Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Bay Shuts Down Tracker, Switches To Distributed Hash Table

think_nix writes "The Pirate Bay has shut down their BitTorrent tracker. Instead TPB is now using Distributed Hash Table to distribute the torrents. The Pirate Bay Blog states that DHT along with PEX (Peer Exchange) Technology is just as effective if not better for finding peers than a centralized service. The Local reports that shutting down the tracker and implementing DHT & PEX could be due to the latest court rulings in Sweden against 2 of TPB's owners, and may decide the outcome of the case."

72 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. In a related question by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How do you get rtorrent to load a magnet link (preferably by pasting it into it's window) ???

    The docs aren't too clear on this. I've tried and then pasting the magnet link at the "load>" prompt. But no luck.

    1. Re:In a related question by sopssa · · Score: 4, Informative

      Magnet link is an URI, your browser is supposed to send it to it directly.

      It's interesting that TPB takes this stance now when it has become too expensive and hard to keep their trackers working, and while having legal issues shot against them from everywhere. DHT and PEX have been around for years with no significant improvements. This isn't a change because "the technology is ready now", but because the ship is sinking.

    2. Re:In a related question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      rtorrent is a console client, so there are obviously problems with the idea of your browser sending it directly.

      Anyway, it appears that rtorrent doesn't support magnet links. There's an open bug on trac for it: http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/ticket/955

    3. Re:In a related question by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 5, Informative

      Of course this is in response to the legal situation, but DHT is a better method provided users get their clients configured correctly and ports forwarded. Your comment implies they are switching to an inferior technology which is certainly not the case. It's far more fault tolerant and less prone to bottlenecks, it simply requires more from the user. As more sites switch to this method, swarms will increase in size and throughput with less liability for all. I'm glad this finally happened.

      Congrats, you've successively cut off a head from the hydra.

      --
      brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
    4. Re:In a related question by Reziac · · Score: 3, Funny

      Any port in a swarm....

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:In a related question by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is it illegal to download a list of instructions on which chunks to use ( and in what order ) to create a copyrighted work from your family photos? :)

      That's just the same old "but it's just random 0 and 1 on my hdd, it's not the movie, it just happens to have the same order in bytes!". No matter how you try to circumvent laws with stupid technical jargon, if it's clear you are or your intention is to violate copyright laws, you wont get far with such jargon.

    6. Re:In a related question by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Especially since megaorp lobbyists can just bribe the lawmakers to make torrent files illegal, regardless of content.

      BTW let's stop calling it "copyright". It's not a right. It's a government-granted privilege of monopoly... same as what they granted Comcast and Amtrak. Nothing more

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  2. Distributed Post! by Lissajous · · Score: 5, Funny

    F......

    1. Re:Distributed Post! by russlar · · Score: 5, Funny

      i........

      --
      Anybody want my mod points?
    2. Re:Distributed Post! by gomiam · · Score: 2, Funny

      Part 1 of the torrent failed checksum. Redownloading...

    3. Re:Distributed Post! by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Funny

      Seriously guys, can you PLEASE SEED!!!!

    4. Re:Distributed Post! by clambake · · Score: 5, Funny

      Crap, stuck at 99%!

    5. Re:Distributed Post! by clambake · · Score: 5, Funny

      R.......

    6. Re:Distributed Post! by Rigrig · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...s.

      --
      **TODO** [X] Steal someone elses sig.
    7. Re:Distributed Post! by sopssa · · Score: 5, Funny

      ....t.....

    8. Re:Distributed Post! by pHus10n · · Score: 4, Funny

      C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!

    9. Re:Distributed Post! by selven · · Score: 4, Funny

      C-C-C- COMBO BREA.......

    10. Re:Distributed Post! by sopssa · · Score: 5, Funny

      piece 443 failed hash check

    11. Re:Distributed Post! by Kryptonian+Jor-El · · Score: 5, Funny

      I"VE BEEN STUCK ON 98% FOR 3 DAYS!!!!!!1111!!!1!! SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED.

      --
      All your 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 are belong to us
    12. Re:Distributed Post! by gravis777 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Refreash your tracker list, I have been seeding for days. I think the tracker server may be overloaded with all these slashdot people hitting us. The original seeder should really have enabled DHT on this torrent.

