Slashdot Mirror


BitTorrent: Sysadmins to face the music

An anonymous reader writes "Two sysadmins in Australia are set to get sued by the music industry after the federal court ruled that Melissa Ong and Ryan Briggs did ignore calls to remove Web sites that were in breach of copyright. All major music labels in the country have banded together to take action against the duo's employer Swiftel, an ISP which allegedly hosted BitTorrent file-sharing hubs (which contained pirated music etc)."

10 of 373 comments (clear)

  1. This just in... information is free by nokilli · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't mean to sound like a pot-smoking hippie here but it is simply the truth.

    What do the BitTorrent file-sharing hubs do in response? Buy a little time shuffling across different portnums until the fix is in to support tunneling protocols, that's what. There may be a limited number of port numbers, but there are literally an infinite number of ways of translating one sequence of bytes into another sequence of bytes.

    BitTorrent over a gaming port. Why not? You gonna block gaming ports? Have fun at the support desk.

    Swiftel, et al, responds by investing massive amounts of resources in detecting the protocol in real-time, so as to differentiate gaming use from BitTorrent goodness, and wins.

    For a day.

    The response that encrypts the stream, stegonographically, arrives a day later.

    By putting up obstacles you only feed innovation. The tunneling protocol is going to consume more bandwidth of course, so now everybody is going to be thinking about how to compress the stream even further than it already has been.

    By putting up barriers, the censors only provide the incentive to create new technologies to overcome them. Create distributed systems that allow trusted peers to authenticate with one another. Verify the quality of content being requested. Allow for protocols that defeat sniffing and snooping, possibly by making it so that existing protocols must be scrapped.

    Swiftel, China and the MPAA are doomed to fight this war forever, losing all the way, because essentially they are playing the role of adversity while the peers are playing the role of biological organisms.

    Adversity fuels life.

    Swiftel, China and the MPAA are fueling piracy.

    It's a beautiful day. Why? Because this shit is FUN.

    Bring it on, and thank you.

    1. Re:This just in... information is free by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't want to sound "i told ya!!", but piracy is an uphill battle for the music and movie industry, because of one piece of technicality Bruce Schneier is always so fond of pointing out (rightly so): you cannot stop copying digital data if you can read it.

      This whole thing comes from way back, its called the Neumann principle, which states that the executed programs are part of the data stored. This simple, but brilliant principle is a good thing for people wanting to excercise full control over their system, and it is probably a bad thing for people working with backup systems or in high profile security areas (think mission critical webservers).

      My point is, that the RIAA cannot boo and make this go away with legal measures, it will be always possible to copy data while a Neumann-principle based computer exist, i'd hazard the guess that such computer will exist for a while...

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:This just in... information is free by RickPartin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is a short history of the P2P revolution that proves your point.

      1. Napster lets you download any song you want. You can only download from one person at a time. Downloads frequently died. No resume download feature. Downloading full albums was frustrating.

      They kill Napster

      2. Kazaa emerges and lets you download any song you want, plus warez movies or anything else. Downloads are spread across many people. Very reliable. Ok speeds. Pausing and resuming is possible. Downloading full albums is still a pain.

      They kill Kazaa by flooding it with bogus files.

      3. Bittorrent comes out and now instead of downloading a single song you can grab the whole album in the same amount of time.

      Each time they kill off a technology the next generation is always much better. I can't wait to see what is after bittorrent.

  2. Common carrier by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, what the hell...

    Their actions are just like if the KKK sued a bus company because they "let niggers aboard". Who cares that you hate Blacks? It's not up to the bus driver to decide who can enter and who can not -- in many jurisdiction, the driver is even not allowed to deny service to a customer if that customer isn't disruptive. And in this case, the web sites who used these ISPs didn't even commit any crime themselves -- they merely provided an index for illegal activities.

    Following this logic, they may start persecuting bus operators because they don't strip search every passenger. You know, that old lady may be a hidden courier for a dope ring...

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  3. Re:Instead of sharing non-free music by Yjam · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sharing free music is good okay. But sharing pirated music is good too.

    Let me explain how I buy music:
    1/ Look on forums/online music stores, ...
    2/ Randomly choose artists whose music seems interresting 3/ Download the artist(s)' full discography
    4/ Listen
    5/ Then, if I like 1 song. I just keep it and delete te rest; if I like an Album, I go buy it.

    Well, if I can't donwload music freely on the internet will I continue listening to music? Hmm... probably yes. The music I already have on CDs (lots of it) and will buy new CDs maybe one a year instead of one a week.

