Slashdot Mirror
European Piracy Crackdowns
DigitumDei writes "The British
Phonographic Industry has been busy over the last half year. Their recent success which netted them £50,000 in out of court settlements is certainly not going to be the end of it with the UK courts forcing 6 ISP's to release information on a further 31 file sharers. The ISPs have 14 days to comply. And once located will be offered the opporunity to settle out of court. 'We would particularly advise parents to check what their children are doing on the internet and make sure that they are not breaking the law by filesharing illegally,' said Geoff Taylor, BPI General Counsel." And in other news, the oldest and largest ISP in Sweden, Bahnnof was the subject of a raid that netted what looks to be the biggest results in Europe ever; as well papper writes "The Swedish organization Antipiratbyrån, which has nothing to do with Swedish goverment, recently got hacked. This was both revenge for and an attempt to stop similair raids like the one who took place this friday, against the ISP Banhof. During the raid several FTP-servers were seized. On the hacked site the responsible group, AUH, posts some private e-mails about an alleged informer and makes threats to release more information and of course there is the mandatory braging. The site is located at Antripiratbyran with a mirror elsewhere and a translated verison also online (although it seems unreachable at the moment). "
anyway, saw this on their site day or so ago, and i think its cool APB is the most hate institution in sweden, but they have had like 150 or so open cases with people all over. With alot of it going on on TV in sweden this is just the begining.. Btw, baunhoff (spelling?) where their OWN ISP.. so they cracked down and got their self shut down. And now they try and use a off-shore (as in usa) webhost.
I think we need a new method of piracy err p2p... I need to be anonymous with lots of peers. Any ideas?
A man in Rodez, France has been cleared (in French, sorry, use the fish) Of piracy charges; the court determined that since he did not mass redistribute the movies he downloaded, he was not guilty of what the movie studio accused him. Furthermore, the court said that given the copy-tax people pay on media and computers, they are entitled to private copy, JUST AS THE LAW ALLOWS.
Crazy kids! Downloading Phonographs!
Is there much of a British Pornographic Industry?
Did anyone else read that wrong?
Appenrently they have the right break in and look through other peoples stuff if they think there are some "pirated" things there.
What happens if I don't want them looking through my private mail/pictures/documents?
They will not stop this stupid behavior unless we hit them where it really hurts, their wallets.
So, don't buy another CD, don't see another film, dont rent another DVD and don't buy any programs from the companys sponsoring "Antipiratbyrån" until they stop this foolishness!
The first paragraph or so of the hacked version of their site, as translated by InterTran. Either InterTran leaves something to be desired as a translation tool, or the hackers who hit the site leave something to be desired as far as proficiency in the swedish language goes. You decide:
Hi and greet to AUHs nya home in cyberrymden! We have displaced in here behind they precedence proprietor stayed outcast frn Internet liked a body as braces away kill and unwanted organ. We have as it were yourself wondered very about what as actually happened with Bahnhof and as wes is , formerly youngest , almighty arga s feels wes ourselves exhort that divide that information but s mnga as possible. All for that yous also ska kunna become arga , and that eras friends ska become arga and their friends and s forth until Internet gator is full by an mad mob as sound AUH! AUH! AUH! and am claiming Ponténs blood!
Specialization is for insects. -Heinlein
'We would particularly advise parents to check what their children are doing on the internet and make sure that they are not breaking the law by filesharing illegally,'
Its amazing that government authorities still aren't aware that in most cases, its pretty damn clear to a child (over the age of 11 anyway) whether they are filesharing illegally or not. They should be responsible for checking their actions, not the parents.
And the site targeted is Antripiratbyran
The Danish version of the Swedish anti-piracy organization is funded by the settlements, and money from the industry. Absolutely none of the money from the settlements will ever reach the artists.
The ISPs have 14 days to comply. And once located will be offered the opporunity to settle out of court.
Apart from the obvious spelling mistake, it simply doesn't say what it means to say. The ISPs will be offered the opportunity to settle out of court, once they have been located? Really? Are you sure?
Maybe this is the reason why Slashdot is sending far less visitors to websites these days. Because people are getting fed up at reading crap. Slashdot points to some fairly interesting stories, but it's frustrating to read it when it looks like a ten year-old wrote it.
Boycott products from RIAA and its puppet companies to show them you disagree with what they do.
"although it seems unreachable at the moment"
/.
After being posted on
Never!
Warning, comments may not have been passed by the sanity department of my brain.