    13. Re:Distributed Post! by ciderVisor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Goddamned leecher !

      --
      Squirrel!
    14. Re:Distributed Post! by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Funny

      Checking hash... 420 Not Found

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    15. Re:Distributed Post! by mister_playboy · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you like your computers old, but your women young, eh? :)

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    16. Re:Distributed Post! by chaos95 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Fist?

  3. Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Kirin+Fenrir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Proving that technology is always one step ahead of copyright law.

    --
    Caffeine is my anti-drug!

    Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
    1. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by sakdoctor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure you can.
      The decentralized service doesn't have that central server weakness, so the best you can do is blast sacrificial individual users with law suits.

      After that, it's a case of mass disobedience vs prohibition laws, because people are not going to stop sharing any time soon.

    2. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by SethJohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Whereas the tobacco companies have lost several huge lawsuits, I don't recall any magazines getting sued for running ads for cancer-causing products.

      Seth

    3. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by AlamedaStone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's more like setting up a site called drugdealers.com where people post advertisements on where to buy drugs. You can defend your "but the site is only giving address where to buy drugs, I'm not selling any!" all you want, but it wont hold up in court.

      Terrible metaphor. It's more like setting up a site called streetaddresses.com where people post addresses of many places. You can defend your "but the site is only giving user-posted addresses, I'm not responsible if some of those addresses contain illegal materials - nor can it reasonably be my responsibility to check every address that's listed on my site to determine what, if any, illegal activities are taking place" all you want, and it might hold up in court. Or it might not, but it sure as hell seems like a reasonable defense to me.

      In before "copyright infringement is theft", moral majority outrage, "if you have nothing to hide", etc

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    4. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Mathinker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > where people post advertisements on where to buy drugs.

      X% of which are for legal OTC drugs sold in drugstores and 100-X% of which are for illegal drugs. You're probably right that if X is small enough, the legal system will rule against the site. But if X is large enough, probably not.

      All this is academic in the case of TPB, because of the "in your face" way they reacted to takedown requests. Nothing will save them.

      However, a site which is polite, officially bars illegal torrents, but errs in favor of accuracy vs. efficiency about reacting to takedown requests could very well replace TPB in functionality while making it a lot harder for the courts to effectively deal with them.

    5. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by DangerFace · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I personally wouldn't demonize TPB. While this kind of sharing isn't the nicest thing, if the companies who are being effected had been decent about their cost structure people wouldn't have resorted to this in the first place.

      To be honest, I'm starting to see the whole argument about filesharing redundant. If the cost structure was fairer I would most certainly spend more money on it. However, if I walked into a shop and bought everything I had downloaded over the last year, say, we end up with this:

      ~1 000 albums, at £15 each = £15 000 (assuming cheap albums balance out rare items - I know for a fact the market value of some of my Nina Simone stuff would be in the hundreds of pounds, but I'm choosing to assume that they are outliers and can be ignored)

      ~250 films, at £10 each = £2 500

      ~50 full seasons of TV shows, at £20 each = £1 000

      TV shows as and when they come out in their country of origin = a little over £1 000

      ~30 games, at £35 each = £1 050

      Adding up to a grand total of £19 550 ($32 851.38). So assuming I didn't have to pay rent or bills, buy food, or have any way of watching this stuff / listening to this music / playing these games, I'd still need a significantly increased household income. And I haven't really listened to / watched / played loads of that stuff, I just like being able to think "I want to watch x genre" and having it there, and when someone comes round and I discover they've never seen WarGames, come on, I need to be able to show them...

      The point being, I spend most of my disposable income on media of various sorts, but that doesn't mean I can afford everything I want - and if I can have it, why not? No one would be getting my money if I didn't 'steal' it, so the only person losing out would be me. The whole argument has been rendered redundant in my case by me not having a huge pile of cash to hand over in the first place. The RIAA/MPAA/whoever can take me to court for however many millions of dollars if they want - they'll get a lower percentage of my income awarded to them than I hand over voluntarily.

      tl;dr: my girlfriend gets annoyed at how much I spend on media, when I should pay bills, and I still pirate more than 95% of the stuff I own. Meh.

    6. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Voyager529 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      There are several. First and most realistically, Google has a whole lot more money to spend in court than TPB does. Second, also from a completely practical standpoint, I'm sure that the number of judges/juries who have use Google are orders of magnitude above the number that have used Pirate Bay, so familiarity is on Google's side. Third, Google has complied with legal takedown notices, whereas Pirate Bay has basically said "go walk the plank". Google has shown good faith when asked to, while Pirate Bay has not. Fourth is a little common sense: Google indexes a huge amount of stuff online, and if there are pirated materials available online, then by nature, some will end up on Google. While Pirate Bay might also host game patches, linux distros, Creative Commons licensed artwork, and other legal materials, when their search cloud shows people searching for theatrical releases, Top 100 music, and Adobe Photoshop (i.e. stuff that's obviously copyrighted), it's going to be a rough day for the lawyer who's defending Pirate Bay. Finally, there was/is a community on TPB that helped "cleanse" "bad releases" and/or help highlight "good releases", while Google has no such community in place specifically for pirated material.

      To further the GP's example, no one is going to press charges on you because you have a phone book which happens to include a few drug dealers in it (it's a statistical inevitability). Any jury would laugh that out of court. On the other hand, if you've got a little black book which is largely filled with drug dealers, even if you also have some of your friends' numbers in there, if half the people in your black book get arrested, you're going to have a pretty lousy day in court if your only defense is "it's just a list of phone numbers, who doesn't have one of those?" - the DA's response will be "yes, I do. To get into MY phone book, you have to be a family member, close friend, or business contact. 96% of the people in your Rolodex are known drug dealers, Mister Anderson, and I've got a dozen witnesses saying that they got the numbers of everyone else we've arrested from you. How do you explain that?"

      I'm no fan of the RIAA by ANY means, nor am I entirely convinced that TPB deserves to be sued out of existence from a legal standpoint. I am saying that they are among the biggest public torrent trackers, made it no secret that they had warez/music/movies for download, and not only did they refuse to comply with the copyright holders, but they were very well known for replying to takedown notices with public replies that usually amounted to "go shove it". Outside of Google being the biggest search engine, they have very little in common.

    7. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The other point is that TPB was notified about specific people in their "little black book" being criminals, responded to that (indicating that they have received the notification, and understood it), and continued to aid them in their activities.

    8. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 2
      Was the quote from the GP you included in your post there because you didn't understand what it said? If so, I'll help you answer your question. The GP said (and you quoted this):

      I spend most of my disposable income on media of various sorts

      "My disposable income" can be termed a pile of cash. From this we know that he has a pile of cash, though admittedly it is unclear if it is a large or small pile. However, we can ascertain that it is at least a small pile.

      "Media of various sorts" can be described as anything that you watch/listen/read.

      Replacing the GP's terminology with your own (hopefully you understand your own terminology) we get:

      I spend most of my pile of cash on anything that you watch/listen/read.

      "Spend" in this case is used to indicate that the GP is buying something with his "pile of cash", specifically, he is buying "anything that you watch/listen/read". So we can further translate the GP as follows:

      I buy [with] my pile of cash anything that you watch/listen/read

      We can see that there are still some words not yet replaced. However, it is out of my power to further translate. Perhaps your question will never be answered.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    9. Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Splab · · Score: 2

      For me it isn't about the money, we pay quite a lot more for content here in Denmark (music is £18-20, rest is about twice what you guys pay). The reason why I pirate stuff is due to the fact that I get a better product by downloading rather than buying.

      If IP sales where market driven they would remove all those fucking nag screens (FBI warning? wtf?) , they would drop the price to something more affordable, they would start distributing the stuff worldwide faster - yesterday I grabbed top gear, today I watched heroes, bot of which wont be on TV around here for another year, top gear wont even be avalable to me legally since the channel who has the rights to show it don't want to do business with my TV provider.

      What the IP companies have been doing is insisting on making extreme amounts of money on content in a cash strapped environment, and when their business plans fail, the cry foul rather than adapt, well bu-fucking-wooo...

  4. Those guys are playing it dangerous! Hashtable? by NoYob · · Score: 5, Funny

    First "Pirate Bay" and torrents and now Hash?!? What next, cocaine?!

    --
    It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
  5. Still guilty by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Still guilty by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hold on there, hoss. It's not that simple -- if we were to define our terms that simply, then ski mask manufacturers would be facilitating the illegal procurement of liquor store cash register contents. The law needs to operate on very black and white terms, and things like the Pirate Bay are operating in very new, and very gray, legal territory. I am nowhere near enough of an expert to comment on how this will specifically affect the legal standing of the Pirate Bay, but I will say that such sites operate on a knife edge of legality -- and any case the legal system can possibly raise against them will depend on an extremely specific set of conditions. If not, Google would be every bit as guilty as the Pirate Bay (as would every single ISP on the planet). What this means is that if the Pirate Bay sufficiently distances itself from the actual illegal activity, then there is no way they can be legitimately prosecuted. We saw the same thing happen with Kazaa (where the industry types decided to go after individual users instead).

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    2. Re:Still guilty by hitnrunrambler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Still guilty (Score:2)

      by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Tuesday November 17, @09:01AM (#30128264)

      So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.

      Don't you mean:
      "Boss, I know them Duke Boy Pirates is guilty! They've gone from bootlegging trackers to bootlegging bootstraps. In the eyes of the law (and flash) they are facily-tatin' the illegal distribution of moonshine. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, with them outlaw haircuts and that fancy car."

    3. Re:Still guilty by purpledinoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then aren't ALL ISPs also facilitating copyright infringement? Isn't Cisco providing the network technology for copyright infringement? Isn't Intel providing the ability for consumers to download illegal material from the Internet? Isn't AMAT, a semiconductor tool manufacturer, guilty of providing Intel with the tools to make microchips for copyright infringement?

    4. Re:Still guilty by BarMonger · · Score: 3, Informative

      ..at least not in Scandinavia..

      What do you mean by that? You are aware that "Scandinavia" is actually three different countries with three different sets of laws, right?
      Here in Denmark we do not have the same laws as the Swedes do. And since Norway isn't even a member of the EU, some parts of Danish and Swedish law is very different than Norwegian law.

    5. Re:Still guilty by Xest · · Score: 5, Informative

      The real problem is that under standard interpretation of Swedish law they weren't in breach of the law in the first place. The only reason they have been found guilty is because of a corrupt judge who made up a false interpretation of the law to suit his goals and to find them guilty.

      So on one hand this view that they're in breach of the law is incorrect as it falsely assues judges are infallible, which of course we know full well they are not, but similarly I don't think this will be much help because as the creative industries got away with installing their own judge once and ensuring his position and stance was upheld (even though he did not follow Swedish law as it is written) and so realistically they'll just be able to do it again.

      Effectively, for the TPB guys the law doesn't matter, because whether they stay within it or not a corrupt court system is allowing them to be found guilty regardless. If anything I'd say that they have done this because it's possibly harder to shut down and perhaps easier to move around than a full blown tracker. I don't really blame them for just playing a game of cat and mouse instead, if their own country has failed them in initially allowing an unwarranted police raid due to foreign pressure, then not giving them a fair trial by allowing a judge with a blatant conflict of interest to preside of their trial, and then protect the judge when they follow the proper process for handling such conflict of interest- again, all because of pressure from foreign corporate interests, then I think it's perfectly justified for them to shun the law.

      I'm sure they're also perfectly aware of the consequences, some call this stupid, but then, that's the difference between people willing to risk their freedom for something they believe in and people who just whinge about things on sites like Slashdot I suppose.

    6. Re:Still guilty by Cyner · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Didn't the US Government directly fund the development of the global file sharing network?

      --
      FreeBSD.org - The power to serve
    7. Re:Still guilty by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's unfortunate that the quote I want to make right now ("The tree of Liberty...") comes from a founder of the very country which put such pressure on the Swedish government.

      I suppose the great always have further to fall.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    8. Re:Still guilty by AlamedaStone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not a matter of legality, it's a matter of public perception. TPB is looking like they're slapped on the wrist for doing something, and their response is "okay, we'll do that instead. Catch us now!". There's no better posture to adopt to attract the ire of the law, which, incidentally, does seem to operate on black and white more often than not...

      It sounds like you may be confusing a court of law with the court of public opinion. If TPB is told they're doing something illegal, and their response is, "okay, we'll do that instead. Is it illegal now?", they may well attract the ire of individuals - but if they're obeying the letter of the law they won't be (legally) penalized.

      In fact, if they are following the law and they get guilty verdicts anyway, it is a huge win for them - they are illustrating inherent injustice and justifying their value to the public.

      (IMO, YMMV, IANAL, WWBBD, etc)

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    9. Re:Still guilty by AlamedaStone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the eyes of the law (and flash) they are facily-tatin' the illegal distribution of moonshine. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, with them outlaw haircuts and that fancy car."

      I agree with this. I think that if they look guilty, and have a name that makes them sound guilty, they should be treated as though they were guilty of breaking the law.

      Details like, "are they actually guilty" then become totally irrelevant! They are being treated as though they were guilty, so they must be!

      Besides, they have "pirate" right in their name! Just like those IP thieves over at Puzzle Pirates, or those hired goons in Pittsburg.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    10. Re:Still guilty by Sancho · · Score: 2, Informative

      It seems unlikely that Jefferson was referring to the ability to facilitate massive amounts of lawbreakers in his comment.

      I mean, the forefathers put copyright into the Constitution for a reason.

    11. Re:Still guilty by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The real problem is that under standard interpretation of Swedish law they weren't in breach of the law in the first place.

      How do you know? Because they've told you so? Are you a Swedish lawyer qualified to judge that they were in the right, and the judge in their case ruled wrongly? (personally, I do not consider myself qualified for that; any arguments that I may advance on this are purely my own views)

    12. Re:Still guilty by cfalcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Jefferson WAS a lawbreaker. He participated in a revolution. And the copyright in the constitution was designed to expire- unlike the one we have today, which is unconstitutional.

  6. Peer ants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pirates are like ants and always find a way around obstacles and tend to attract more pirates to use the same path.
    Removing a single tracker, no matter how widely used it was won't deal much harm. This may lead to the removal of other trackers in the future, but peer exhange and DHT are pretty much a good subsitute in my opinion.

    1. Re:Peer ants by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In other words, the Internet is seeing copyright enforcement as damage and automatically routing around it.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  7. Are they? by beatsme · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The question then becomes: does the md5 hash of a file, being linked to a swarm of peers with the files themselves, become symbolic of the property that is being pirated ("stolen") in a convincing enough manner to implicate the hashtable host? It seems to be a stretch.

  8. Re:"Just as effective"? by icebraining · · Score: 2, Informative

    So lower the maximum open connections in your client. The problem with router is the available RAM for the NAT table. I've set rtorrent to only use 100 per torrent and not only the router holds it nicely, as the connection seems to be more optimized towards actually downloading instead of peer detection, so I get higher throughput.

  9. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    As far as I know, the tracker has not been shut down but merely moved to OpenBitTorrent. There are various posts on SuprBay confirming that fact. The (PirateBay) trackers themselves were shut down since august and OpenBittorrent is now the official tracker. I remember reading another post where someone did some research and ran a few traces, which confirmed (at the time) that the trackers were running on the same IP address. Here is another post worth reading.

    As for OpenBitTorrent, it has been 404-ing since I tried to open that website. However a google cache exists as early as November 14th. On the cached page it is explained that the tracker operates solely on the info hash and thus knows absolutely nothing about the contents itself. Presumably in an attempt to elude copyright cops. Adding new torrents to that tracker is as simple as adding the tracker address to your newly created .torrent file. The tracker will automatically start tracking the info hash when an announce is made.

  10. And the hydra... by Taibhsear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    grows yet another head. Good luck trying to keep up, MAFIAA.

    1. Re:And the hydra... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Poor analogy. In this instance, the hydra has no head. Each cell in its body relays information between adjoining cells, as requested from cells further down the chain. Destroying one cell, or a bunch of cells, does not kill the hydra or stop the messages.

      From now on, nuking the hydra from orbit really is the only way to be sure...

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  11. If DHT and PEX are by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " just as effective if not better for finding peers", then why did they wait for the ruling to change over?
    why not just switch over a long time back??
    especially if they are better..

    1. Re:If DHT and PEX are by grazzy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because you cannot authenticate a user to the tracker. It makes ratios and private sites much harder to operate. DHT is more like gnutella in that sense, if you share it everyone can access it without having a good trackratio of seeding.

      However, the private sites will just continue to run their own trackers I suppose, there's no problem for them todo that, however for the public large ones this could very well be the holy grail.

