Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Targets LAN Filesharing at Universities
segphault writes "The RIAA has sent letters to 40 university presidents in 25 separate states informing them that students are engaging in filesharing on their campuses using the local network. Apparently, the RIAA wants to get universities to use filtering software on their networks to detect student filesharing. The RIAA did not disclose the methodology they used to determine that filesharing is occuring on those local networks, but it probably didn't involve asking permission. The article goes on to predict that the RIAA will eventually try to get the government to require use of anti-filesharing filtering technologies at universities."
but it probably didn't involve asking permission
Despite the implications of this statement, what it probably really involves is paying off a student or two to sniff out and inform on filesharing activity, either by running RIAA apps or just manual searching. It wouldn't be the first time they've used this method.
I have more than one computer on my home network and I share music between all of them. Are they going to get me too? What is the law regarding file sharing on a private network? What if my girl friend copies my music from my laptop? Is that piracy?
fuvoo: watch something
So are the universities (and all networks, by extension) supposed to sniff every packet and look for "copyrighted material" so it can take whatever action the industry think is "appropriate"?
Perhaps every car should also have a sensor to detect speeding and automatically cut the gas?
Fuck the music industry. Their ever more desperate measures only mean they are painfully aware of how irrelevant they are about to become.
MUTE functions in such a way that it is excessively difficult to tell what user is sharing which files, but is still possible to get reasonably fast downloads.
The MUTE project: http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/
I don't remember, maybe it was Einstein who said the definition of insanity was to repeatedly do something and expect a different result. Is the RIAA insane?
This is cutting their (RIAA/Entertainment industry) future profits off at the source on a number of levels.
Also, it is so problematic to try and institute filtering in an academic arena. There are probably any number of legitimate ways and reasons to see file sharing on a college campus that would not be legal outside. This will force universities to layer artificial distribution mechanisms they otherwise could have handled with firewall policies. (All this at an added expense to universities, and eventually to the cost of an education.)
So, once again the music industry goes to the "we don't know for sure, but to be safe we're going to assume you're a crook" mentality. The RIAA needs to listen to clue.mp3.
and demand that Congress pass a law requiring every person with a social security number to purchase 5 DRM loaded cd's per month, and staple their receipts on form 1040 come April 15th. After all, the government requires us to support the insurance companies by purchasing auto insurance. Why not entertainment too? I mean, EVERYBODY is guilty of pirating music anyway, right?
When interviewed, the majority of congressmen said point blank that person to person "dormroom" sharing of music was fair use and in no way objectionable.
.. "in the news today the RIAA demanded that automakers comply with new requirements to prevent passers by and non-drivers from "illeagally hearing" music from car stereos which "by law" is only entitled to the owner/operator of the vehicle alone."
Further, the DMCA's notice and takedown only applies to the internet, not local area networks.
Any university complying with these bs "complaints" has to have the stupidest administration ever, and any claims made by the RIAA are now utterly specious.
What next.. "illegal sharing through car radios"?
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
You don't get it. The whole damned point is that it shouldn't be illegal. That the law itself is immoral. Your reactions are themselves disturbing to me.
You think copyright law is immoral? Do you mean the current laws on the books, or the idea itself that people can own the rights to copy things they produce? If it's the first, I (and most here) would agree; if it's the second, you need to do a reality check. You honestly think that if I produce something, through honest means and hard work, you should be able to copy and sell it without my permission? That attitude is damn disturbing to me.
Please note that I don't believe the current system is good. Copyright lasts far too long, has become monopolized by companies like the RIAA, and definately needs an overhaul. But I believe someone who creates something should have their work protected to some degree. If I write a novel, why should anyone with a printing press be able to turn out copies unless I allow them?
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
Most of the time when I read the modded up comments below the summaries, someone has already said everything worth saying... but for this paticular article it seems like even a lot of the the +5 comments are, well, crap.
I am a student at the University of Texas. One week ago our DC++ hub was shut down. This was unexpected and unprecedented. A few months earlier the school news paper even interviewed people with ITS who basically said they could care less about the hub. After the university received some type of a cease and desist letter, our school's ITS contacted the primary HUB admin, and long story short within less than 24 hours the hub had to shut down forever. Amoung other obscure sidenotes, they even ordered that the facebook group "Direct Connect Users Group" be deleted. My friends at Texas A&M have told me their hub is down right now too, similar story.