I have to admit, as a user I am starting to get worried. Its not even a week since the related story on Aussie ISP raids
http://www.sandstorming.com
That's bahnhof, not bahnnof or banhof.
I'm a bit split at how to take this. APB (Translated: "The bureau of anti-piracy") is using illegal methods and a lot of money to track down and convict pirates. I believe we all agree that APB generally sucks. Right?
But defacing the website to publish information about private citizens is in my view worse. There's currently several campaigns going on which aims at terrorizing Pontus Pontén (chief asshat of the APB) by sending hate SMS, e-mail, snailmail. His own kids have gotten several death threats for fucks sake. What kind of message does that send?
There have also been several attempts to break into the APB locales, in at least one case using heavy tools.
APB uses methods thate are questionable to say the least, but this response will only strenghten the public view that pirates are evil anarchists that ought to be hung.
Sweden is a democracy, and we have freedom of speech. I'd like to encourage everyone to protest openly.
Has the RIAA or the MPAA ever provoked this kind of responses?
I'm sure this will all end up the same old discussion all over again, but this case with Bahnhof actually goes beyond "piracy", it's a question of judicial security.
What seems to have happened is this; APB (these are an umbrella org. for Sony and the other big giants) went to a court to get a warrant to search against Bahnhof. They listed the material they were after; Lisa Miskovsky, Kylie, Peter Jöback, Rebecka Törnqvist, Santana, The Ark, Totta Näslund(!!) and Ulf Lundell were some of the artists they mentioned. Anyhow...
They went in, shut the company down for the whole day (no one was allowed to use their computers for the rest of the day -- you can imagine how easy it is to run an ISP when you're not allowed to touch a computer) and found, they say, nothing of the material they used to get their warrant. Nothing!
Now, they did find other material, which they tipped off the police about (seeing as that would have to become a criminal case) the servers.
Now the question is; is it now basically acceptable to lie or just make up material for the search warrant? Should a consortium of large companies be allowed to put a million SEK in escrow, and then shut down another company while looking for anything illegal?
I don't think I've adequatly expressed all the problems (and known details) here, but this is big.
Swedes should look here (JO-anmälan) and here ("Piratjaktens Faror -- Om balansen mellan personlig integritet, rättssäkerhet och upphovsrätt")
Belief is the currency of delusion.
There seems to be a misunderstanding here.. Piratbyran (The Pirate Bureau) http://www.piratbyran.org/ AntiPiratbyran (The Anti-Pirate Bureau) http://www.antipiratbyran.org/ The mirror of the hacked site is available at: http://ak.webcust.prq.se/Arga.unga.hackare_2k5_rev enge.is.sweet.htm
Quick translation:
AUH = Angry Young Hackers
We have moved in here after the previous owners got repelled off the Internet, just like a body repell dead and unwanted organs.
We have, just like you, been wondering about what happened at Bahnhof (the ISP who got busted) since we are, young of course, very angry so we feel that we need to share the information with as many people as possible
Just so you also will be angry, and that your friends and their friends and so on.. until the streets of Internet are full off angry mobs who scream AUH! AUH! AUH! and demands the blood of Pontén (the lawyer from Antipiratbyrå)
Daniel
Why is this presented as such a Bad Thing(tm)?
When the music/movie industries were making blanket charges against whole groups of people, a great hue and cry erupted here that they should instead be targetting the individual lawbreakers.
Now that the industries are doing exactly that, why don't I hear much support coming from the Slashdot community? Isn't this what you asked for?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
In fact, cutting out 90% of the activity may well satisfy The Man. I can't see that it's worth spending millions chasing down people swapping files among their friends via FTP, private newsgroups etc.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
If they can't make money selling their product, the'll make it by collecting "piracy" settlements. The margins are probably better, too!
Hi and welcome to AUH's new home in cyber space!
We have moved in here after the former owners got rejected from Internet like a body rejects dead and unwanted organs. We have, like you, wondered what actually happaned at Bahnhof and since we are, except young, very angry we feel requested to share this information with as many as possible. All because you should be able to be angry too, and so that your friends can be angry and their friends' friends and so forth until the streets of Internet are filled with an angry mob that barks "AUH! AUH! AUH!" and demands the blood of Pontén!
What was it about the way it is presented that you took to mean that this ia a Bad Thing?
I'll repeat the summary here:
All looks objective enough. Am I missing something?
The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
swedish law is messed up.
