C'mon, like you go there to get Linux distros or other GPL'd stuff) making this scam kind of funny.
"Bast*rd took my money!" - Should have used that money to buy the stuff you downloaded to begin with.
Find 'em. Beat the living shit out of 'em. Post torrent with play by play pics.
If done correctly, everyone that donated shoud feel they at least go their money's worth ^_^
Michalangelo Progr
So...if it's not on the internet, it must not exist right....right!?
I can be googled, therefore I am.
You can't take the sky from me...
...Are you taking about Lokitorrent or the RIAA?
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
There's a link to the related press release on the MPAA's website.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Someone found a business model to get pirates to pay for content!!
Step 1) set up torrent site
Step 2) claim MPAA takedown
Step 3) collect money from torrent downloaders, then run away and PROFIT !!!
The process probably can't be repeated too many times, though... do you figure they made more money than they would have through advertisements ? I'm guessing they did...
The site is blocked for "sexuality" by websense. Thanks
OK, so many, many LokiTorrent users coughed up cash to the owner of the site. I've no problem with that, and the owner of the site looks to have come out of it for something like 30K.
Seems fair enough to me.
Can we add a Nigerian email to this story, please?
quoting from this mpaa press release:
/. tradition of journalistic excellence, we'll probably see this same "story" reposted several times in the next few days.
"The MPAA's efforts to date have resulted in a 40 percent reduction in the number of servers that continue to operate. One such site that will no longer exist is LokiTorrent -- one of the largest BitTorrent host servers. The operator of that site, Edward Webber, agreed to not only pay a substantial settlement with even greater financial penalties for any further such actions, but by Court Order must provide the MPAA with access to and copies of all logs and server data related to his illegal BitTorrent activities, which will provide a roadmap to others who have used LokiTorrent to engage in illegal activities."
took all of like 3 seconds to find this.
in keeping with the usual
As the saying goes, I sleep with gay guys but the jokes on them because i'm not gay!
I mean, if I were paying a thief, I'd expect him to be honest with me.
Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
because you can't "buy" all episodes of all tv shows, that is the main thing my wife looks for on torrent sites, you can buy some really popular shows, but most you can't buy.... so how else are you supposed to get the content?
Norse god of, among other things, practical jokes.
Hmmmmmm....
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Like so many here, IANAL - but how exactly would you mount such a case?
"Your Honour, I used this website to knowingly violate copyright law, and then gave the owner of said site some money in the belief it was in order to defend a case against him, and therefore keep the site up. I want my money back, because no such case existed".
Response:
"So, you gave money in exchange for the possibility of continued use of an illegal service"
It would be very, very hard to argue that you gave money without previously using the site to download illegal material, or that when you parted with your money you had no hope at all it would result in the continued usage of the illegal service LokiTorrent provided.
Donate X amount or more and win some prize. It was innovative and I may use it in the future myself. As to the hoax? I got nothing.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
VCR, Tivo...
Nobody said life was convenient. If my car is in the shop and I need to get somewhere, I can call a cab or take a bus. I cannot steal my neighbor's car.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Why don't people who start these sites in the first place register them as a corporation. That way when the RIAA et al. come knocking on your door you can just let the company take the fall.
Limited liability people.
link
...it's in the form of a question.
/. editors would be complicit in the execution of a Fox News tactic.
What a crock of shit. To think
You can say anything you want without fear of reprisal as long as it's in the form of a question. You people don't fact check a goddamn thing, and just publish away. Never mind that the author of the original "article" is in bed with the MPAA.
So unless the MPAA is also in on this hoax (which wouldn't really surprise me), there are some issues with this story.
http://www.mpaa.org/CurrentReleases/2005_02_10_Bit TorrentLokitorrent.doc
To link to a article about someones opinion is one thing but to support and spread lies and slander is just plain wrong
Personal Website
Isn't Earth Reactor an Earth Station 5 satelite site? With all the unsubstantiated anonimity claims (amid clients with remote file deletion exploits), and a long history of mud slinging. Why are they a credible news source?
paul reinheimer
Remember Loki, the norse trickster god and a master of deception.
Not saying anything about the truth of these accusations, but maybe this guy's choice of domain name could (ironically enough) turn out to be fitting...
But the money was still collected under false pretenses. He asked for a legal fund, and instead used the money to fund his settlement.
I say hang him.