Both our colleges had hubs constantly sharing about 20TB of data, 24-7, with net download speeds of 1.5Mbps. Every TV show was on our hub within 4 hrs of airing. Adobe Acrobat 7 and Office 2007 were both readily avaialable before I could, not that I ever would of course, download them from private bittorrent trackers. The files were never corrupted, there was no risk of getting caught, and everything mainstream you could ever want was on the hub.
One huge appeal of the hub also was it's simplicity of use. 5GB share minimum was pretty much the only barrier to entry. I know friends who downloaded from DC++ who never heard of BitTorrents in their life, and for that matter, have asked me for help reinstalling windows. It was so simple and easy to use to the average non-geek that now that it has gone down people ask me what to do and give me blank looks.
So in response to every post about other alternatives to file sharing or otherwise really miss the significance of this, I think it is quite a significant win for RIAA.
Correcty me if I'm wrong, but providing a link to a bitTorrent client doesn't really have anything to do with the article. Or the summary. Or the Headline. FTFS - segphault writes "The RIAA has sent letters to 40 university presidents in 25 separate states informing them that students are engaging in filesharing on their campuses using the local network.
I am a student at one of the Universities that had our local DC++ file sharing hubs shut down. The hub was up 24-7, sharing roughly 20TB of pretty much everything. Students loved it because you could get almost any file that was available on BitTorrents with up to 1.5Mbps transfer speeds, and almost always at least 300Kbps. On BitTorrents, similar first release movies on public trackers often peaked at about 30Kbps download speeds. Now students still download the movies, using BitTorrent, it's just much slower because they can't utilize the LAN. As far as "download while you still can," these is no reason universities are going to stop BitTorrent downloads. Additionally, I don't think the RIAA even thinks it is significantly curbing piracy by shuting down LAN networks, it just knows the student have to go out into the more public file sharing arena, and RIAA at least theoretically has the ability to catch them then.
There have been rumours for many years of women who read slashdot. And I have come to tell you the truth, yes, in fact, we do exist.
And, yeah, the ex-boyfriend reads slashdot. So yeah, those rumours about male slashdot readers having girlfriends? Also occasionally true.
If the RIAA wants the university to filter their network to protect their copyrights and their bottom line then they should pay the university for all of the network equipment, bandwidth, employee/consultant hours, and any other expenses necessary to conduct the filtering. The mission of any university is to provide higher education and policing the student body so that a private industry organization, which is entirely external to the mission of the university, will not suffer from potential loss of profits is NOT the responsibility of the university. The question is not whether file sharing is legal, but rather to what extent the university can be compelled to shoulder the cost of protecting the intellectual property of someone else, especially in the expensive and escalating arms race between the RIAA and the file sharers. If the university makes a good faith effort to inform students in their acceptable use policy what is and is not acceptable use and complies with reasonable and specific subpoenas (subject to reasonable charges for research, copies, and other legal expenses that any other civil plaintiff would have to pay) the I would say that they (the university) have satisfied their obligation under the law. If the RIAA et al wants more extensive monitoring then they can shell out the $100,000+ for extra servers and network monitoring gear along with the consultants to operate it all and the university employees' time (billed at least $100 per hour for interruption of normal university related duties). They cannot compel us to pay to protect THEIR property, only the government has the power to tax. Anyway, no other private business gets anywhere near the cooperation from law enforcement at the expense of the tax paying public and still they complain. The FBI should be traking down the identity thieves, terrorists, serial killers, and other really nasty criminals...not wasting their time busting copyright infringers on behalf of the entertainment industry. The RIAA should get off our campuses and they should take their craptastic "music" with them.
LAN oriented simple VPN that could be shared between known friends .
http://www.hamachi.cc/
Very simple, works well, even clear across the world network neighborhood works
if you tweak your firewall and port forwarding requirements if using NAT .
Ex-MislTech
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
it's the RIAA. A dinosaur whose right to exist has expired.
In my capitalism books, what is obsolete has to vanish to the market can concentrate on material that is valuable. Now, capitalism has been turned upside down. Obsolete companies and market structures are kept artificially alive with laws.
Roll back about 100 years, when the automobile came into existance and hackney coaches became obsolete. Remember the laws that look so stupid today? The "man waving a red flag that has to walk in front of automobiles" and similar rubbish? Same shit.
What did it serve? It was annoying then, and it's something we can only shake our heads at today. Who'd come up with a STUPID law like that?
Well, now you have it all over again. Instead of traffic laws, now it's copyright laws that come up with harebrained ideas to protect a business that is essentially dead.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.