:)
software piracy falls into the same group as prostitution. its illegal to perform the "act", but its not illegal to exist. if that makes sense.
for example, if a police office catches a prostitude selling services to a gentleman, a crime is being committed. however, prostitutes are legal citizens - and, even their tax is declared so.
the same goes for software piracy, if a company can say "hey, i downloaded this file from user X - which is a copyright violation" and the cops come and cease your computers and find the file in question - you will be convicted of sharing files illegally over the internet.
however, if you have 1TB of TV shows and DVDR images - yet they cannot find the file they have the injunction for; you are free to go. owning the files is legal, sharing them isn't.
there was a case with some direct connect users where a guy got busted by the cops for sharing files; however, he got his computer back with all his illegal files without any legal action been made because they could not find the file in question.
interesting
Is the money these lawsuits still giving them a net profit after paying for the lawyers, the labour to track down the pirates, etc.? Or is the purpose of this just to set an example and scare all the other pirates away? Maybe it's the coffee, but I for one see a future where the music industry becomes almost dead due to pirating and music becomes opensource, like *BSD or Apache. Musicians no longer are paid significantly by percentages of record sales. Instead, music is freely and legally downloaded. The musicians perhaps will get their money some other way, like commercials and live performances.
Powered by caffeine and sugar; BSD
Bahnhof (http://www.bahnhof.se) is spelled two times and both times incorrect...
If what the AUH group (Accron. transl. Angry young hackers) claims is true they are a pretty impressive bunch. They have (apparently) penetrated an ISP to the point of being able to get personal info from a dynamic IP, compromised several IRC networks and totally pwned Antipiratbyrons systems.
The text is basicly examples of email conversations the staff of Antipiratbyron has had with various contacts, some personal information on a staff member, and a whole bunch of taunting.
Its just a matter of time untill anti-piracy groups form an army of their own, kill all of us copyright infringers and take over the world in the name of crappy pop music.
20 pages so here are some extracts...
Hi Oliver,
Please find our P2P fact sheet attached.
Kind regards
BPI Anti Piracy Unit
Sent: 08 March 2005 16:27
To: Tonia Howell
Subject: P2P networks
Hi,
I am a small producer for a few local bands here in the UK and have been thinking about releasing some demo tracks on the P2P networks, as it seems simpler than getting air-play time.
I am worried about recent reports in the news and advertising campaigns linking P2P networks with piracy and Terrorist activities. Although I am not a member of the BPI I would be glad of any advise on the matter.
Reagards,
"The unauthorised distribution of music over the internet is against the law. It infringes the
legal rights of artists and record companies. And it's bad for music.
The British record industry, which is responsible for the lion's share of the UK's investment
in new artists in excess of £150 million per year cannot possibly hope to continue
investing in new music if nobody pays for it."
Note, 'distribution', not copying.
"After years of widespread illegal uploading, the new legal download sites give music buyers
the opportunity to access an enormous range of music whenever they want."
Note, 'uploading', not downloading.
"The UK's official download chart was launched last September, and is set to be merged
with the UK singles chart this April."
Note, this doesn't include bittorrent downloads.
"CONTENTS
1) Illegal filesharing and the music industry
a. What is filesharing?
b. How can I tell if I am filesharing?
c. What's wrong with illegal filesharing?
d. The research: why filesharing damages sales
e. The picture in the UK
2) Online music piracy the industry response
a. Litigation
b. Instant messaging & consumer awareness
3) The rapid growth of legal music downloads
a. The UK digital download market
b. Broadband: opportunity for growth or the end of the album?
4) Further information
a. the UK's main digital music services
b. UK Digital Music Timeline, March 2005
c. Why illegal filesharing is wrong what the industry says
"
"a. What is filesharing?
Filesharing is the activity of trading digital files with other users over the internet. Users
trade files by downloading (to obtain them) and uploading (to distribute them).
In this context, downloading is when an internet user obtains a digital music file from the
internet. If this is done, for free, from an unauthorised source, it is likely that it has been
done illegally. UK internet users can download legally from an increasing number of
sources; see section 4a of this pack.
The more serious activity of uploading, is when an internet user allows other internet users
access to their digital music files. This is commonly done using filesharing programs. The
uploader is effectively distributing music illegally on the internet. This act is unlawful
regardless of whether or not the music was acquired illegally or legally.
Although the technology (also known as peer-to-peer, or p2p) offers lots of potential for the
development of legitimate services, the vast majority of songs currently available on file-
sharing networks are copyrighted works that are being distributed illegally."
"b. How can I tell if I am filesharing?
If you have filesharing software (known as a client) on your computer, have music in a
shared folder, and are connected to the internet, it's highly likely that you are filesharing
music illegally.
Here is a list of the more well-known filesharing clients that are used to fileshare illegally:
Kazaa, Grokster, eDonkey, LimeWire, Overnet, Direct Connect, BitTorrent, Soulseek,
Bearshare, iMesh, WinMX, Ares, Gnutella, GrabIt.
The only way to be sure that no one is illegally filesharing from your computer is to remove
the filesharing software altogether.
Bookmark the webpage below for a simple guide to re
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Hello and welcome to AUH 's new home in cyberspace!
We have moved in here since the last owners were evicted from the internet, like the dead and unneeded organs of a body. We have, like you, wondered a lot about what really happened at Bahnhof and since we are, except young, very angry, we feel compelled to share this information with as many people as possible. So that you will be angry too, and your friends will be angry, and their friends will be angry and so on until the streets of the internet is filled with an angry mob chanting "AUH! AUH! AUH!" and demanding Ponténs[Note: Henrik Pontén, lawyer and front figure for Swedens Anti-Piracy] blood.
We'll start of slow by letting someone named 'Peter' sum up the situation
Hello there, Peter! It will be interesting to find out what kind of infiltration you guys have been doing
Before long, we realize that Pater is a pretty nasty person - time to infiltrate the infiltrator. An just so you know, we have infiltrated you, your sites, your mail and your activity ever since we stole your passwords through SONG 4 years ago. I suppose this makes us more macho than you.
Interesting, Peter is mailing IRC-logs to Anti-piracy. Could this means - is Peter the bad guy? Let's continue looking and see what we'll find!
Oh my.. That's a bad Peter! Mailing from home when you're undercover is just what you need to do if you want people to find out!
w00t! A chello address in
Now that the industries are doing exactly that, why don't I hear much support coming from the Slashdot community? Isn't this what you asked for?
The people making those arguments were wrong.
We want the freedom to share. This is always the goal. Sometimes we express this poorly or focus on side arguments. We know, deep down that sharing is not wrong and this is what we argue for.
If you'd like the slashdot philosophy elegantly expressed there's the FSF's "copyright versus community" in text and ogg.
Individual infringers are somebody else's problem:
They sued the mp3 codec clones, but I didn't speak out because I use ogg vorbis,
They sued the pirates of Windows, and I didn't speak out, 'cause I use Linux,
They sued over CSS, but I didn't speak out because it wasn't in my country,
They sued the music and movie downloaders, but I didn't speak out because I used a different filesharing network,
They sued me, but there was no-one left to speak out for me.
One thing I've wondered about is how the BPI are showing losses in order to claim damages.
X people are sharing track.001
Y people download track.001
Joe Bloggs is sued for damages for being a member of X.
Just because Y people downloaded track.001 doesn't show the actual loss - how many would have purchased had they not downloaded? This, IMO, is the true loss - how many real sales were affected?
Having gotten that mystical figure how does the BPI calculate the percentage that Joe Bloggs, as a member of the X sharing group, was responsible for?
So basically you just want shit for free.
You want music. You want movies. You want software. You just don't want to pay for them, and feel that justifies doing anything to obtain them.
You are nothing but a freeloader, and it pisses me off to no end that you try to make it sound like a virtue.
Here's the solution: www.i2p.net
Anonymous net surfing, anonymous bittorrent - even running at pretty good speeds (unlike a certain other anonymous network *cough*freenet*cough*).
It's not really meant to be "ready for primetime" yet, but it works for me. Heck, someone's even got streaming music working over it. Definitely worth a look
These aren't the sigs you're looking for.
Does this mean that any organization of copyright holders is able to Supply the Swedish District Court with payed for testimony regarding possession of their intelectual property, and gain a search warent for any and all computer systems?
Therefore wouldn't a Copyright holder for example that is conserned about the misuse of a small application for example be able to use the swedish court to search all the computers of say the Antipiracy Bureau? If as people have said in other threads the Copyrighted Material is not found, but violations of Others Copyrights is found would then that be just cause to repost the information to the holder of that Copyright? Considering the BSA reports on the State of Enterprise Licensing, SOMETHING is likely to be used inapropriatly somewhere within the organization.
Second Point, I think this will certainly lead to interesting mayday protests in Sweden this year. In the Light of the previous year's "100MBits For All" propiracy protests in three swedish cities. It makes me Wonder if the AUH's Call for street protests isnt quite as foolish as it sounds.
Because these laws are stupid.
Sorry for that, I'm trying to make the point that there should be public outcry if the public believe it is being robbed of its fair use rights. It isn't right to let individual people suffer because they're not you.
I'm not suggesting that we should burn our money so everything can be free. I'm more pragmatic than that. Further, I think that legal methods should be used to bring justice where the law is broken, but there remain questions about the way in which the industry associations have gone about suing filesharers.
So basically you just want shit for free.
Yeah, that's the gist of it.
The sole purpose of copyright is to help create more shit that will eventually become free. Copyright exists to maximize our level of free shit. When copyright interferes with free shit, it is malfunctioning.
I think laws against murder and rape are stupid.
Antipiratbyrån are a bunch of commie bastards....Oh sorry, I meant CAPITALIST bastards.
The poor bastards may have some large companies on their side but they're hated by the people.
Who would you rather support? The organization dedicated to suing you because you couldn't afford to buy a program and couldn't afford to be without it, or the organization dedicated to making people happy by not forcing them to buy stuff (http://www.piratbyran.org/)?
Okay, that didn't come out quite as I wanted it to but I basicly meant that the people don't want capitalist bastards suing them over intellectual property, they want stuff for free.
Also, I'd like to apologise to all capitalists. I don't think it's a bad thing, but when it's too much, it's way too much.
Arr, mateys!
Error: No error occurred
LOS ENGELES (Reooters) - Zee U.S. feelm indoostry oon Freedey heeeled a reeed by Svedeesh puleece-a egeeenst un Internet serfeece-a prufeeder es a mejur bloo tu Ioorupeun purecy ooff mufeees und mooseec oon zee Veb. Zee reeed ves cerreeed oooot oon Thoorsdey et zee Stuckhulm ooffffeeces ooff Behnhuff, Sveden's ooldest und lergest ISP, vheech U.S. cupyreeght prutecshun ixperts hefe-a cunseedered a hefee fur heegh-lefel Internet purecy fur yeers. Um gesh dee bork, bork! "Thees ves a fery beeg reeed," seeed Juhn Melculm, vurldveede-a untee-purecy oopereshuns durectur et zee Mushun Peectoore-a Essuceeeshun ooff Emereeca (MPEA), vheech represents Hullyvuud's mejur stoodeeus. Um gesh dee bork, bork! "Zee metereeel thet ves seeezed cunteeened nut oonly ifeedence-a ooff a purecy oorguneezeshun oopereteeng in Svedee boot ooff oonleene-a purecy oorguneezeshuns oopereteeng thruooghuoot ell ooff Ioorupe-a," he-a tuld Reooters. Um gesh dee bork, bork! Behnhuff, zee furst mejur ISP reeeded by zee Svedes veethuoot edfunce-a nuteece-a, ves hume-a tu sume-a ooff zee beeggest und festest serfers in Ioorupe-a, zee MPEA seeed in a stetement. Um de hur de hur de hur. Oothureeties in Svedee seeezed fuoor cumpooter serfers -- oone-a repooted tu be-a zee beeggest purete-a serfer in Ioorupe-a -- cunteeening inuoogh deegitel feelm und mooseec cuntent fur up tu 3-1/2 yeers ooff uneenterroopted pley, zee oorguneezeshun seeed. Bork bork bork! Melculm seeed oothureeties in Scundeenefiun cuoontreees hed beee relooctunt tu teke-a sooch ecshun in zee pest boot vere-a recently creckeeng doon oon purecy. Bork bork bork! Ebuoot 20 indeefidooels soospected ooff Internet purecy hefe-a beee zee tergets ooff smeller reeeds by Svedeesh oothureeties dooreeng zee pest munt. Zee serfers seeezed dooreeng zee oopereshun cunteeened a tutel ooff 1,800 deegitel mufeee-a feeles, 5,000 sufftvere-a eppleeceshun feeles und 450,000 deegitel oodeeu feeles -- emuoonteeng tu 23 terebytes ooff deta. Zee MPEA seys zee feelm indoostry luses $3.5 beelliun a yeer tu feedeutepes und DFDs suld oon zee bleck merket, boot it hes nu isteemete-a fur hoo mooch Internet purecy custs zee indoostry. Bork bork bork!
You're using her as bait, Master!
I'm starting to wonder if maybe the suing of illegal file sharers and, in particular, the suing of Sharman networks, may not be a good thing.