Remind me again why we can't mod down stories? The submitter is an idiot for believing what an uninformed 12 year old wrote on some random site. The editor is an idiot for approving such a bullshit "story". We're all idiots for bothering to read past the first post linking to the MPAA press release.
this is getting old and so are you
blog
If you look at the most popular downloaded shows, they nearly always correspond with the most popular sold DVDs. Those two things are directly related -- people want to see the show, and are often more than happy to go out and buy the content when it's available for a decent price
Of course, that same reason is why unavailable media (stuff you can't buy anyway) or "edited content" are still heavily pirated -- people who own, say, one particular version of Bladerunner are probably quite interested in seeing the alternate version, if only temporarily, so instead of renting (if they're able to find the version at all), they'll head to the internet. I see a similar reaction to most people when they talk about TV shows.
Similarly, look at the fansub/anime community. "Piracy" is rampant, but the groups will stop distribution of a series when they are released in their respective countries and they will often be purchased by fans. They're a good example of something that's otherwise unavailable being pirated until it becomes available, at which point peopel are happy to pick them up.
There will always be exceptions, but I personally find the TV people a lot more realistic about piracy, digital media, and access to content compared to the RIAA and MPAA groups. TV shows include like 6 hours of basic content in a release and costs just a little more than a comparable movie, not to mention a bevy of special features including multiple commentary and other crap.
TV shows are one of the most common pirated media, but TV DVDs are also one of the fastest growing markets. The fact that TV people realize that means good things for consumers. When record and movie people realize that, I think we'll be better off.
(personally, I'd be very excited for a movie studio to set up a "drm'd torrent" site of their own, that let people download movies and watch them for free, but only keep them on their harddrive for, say, a week, after which point they're deleted automatically or rendered unplayable. And you're unable to download more movies if your share ratio goes below a certain percentage. It would probably curb piracy significantly as well as encourage people to both watch more movies and purchase movies that they like)
He is in a dumpster somewhere in a dark alley with a gunshot wound up the ass. It was buckwheats for him.
This article is written by SharePro of ES5 -- the same fellow who was threatening to post pictures and personal information about the bloke who found the 'remote file deletion' utility in the ES5 p2p program awhile back.
Take whatever this man says with a grain of salt and call me in the morning...
The Yasashii Syndicate ||
"because you can't "buy" all episodes of all tv shows, that is the main thing my wife looks for on torrent sites, you can buy some really popular shows, but most you can't buy.... so how else are you supposed to get the content?"
Wouldn't it be interesting if all this demand had proper supply?
"Derp de derp."
The new generation of hoaxes that label real events as hoaxes and hoaxes as real. Perhaps the above post is a hoax too?
Side note from the MPAA's war-cry page: "By deeply cutting into revenues, movie piracy limits the choices for consumers at the box office. Sixty percent of all movies never recoup their production and marketing costs which average well over $100 million."
Sigh. The fact that most movies didn't recoup production costs in the decades before p2p, the Web or VCRs ever existed seems to have slipped under the radar.
I'm not good in groups. It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent. - Q
IMO, Artists should be able to live from their art. That's one thing. IMO, Information, including art, should be Free (as in Free Speech).
It would be WRONG to not pay artists. It would also be wrong to deny people they legitim right to accesss art.
So, we need a solution in which the artist gets paid , and the people get the content they diserve.
For example, people is free to do whatever they want to music. The artist sells disks. Those that want to help the artist, and also receive the disk with a nice poster, lirycs, etc, buys the disk for a reasonable price. The artist also charges for tickets for they concerts, interviews, merchandise, etc.
And there is no MPAA/RIAA/Sony/Other-Bloodsuckers in this history.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
It's perfectly real. I downloaded the court documents from Pacer (the online docket system of the US Courts) and put on my website. It includes the permanent injunction signed by the judge that closed the case.
This is a great illustration of how the MPAA fail to acknowledge reality. BitTorrent and other protocols who allow evil corporations like MPAA to find your identity are already drawing their last breaths, these are on the way out. They are currently being replaced by I2P, Freenet and other systems who allow users to anonymously share what ever they want. By attacking their customers instead of providing real alternatives (I have yet to find a site where I can legally download movies and view them on my Linux-based entertainment system) they simply encourage peer to peer systems who allow users to participate free from prosecution threats.
MPAA, you are wrong. It is possible to hide. And your idiotic attacks on the general public will only make the systems where this is possible more popular. I have said this numerous times, users want to use simple peer to peer system to acquire movies. This is because divx is the preferred format, p2p is the preferred way of delivery. If there was a way to just enter the movie title of any movie and pay $5 or something for the right to do so, then most p2p users would pay that sum. Allow free distribution, allow fair use, and most importantly: Provide ways of paying for your products...
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
Divx sucks, nobody has used that crap in a long time. If you use compressed content then xvid is current. Since DVD burners have gone sub $100 and 3mbit connections are common, actual dvd-r images are becoming vogue. You are a couple steps out of date. ;)
This is the first I've heard of this story, and I don't know what went on. However, I checked the Northern District of Texas's online docket system (PACER), and the lawsuit was filed, and was terminated with an agreed judgment. I have pdf copies of the amended complaint and the judgment. If someone has a place to host them e-mail me (tvanmeir //at\\ gmail //dot\\ com) and I'll send you a copy.
Imagine what would happen if the copyright holder of Happy Birthday just woke up one day and forbid anyone from singing it again?
They did I believe, hence the song in futurama is
#What day is today?#
#It's nibbler's birthday#
#what a day for a birth day#
#lets all have some cake#
"legally shared the tape with their friends"
No, they didn't -- there is nothing legal about sharing tapes made of TV shows. It's okay for YOU to tape something, but it is not okay for you to distribute that tape...
"That's not even wrong..." -- Wolfgang Pauli
Eathreactor is Run by Sharepro the same sharepro who Ran the dubious Earthstation 5 forums so no news here if you go look at Slyck you will threads about this got closed of flamed out of existence.
.The Million dollar settlement was potetial losses the record caompanies claim he wasnt fined 1 millon . /. is getting bad if they post this crap
Loki has a out of court settlement that was notarised by the federal court judge
I agree, the author of the article bears some scrutiny. SharePro doesn't exactly enjoy a high standing with many memebers of the filesharing community. It's interesting that Slyck.com is mentioned in this article. A critical commentary on the demise of Earth Station V (SharePro is the forum admin for ES5) was recently posted on that site. SharePro states that: "Slyck.com promoted people to donate to Loki Torrent". In the context of the recent article, it could be construed also as an attempt to tar Slyck by association.
It's a freely available program. It wasn't PPV.
Fortunately, the algorithms used are good enough that it's not usually noticable. (Note that I said `not usually' -- there are certainly cases where you can notice the compression artifacts.)
If you want video that's not compressed, get a Video Disc player. They're analog, though some do have a CD quality digital soundtrack. Or a VHS tape deck.
That is the only logical conclusion I can come up with.
First Lokitorrent is created to host links to BitTorrents and not the files themselves. While sharing the files may be a crime, one has to reason is sharing the BitTorrent files that link/track to files on someone else's hard drive (Not on LokiTorrent) does not fall under piracy directly. Lokitorrent is technically not sharing files, or even having them stored on their server, they are simply providing links to other people's hard drives. Sort of like having a list of links to Movie or Music downloads on your web site, but not really having the files on your web site.
Now then we have the MPAA contacting (not suing, issuing a warning letter from lawyers) telling Lokitorrent to cease and disist from hosting Bit Torrents, and threatening a lawsuit.
So Lokitorrent asks for more donations to fight off a lawsuit that has not yet happened, and they don't know how much it will cost to defend, but they have a ballpark figure.
Lokitorrent panics, offers the domain for sale. Makes up a story as to why it is for sale.
A judge hears the case, decides if there is any merit to it. Preliminary hearing or whatever. Not the trial itself, Lokitorrent panics and then settles out of court.
As agreed, the Lokitorrent site is taken down and replaced with a warning by the MPAA. An undisclosed sum of the donations made to Lokitorrent get paid to the MPAA for damages. The web site does not change hands yet, but the BitTorrent tracker and BT web portal are now offline.
Some angry fan of BitTorrent, gets upset that LokiTorrent got so much money in donations and still "Sold out" to the MPAA, that they make a hoax story.
While not exactly giving the MPAA the Lokitorrent web site, maybe the IP logs, the domain name, and hosting is still owned by LokiTorrent, but the hoax is we are to believe that the MPAA owns the site and is tracking all visitors to it.
Meanwhile millions of BitTorrent users are freaking out that the MPAA might actually have their IP addresses and downloading habits and filing a suit against them right now.
Yet another story is posted to Slashdot without the facts being checked first.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
See this site. -- Will
so how else are you supposed to get the content?
Well, if you're not gonna watch it on TV and you can't/won't buy it - then... um... that means you AREN'T supposed to get the content.
It's not yours, and you have absolutely no reasonable inherent claim to it. You pirates need to come to terms with the fact that the world doesn't revolve around you and you can't always get what you want your way. I learned that when I was 5 years old.
Secondly it's debatable as to whether we have an inherent to this content. Copyright law exists(or at least existed) to provide a financial insentive to content creators so that more content would be created to benefit the population as a whole, if you can't get hold of the content then what's the point of subsidizing its creation(which is essentially what copyright does).
Why bother promoting the creation of content if the creators won't distribute it. There should be a stipulation in copyright law that if I want to buy it you have to sell it to me(preferably at a preset price), because otherwise there isn't any purpose to having copyright law in the first place.