    I *hope* I'm not the onl one to D/L music in order to choose whant I want tu buy... but hell... I *doubt* it. But anyway, too much protection can also have a vicious impact.

  4. Re:Instead of sharing non-free music by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is one of the occasions when i hate living in the country i live in atm. In Hungary, there is no free music, by the law.

    How is this possible? Well, the law wants to "protect us" from big labels bullying people into non-paying contracts or giving music away free. Thing is, this is almost a century old law and is fundamentally broken in today's world. It works like this: the musician cannot excercise his own right to declare music public domain, because there is a for-profit organization called Artisjus which steps up, and "demands" money after every musical work. In today's reality this killed the amateur music in Hungary, because of the following:

    An amateur musician makes some nice music, and puts it on his homepage for free download. The thing gets noticed, people are downloading it and Artisjus notices it aswell. Artisjus has a legal(!) right to collect around 100HUF ($0.5) after every downloads. That's right, from the artist. Then, Artisjus takes its fees, spins things around, and in the best case, the artist gets back 35-40 HUF as his "profit" from that original 100 he payed to distribute his OWN song he wanted to put into public domain. This is a good example how laws can be f*cked in some countries.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  5. Re:Instead of sharing non-free music by cyxxon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That sounds even worse then the GEMA in Germany. IIRC from my days as a guitar player in a hardcore band (read: not many sales, not doing it professionaly) I rememeber that you could choose not to become a member of the GEMA if you saw no gain from it. But then, you either had to make your recordings public domain (since else no club had the right to play them) or negotiate with every club/DJ yourself.

    This insecure position led to weird situations where we had to fill out forms with the names of all songs we were going to perform on a night for sending them in to the GEMA, because the club wanted to be on the safe side, but we had some checkbox there on the paper that said that all songs were non-GEMA-controlled...

  6. Re:The problem isn't piracy... by warez · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With anonymizing proxies such as The Onion Router (tor) and I2P that utilizes encryption and Bittorrent clients that are supporting decentralized trackers which make P2P unstoppable, good luck pinning the blame on ISPs. The ISPs already have a tough enough job trying to provide reliable connections and allocating bandwidth without customers complaining. Now clueless music labels think they're going to scare piracy out of existance by suing ISPs, the provider of the infrastructure. That's about as illogical as trying to sue the state for building roads everytime there's a drunk driving accident.

    This is just a taste of what is heading over the horizon. The Internet with anonymizing protocols and encryption has opened up a Pandora's Box, and what's inside is a reflection of human nature itself.

    Perhaps it is the evolution of our species to be interconnected and sharing ideas freely, instead of functioning at the same level of design as the laws that try to enforce an imaginary system of credit. This extends beyond the music and movie industry, and raises questions as to how governments are going to control the minds of its citizens in the age of a globally interconnected community.

    Bittorrent is only a foreshadow of what is coming around the corner for our species' evolution, with humans interconnected via cybernetic implants, who decides what meme have the most value?

  7. IANAL but... by Decker-Mage · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I have 3 co-lo's which have individual domains, so far. Per the RFC, I dutifully set up the Postmaster addresses. Now, fortunately, as a free service my hosting service is providing SpamAssassin on each of these (and any other) domains that I have hosted on my co-lo's. Every day I see a ton of crap that SpamAssassin has marked as SPAM, some of which may be in the same category as one of these supposedly legally binding e-mails. I don't look at them; I don't read them; I send them right to the bit bucket.

    Now they are saying, at least in Australia, that these are legally binding documents? Ya think?! IANAL but I have a real problem with this. The last time I looked legal notices were supposed to be on paper, not in the form of bits down the cable. This doesn't even begin to address the issue of legal liability for the ISP/hosting provider that does take action on one of these e-mails and it turns out that the e-mail was either fraudulent or in error. Sheesh, what a can of worms.

    I do know one thing. For simple self-protection I am so not going to host anything other than something I myself create, and even then I'm probably going to end up in software patent hell, knowing my luck. So much for the Internet age. It was sweet while it lasted.

    --
    "[I]t is a wise man who admits the limits of his knowledge or skill, and that pretending either causes harm." --Terry Go
  8. Re:Heavy handed, but it is their right by fuzzybunny · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the UK, any 'ISP' is responsible upon a legal order to prevent illegal activity on their systems and network. If they don't then they are in breach of the law.

    You got it right and used two important words/phrases.

    1. "ISP" != sysadmins at the ISP.. ISP = legally authorized representatives of ISP, ISP management, whatever.

    2. "legal order". Not emails, not phone calls. In most of the world this takes the form of a subpoena, a court order, visit by a duly authorized officer of the law, notarized & witnessed document, whatever.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage