Slashdot Mirror


RIAA MediaSentry, Dead In US, Is Alive In Australia

newtley writes "Disgraced and discredited 'private investigator' MediaSentry, fired by former patrons Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music, and Sony Music and their RIAA, may be dead and buried in America, but it's alive and well, resurfacing in Australia where it's once again plying its trade, probably under new management. 'I currently (but not for long) reside at a student dormitory... in Brisbane, Australia,' says a p2pnet reader, continuing: 'Yesterday I got called into the Managers office because the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons. Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'"

26 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. Angels and Demons by Andr+T. · · Score: 5, Funny

    Damn, you could at least lose your dormitory for a movie worth watching.

    --

    Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    1. Re:Angels and Demons by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Damn, you could at least lose your dormitory for a movie worth watching.

      Even worse result:

      <RIAA> See? Illegal file sharing is why Angels and Demons did poorly at the box office and got an average rating of 38%! It isn't the economy or quality, folks, our formula has never failed therefore it must be the file sharers! </RIAA>

      --
      My work here is dung.
    2. Re:Angels and Demons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah the illegallity of sharing movies is a gros affront to human dignity. Downloading free movies is exactly like what Rosa Parks did. Shithead.

      Maybe if Rosa Parks could download the movie she wanted to watch, she wouldn't get the bus to go to the movies in the first place.

    3. Re:Angels and Demons by canajin56 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the fuck is wrong with Slashdot??? The guy saying that your right to download movies for free is the same as your right to sit on the bus regardless of your skin color, he gets a +5 and hailed as a god among men, and the guy who says that's a retarded comparison is modded Troll. Every last one of you honestly believes that downloading Angels and Demons is exactly the same thing as refusing to give up your seat on a bus because of the color of your skin? Honestly? HONESTLY?

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    4. Re:Angels and Demons by BobMcD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is true. Likewise, just because laws can be broken doesn't mean that every crime is a protest.

      What Ms Parks did was absolutely, positively, NOT in the same league as what this student did.

      To claim so diminishes both Civil Rights and the arguments against Intellectual Property.

      There are things in the IP realm to protest, but the 'right' to download Angels and Demons is NOT among them.

    5. Re:Angels and Demons by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Funny

      In my day most people got thrown out of university accommodation for having wild parties and trashing the joint or for dealing drugs.

      How things have changed.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    6. Re:Angels and Demons by Tikkun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe that people have a right to read, listen, watch, remix, rebuild, modify, reverse engineer and otherwise contribute or take part in our culture. Obviously laws around the world today don't match my beliefs, and many people disagree with this statement.

      I believe that a commons, a public library by and for everyone is a better model for creation and distribution of content than one that is limited by an unnatural monopoly. That everyone stands on the shoulders of giants and no man is an island of information.

      The student that got kicked out of their dorm is not Rosa Parks. They are likely not oppressed in their day to day lives, just the victim of an IP scheme that has outlived it's usefulness.

    7. Re:Angels and Demons by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Informative

      Every last one of you honestly believes

      You need to look up how slashdot's moderation system works before you make dumb comments. It takes three moderators to make a comment +5. I'm pretty sure there are more than three users of slashdot other than yourself.

      After you educate yourself on how the moderation system works, you may continue to make dumb comments.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    8. Re:Angels and Demons by CoolCalmChris · · Score: 5, Informative

      My wife loses hers soon because the Movie Industry is laying off heavily.

      Sorry to hear that, but if you think she's getting laid off because people are downloading what they can't afford to buy (ten dollars for a non-matinee ticket?) then you've had a little too much Kool Aid.

      If the actors and executives voluntarily took a pay cut and redistributed the wealth a little bit so people could keep their jobs and possibly float the studios through this recession, I wouldn't see the film industry as being ridiculously top-heavy and greedy. I might even give some credence to the MPAA screaming "We're getting robbed blind!" every time they get near a reporter.

      For the record, I'm not trying to be an apologist for people who choose to download copyrighted material, but at the same time I don't make any excuses for the business model the entertainment industry is fighting tooth and nail to preserve either.

      Something to think about.

  2. Not that sympathetic by cyber-vandal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You chose to break the law and were punished for it.

    1. Re:Not that sympathetic by Andr+T. · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It seems he got a damn fast judgement. And a damn fast judgement done by a private company.

      Does anyone remember 'Judge Dredd'? 'I am the law!!!'

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    2. Re:Not that sympathetic by oahazmatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't really see too much room for debate when the accused states the matter as simply as "...a result of me downloading Angels and Demons". I don't read this and feel that the person is genuinely feeling remorse for what was done, only for getting caught.

      --
      Those who believe the Internet is private,
      find their privates are on the Internet.
    3. Re:Not that sympathetic by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not having read TFA, I'm assuming that he was actually kicked out of his residence for violating some sort of agreed upon terms of residence/bahaviour which he did admit to violating. If it's because he broke copyright law, there should be at least some sort of due process. The universities in North America have been amongst the few that have generally stood up to RIAA bullying tactics. Sounds like a different ball game in Australia.

    4. Re:Not that sympathetic by vivaoporto · · Score: 4, Informative
      Had he committed an actual crime (as in criminal offense) and stole the DVD on a store, he would probably only get fined

      "Infringement notices not only provide a prompt and direct response to shop theft under $600, they significantly reduce the cost and paperwork associated with prosecution. The ARA would therefore expect that authorities continue working to reduce shop theft and improve deterrence with firmer enforcement measures," Evans said.

      From July 1 2008 police will be able to issue infringement notices for seven common offences, including shop theft of less than $600. The infringement fine for this offence will be two penalty units ($227). Guidelines for the use of infringement notices for this offence provide that police will consider factors such as the person's criminal record, whether the matter appears to be part of a wider criminal operation and whether restitution is an issue before deciding whether to issue an infringement.

      Notice that even in the case of an actual criminal activity, police will take many variables in context before to punish.

    5. Re:Not that sympathetic by chabotc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      +1 on this sentiment.

      He was punished based on an accusation, not on being found guilty.. that's skipping over an incredibly vital step in the justice system.

      Really that's only a small step away from how 'justice' was administered during the 'Dark Ages'. I thought we had left that behind us, but apparently having lawyers and money means you don't have to bother with such pesky details anymore. More so because we're not talking of a fine or something small, but of evicting someone!

      Oh while we're at it: What if someone accused you of having *something* illegal on your computer, be it a non licensed picture, an bit of software you didn't obtain legally, or some content you've downloaded. Would you be so happy to instantly loose your home without any independent parties being involved in judging what's true and appropriate ?

    6. Re:Not that sympathetic by tsalmark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have a strong feeling that he admitted to the act (I won't call it a crime). That in a school setting is enough for action. I expect that if he had said "no not me" then he would still have accommodations and probably a lot more scrutiny of his internet actions than before.

    7. Re:Not that sympathetic by TheSambassador · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not to mention that the severity of punishment is a jump away from the severity of the offense.

      Yes, downloading movies should be illegal, but why are the charges so incredibly much more than shoplifting the DVD out of a store? If he'd done that, he'd probably still have his dorm room.

    8. Re:Not that sympathetic by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How do you people know he didn't get due process? How can you even assume that? Considering the fact that he confessed to this on a public website, I'm thinking his conversation with the manager went something like this:

      Manager: Hey, kid. I got this letter here from a company called MediaSentry claiming that they traced a download of Angels and Demons to your PC. Is that true?
      Kid: Yes.
      Manager: GTFO.

      That's due process, right there. The kid decided to use his study time to search for, download, and presumably watch a movie which he wasn't entitled to download, and now he's crying because he has to use his study time to find a new place to live.

      The only thing newsworthy about this story is the fact that MediaSentry is operating in Australia, the kid who got what he deserved is not the story.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  3. Boo hoo.... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""

    Wah?

    I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Boo hoo.... by langelgjm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

      He must have missed the part in the AUP where it said dorm management would evict you for violating network policies based on the accusation of a private third party.

      Seriously, WTF /. Half the comments are along the lines of "you deserve this." Sure, he was downloading infringing material and violating the AUP - cut off his internet access. But throwing someone out of a dorm?

      Hint: what's to stop a creative student who is pissed at someone from spoofing an e-mail from MediaSentry to the management, and having someone else thrown out?

      The real ire should be directed at the management for throwing someone out of housing for violating network policies. What next - run an open access point, and you get expelled? Download a song, and your landlord throws you out of your apartment?

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
  4. Stupid replies ignoring the point. by apathy+maybe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As expected, there are a large number of replies by people who didn't even bother to read the summary. (Or, have poor reading comprehension, or even both, I guess.)

    The submitter is not the same as the student.

    Anyway, the point is, MediaSentry is still "alive", and still sending out automated messages.

    Now it seems that the student admitted to downloading the file ("as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons"), which sort of screws over any real complaint they may have had.

    Personally, I think it's disgusting that the manager paid any attention to the "generic copyright infringement email" at all. Seriously, if I were in that situation, I would delete the email and forget about it.

    I wonder, who is MediaSentry acting for in this situation? Does that company know that MediaSentry is doing this? Do MediaSentry have the right to sue on behalf of that company?

    And, is MediaSentry keeping track of these emails and watching for responses?

    --
    I wank in the shower.
  5. Punishment does not fit the 'crime' by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I put crime in quotes, because I believe it's only a civil infraction (although, I don't know much about Australian copyright law). In any case, getting kicked out of a dorm room for one 'count' of copyright infringement seems a little harsh, no? I mean, they could have started by just cutting his Internet access for a couple days or a week or something.

    I mean, I really fail to see how it is even *legal* to kick someone out of a dorm room/apartment/etc for copyright infringement. Don't you guys have any tennants' rights laws in Australia?

  6. Re:let the punishment fit the crime by rhsanborn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, not in this case. If the dorm manager had evicted him for scratching the paint, it's a direct issue betwene the manager and the student. This, on the other hand, is the student bringing issues down on the dorm via legal issues with a third party. It looks like the dorm doesn't want to deal with fighting legal battles that aren't it's problem. The student likely signed an acceptable use policy, and so long as the student admitted fault or there was acceptable level of evidence, there shouldn't be a problem. The only issue would be blindly evicting based on every letter sent to the dorm management. It doesn't look like that's the case given the admission of downloading the film.

  7. Due Process by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""

    Wah?

    I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

    Um ... where's the due process. A third party, which has been discredited in another country and fired by the copyright cartels there because their ability to track offenders has been so abysmal and inaccurate, has made an accusation. One that, based on their track record in the United States, should be taken with a mountain of salt.

    Based on that accusation, someone has been evicted from their home at a time when they should be studying for exams. As far as I can tell, there's been no disciplinary due process, no hearings, no opportunities for appeal, just a summary eviction with no opportunity for the student to put their case forward. Maybe s/he is guilty. Maybe his/her roommate is a prick and used his equipment to do something stupid so they wouldn't pay the price. Maybe someone else did it entirely, and spoofed his IP address. Or maybe, like in so many cases in the US that the company had to close their doors, no one in the dorm was involved at all, and they're barking up the wrong tree completely.

    Doesn't matter. Summary punishment has been meted out, on the barest of accusations. That is a problem, the student's guilt or innocence not withstanding, and if I were considering sending a kid to university, that's one school I would avoid quite possibly wasting my hard earned money on.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  8. This doesn't sound like MediaSentry's style by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This doesn't sound like MediaSentry. In this case they actually located an actual download. That's not MediaSentry's style.

    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  9. BZZZT by Zordak · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know almost nothing about Australian law, but in the U.S., downloading a copyrighted work without a license is a copyright violation, and in some cases may be a crime. For civil copyright infringement, the law does not care whether you actually knew you were infringing the copyright. So you absolutely are the one who has to check for this.

    I suspect Australian law is similar.

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.