Follow my logic here, and in particular, I'm going to concentrate on Sharman networks, but the same also sort of applies to anyone accused of sharing files.
Sharman is basically being sued for providing the means by which people are illegally trading files. Thus, Sharman is likely going to be held legally liable for the actions of its users. In the same way that if I make files available on my machine and you download them illegally, I am really being held liable for your illegal actions.
Now why is this a good thing? Well, IANAL, but it seems to me this opens a terrific can of worms for other industries. By the same analogy, can we not now make gun companies legally liable for gun related deaths? Can we not make cigarette companies legally liable for smoking related deaths? I mean, really, it's the same thing isn't it? Holding the product supplier responsible for the actions of its users?
I certainly wouldn't mind seeing these two industries sued out of business. So, if some clever lawyer can make the coming precedents cross over into these industries and form the basis for some really major class action lawsuits, I might not see all of this as such a bad thing. I mean after all, why should big business have it both ways. Producers liable when it's in their interests and consumers reliable when it's in their interests. Surely we have to decide, as a society who's actually responsible. Either way, the consumers win, I think. Either sharing files (but not downloading them) becomes legal or cigarette and gun manufacturers are liable and thus pretty much out of business.
How was this done?
"Those innocent fun games of the hallucination generation"
OK people, this is a running joke and a scare tactic. If the population of England is about 52 million (according to a quick google search), and the latest round of suits targets 31 people according to the story, and if a mere 1% of Britons file share, the numbers look bleak.
52,000,000/100 = 520,000
520,000/31 ~= 16.7K
Hmm, what are the odds of getting hit by a bus? Now, if the revent Slashdot stories about Britonss being the largest group of downloaders out there means that there are more than 1% downloading, the numbers get worse for the industry.
Besides suing your customer base not being the brightest idea on the planet, just ask SCO, the odds of them doing anything appreciable are laughable. Look at eDonkey for example. The RIAA has sued thousands of users in the US, and it is putting such a dent in..... never mind.
This is a headline grap people, and with each headline they grab the tool gets less and less effective. In the US, rounds of new suits barely make a third tier story at HardOCP.
My prediction: News headlines, people fearing big brother, thousands of files purged. Millions shrug and go on with their lives.
Next round: Page 4 news headlines, people mildly nervous, hundreds of files purged. Millions shrug and go on with their lives.
Round 3: Covered in niche publications, no one gives a rats ass, tens of files purged. Millions shrug and go on with their lives.
Round 4: Niche publications have better things to cover, cattle mutilations and CIA microwave mind control lasers trump the latest file sharing atrocities. 7 files purged and a grandmother in Cardiff wets herself. Millions shrug and go on with their lives.
-Charlie
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is is a somewhat interesting development.
See my journal entry: Swedish ISP, on national television, promotes DRM
One of the employees of the Bahnhof ISP promoted DRM in his interview with Swedish television. It's like Alien vs. Predator. Whoever wins, the freeloaders or the overstepping lawyers, you lose.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
I figure in the end, the internet will look like this. An endless expanse of meaninglessness. Then, for brief moments, "content" will appear on some site or other. Any site producing "content" will be immediately devoured by ravening hordes of copyright lawyers, hackers, file sharer/collectors, wronged, starving artists, and average people seeking entertainment.
Oh wait, that's what it's like now.
According to the snopes story, they didn't change to KFC to get rid of fried or chicken!
Don't save Windows XP! http://www.petitiononline.com/jjw1xp/petition.html
the campain to "terrorize" ponten tell people to send "klapa snel hest" to him. It will translate to something like "pet nice horse" and is an inside joke on irc
the official representatioves for the artists asked the providers for the adresses of possible offenders. Naturaly every normal provider would say that they needed a court order to do that. When they went to court the court said: please come back with people who make loads of money of these copies. We are way to busy to handle this kind of stuff.
I am sure that if the court would hear that the persons would like to handle out of court, they would not even start it in Belgium.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
...wasn't the standard supposed to be that intellectual property owners were supposed to protect their own property? Has anyone noticed that from Sheryl Crow to Kiss to whoever, no one needs to follow that standard anymore? They can allow the RIAA to do it for them. Ditto for the movie industry with the MPAA. Ditto for the European organizations.
The courts here in the US, AND in Europe and everywhere else need to require these third parties to get the active participation of the property owners on an ongoing basis for each case, or butt the heck out. It is wrong for catchall organizations to do all the enforcement as they increase towards near governmental police powers on behalf of individuals and companies versus other individuals and companies, giving them an unfair advantage where the accused is more and more guaranteed to be stomped without a reasonable chance of defense.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
Alas, Swedish is not supported, but The Google translation looper is still lots of fun!
Lets start calling it by it's real name, Phonography.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Filesharing music increases CD sales, it is an organ of publicity just like radio.
_ United_Kingdom
/ 11/23-movies-downloading-judged-legal-in-france
Copying things for personal use is "Fair Dealing".
UK Copright Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the
Copyright was designed to encourage art.
But It is being abused to clamp down on music, by illegalising the Mashup and Mix and destroying Sample Based Music with exhorbitant Liscense Fees.
For many examples of why Copyright Cartels destroy Creativity read "Freedom of Expression" for Free http://kembrew.com/books/ - an excellent read that shows how Intellectual Property Laws are harming Progress and the Value it Creates.
Clamping down on the distribution of culture within a society will cause the well to dry up.
Do the Major Labels nuture talent? Do they provide music Eduation? No they steal Britain's Greatest Resource, tie it up with legal, and milk it dry, giving nothing back.
The Major Labels act as a Monopolistic Cartel, fixing CD prices, forcing artists into low paying contracts where they have no control over what they make and what it is used for.
Suing people is just a money grab, it has netted the American RIAA $1,000,000 so far and now the greed is spreading.
Sharing things is morally and ethically good, it enriches society and in this case increases the size of the music market.
Want to Protect your Intellectual Property from Unliscenced Commercial Exploitation and Want it to be Used by Other Artists - Use A Creative Commons Liscense.
http://creativecommons.org/
The Majors are set against it because they do not wish to relinquish control, their bloated business practices wouldn't survive one minute in a free market.
Here is a translation of a recent French case where the judge saw sense and let the Guy off.
http://www.audionautes.net/blog/index.php?2005/03
Peer to peer is the intended architecture of the Internet, Client Server is a hangover from when Bandwidth and storage was expensive - if these fools have their way the internet will break.
The European Union Copyright Directive (EU DCMA) has removed many of our "fair dealing" rights by the backdoor of DRM.
The UK Phony Society's recent press release eagerly parroted by the press are all spin how can they possibly sue 8 year old children for downloading things - They Can't They Are Lying and Bullying People into Coughing Up money they may have used to see bands or buy music.
I thought the most interesting aspect of this was hackers attacking these immoral corperations.
If hackers could destroy the RIAA botnets that would be increadible... hardly immoral and a better solution than just boycotting (Though that's what I intend).
"CD sales rocketed 7.6 per cent in the United Kingdom last year, according to Music Week. 121 million CDs were sold, excluding compilations.
r ocket_in_uk/
Music industry executives in the United States have cited falling CD sales as an excuse to intimidate music lovers and curtail ordinary computer users' freedoms in their pursuit of file swappers. Critics counter that sales typically follow macroeconomic patterns, and fall during a downturn in the economy."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/13/cd_sales_
Why are the Major Lables lying to every one?
To retain control? To overcharge? To keep small labels out? To make money from Lawsuits?
Or something more sinister.
For someone which usually does not like indie music, and has basically no musical hability whatsoever, I actually liked these.
What AUH has done is truly a necessary pain. In comparison, the damage APB has caused to the entire Internet community is much huge: We all suddenly realize that we are living in fear and uncertainty, wondering if one day someone is at the door for a raid. Well, you say, if you have nothing to hide, so what? But we DO have SOMETHING to hide. Either we have downloaded a song, a movie, a program; or we have a porno picture showing mature men and mature women (I won't mention otherwise), which is totally legal but still we want to keep that only to us. Then this APB can just say, look, this guy has got THIS, let's check him up. Sure, they don't find THIS on their list, but they find THAT. Who doesn't have something in his or her computer that he or she doesn't want to share these days? There's a skeleton behind every gardrobe door, someone once said. That's why this is so principally wrong. That someone can use totally false evidence against you but still nail you. By doing so, APB has dramatically increased its scope in search of pirates. Now almost everyone is in theory affected. By having so many visible and unvisible enemies, APB has done itself a disservice. They don't know what kind of people they are now dealing with. I won't be surprised that this guy H P (no name here in accordance with Swedish PUL) will soon find all his personal information online, address, telephone numbers, email address. A personal DOS is quite thinkable. You never know, maybe someone working in ISP, phone provider, tax office, whatever, will quietly leak out something about this guy and his fellows. And the damage is done. And how about his family, parents and friends still living in Kalmar? You don't need to do any harm, but once someone is totally naked in an information society, with all their info online, he is living among fears and foes, invisible but surely around. Let he and his fellows also experience what is fear in the air. Any extra-marital affairs? Any lovers or kids outside of the relation? Any tax fraud? Any cash stashed away in tax haven? (Well, I guess Hollywood and Sony pays well). Where does he do his shopping? Where does he live? Anyone ever spoofed his email address and send out illegal pornos and then filed with police? Smear campain, which HP has so far so enjoyed, can be used against himself. Has he provocated a crime by giving out bites of coveted music or programs? Then that is a crime in itself. One can hire bodyguards to lose privacy. One can change identity to lose convenience. That is the price of fear. But those facing the charges by APB, is there really anything to fear about? What APB provides to the police is only something like this: a computer with this IP has downloaded this and this and this, during this time. And the ISP can identify that IP to a certain subscriber. But the point is, how can the APB evidently connect this subscriber to that "illegal deed" from that IP? If it is a household with a couple with a child, who is to charge? You can not charge the whole family. And if no one remembers who was online at that time, who to charge? Can APB be sure there is no virus or worm hijacking the computer as a proxy with that time? Or if there is a WLAN, can it be someone else in the neighborhood who used your WLAN to download? How to prove at "that time" there is MAC filter or encryption in place to prevent this from happening. I don't know how APB can answer all the questions. And I simply don't see how APB can provice all the evidence in the court. How can they win? Above is simply fictive, theorizing how terrible life can be if everyone is living in constant fear and nakedness.
What AUH has done is truly a necessary pain. In comparison, the damage APB has caused to the entire Internet community is much huge: We all suddenly realize that we are living in fear and uncertainty, wondering if one day someone is at the door for a raid. Well, you say, if you have nothing to hide, so what? But we DO have SOMETHING to hide. Either we have downloaded a song, a movie, a program; or we have a porno picture showing mature men and mature women (I won't mention otherwise), which is totally legal but still we want to keep that only to us. Then this APB can just say, look, this guy has got THIS, let's check him up. Sure, they don't find THIS on their list, but they find THAT. Who doesn't have something in his or her computer that he or she doesn't want to share these days? There's a skeleton behind every gardrobe door, someone once said. That's why this is so principally wrong. That someone can use totally false evidence against you but still nail you. By doing so, APB has dramatically increased its scope in search of pirates. Now almost everyone is in theory affected. By having so many visible and unvisible enemies, APB has done itself a disservice. They don't know what kind of people they are now dealing with. I won't be surprised that this guy H P (no name here in accordance with Swedish PUL) will soon find all his personal information online, address, telephone numbers, email address. A personal DOS is quite thinkable. You never know, maybe someone working in ISP, phone provider, tax office, whatever, will quietly leak out something about this guy and his fellows. And the damage is done. And how about his family, parents and friends still living in Kalmar? You don't need to do any harm, but once someone is totally naked in an information society, with all their info online, he is living among fears and foes, invisible but surely around. Let he and his fellows also experience what is fear in the air. Any extra-marital affairs? Any lovers or kids outside of the relation? Any tax fraud? Any cash stashed away in tax haven? (Well, I guess Hollywood and Sony pays well). Where does he do his shopping? Where does he live? Anyone ever spoofed his email address and send out illegal pornos and then filed with police? Smear campain, which HP has so far so enjoyed, can be used against himself. Has he provocated a crime by giving out bites of coveted music or programs? Then that is a crime in itself. One can hire bodyguards to lose privacy. One can change identity to lose convenience. That is the price of fear. But those facing the charges by APB, is there really anything to fear about? What APB provides to the police is only something like this: a computer with this IP has downloaded this and this and this, during this time. And the ISP can identify that IP to a certain subscriber. But the point is, how can the APB evidently connect this subscriber to that "illegal deed" from that IP? If it is a household with a couple with a child, who is to charge? You can not charge the whole family. And if no one remembers who was online at that time, who to charge? Can APB be sure there is no virus or worm hijacking the computer as a proxy with that time? Or if there is a WLAN, can it be someone else in the neighborhood who used your WLAN to download? How to prove at "that time" there is MAC filter or encryption in place to prevent this from happening. I don't know how APB can answer all the questions. And I simply don't see how APB can provice all the evidence in the court. How can they win? Above is simply fictive, theorizing how terrible life can be if everyone is living in constant fear and nakedness.