      TPBs core problem is that they are more or less being punished for "helping" people make copyright infrigments. I dont think their charges will go away over this during the current political climate in sweden (more privacy laws, more company friendly politicans and less civil liberty). It is their intent that is the problem, and that intent is just as much now as before to help people infrige on copyright.

      However I wonder just how the swedish juridicial system are going to prove that the people currently being prosecuted really are the ones behind The Pirate bay since they seem to have moved all systems and IP assets overseas. I guess we'll just stick them in jail for being pains in the ass and go back to being good pawns in the much larger conspiracy to turn the entire EU area into a padded and walled commercial zone where money rules all aspects of life.

    2. Re:If DHT and PEX are by gravis777 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because it just recently started being build into the majority of trackers. Also, you cannot do authentication, so sites that require registration and control upload / download rations no longer work. In fact, DHT will probably make registration sites obsolete, unless you want to be sure to release something to a very select group of individuals. I think the main reason for sites taht required registration is to prevent overload on their trackers.

  12. Thank you MAFIAA ! by BESTouff · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Thanks to the Swedish equivalents of the MAFIAA, TPB has been innovating and now we have a more solid technology for P2P exchange. Let's have a few more iterations like that (I see no reason for it to stop nowadays) and soon P2P networks will be completely stealth except for the bandwidth they consume.

    Thank you guys, in the name of technology.

  13. Napster et al court cases... by nweaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the reasons why BitTorrent didn't suffer the legal fate of Napster, Kazaa, etc is that BitTorrent only handles data transfer, not search, and has significant noninfringing uses.

    Having trackerless torrents however doesn't help the noninfringing uses, only infringing uses. (If its non-infringing, just host a tracker damnit!), thus trackerless client features start to get very dangerous from a legal perspective for the developers.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Napster et al court cases... by Seahawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Doesn't trackerless torrents cut down significantly on the traffic in the tracker/bootnode end of things? So it gets even cheaper to distribute big amounts of non-infringing data?

      So what is the downside for someone like Canonical to start using trackerless torrents for ubuntu? As far as I can see they would save on tracker traffic.

    2. Re:Napster et al court cases... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having trackerless torrents however doesn't help the noninfringing uses, only infringing uses. (If its non-infringing, just host a tracker damnit!)

      Why?

      If there's a way to make legal distribution more robust and able to tolerate problems (e.g. slashdotting) on your node, why wouldn't you want to use it?

      If the advantages of decentralization are irrelevant, then you don't need bittorrent (tracker or not) for non-infringing use. Just host a ftpd dammit!

      The MAFIAA is supposedly out to fight piracy, but it's not like the MAFIAA is the only entity in the universe that has ever tried to interfere with information distribution. Nor are people who try to interfere with information distribution, the only thing that ever causes failures. People are going to want reliable data transfer regardless of whether or not some people happen to want reliability for copyright-infringing purposes.

      TPB is going down for piracy, but the fact that it can be shut down at all, overshadows the relatively minor piracy issue. If force can be used against trackers, then everyone (pirates, other governments, Falun Gong, Operation Clambake, Voice of America, you, and me) benefits from trackerless torrents. The pirates-vs-MAFIAA battle is unimportant and uninteresting, except perhaps as a technology driver and microcosm-scale stage. However that turns out, people are always going to need freedom from governments, other bullies, and even "natural" phenomena ("oops the server's down, because a court ordered it / because the admin fucked up and installed some malware / because apparently I tripped over an ethernet cable as I was leaving the building and can't drive back there until tomorrow / because the power went out / because an asteroid hit that city").

      Look at any historical record of computer problems, and "shutdown by the MAFIAA for piracy" is a relatively rare explanation. Question: What do you do about the other 99.99999% of cases? Answer #1: learn from your mistakes and don't let the problem happen again. Answer #2: learn from your mistake and make a single node failure not matter. I guess I know which basket you put all your eggs in.

  14. Still confused by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 4, Informative

    It looks like someone is still confused there about copyright treaties like the Berne Convention.

    It is perfectly legal to download and re-distribute the copyrighted material when the copyright owner gives permission. MPAA, RIAA, Disney / Microsoft don't want that discussed. And when formerly copyrighted material has its copyright revoked, either by the rights holder or by the passage of time. For example, the early Elvis recordings are now in the public domain in many countries because the copyright on that particular edition has expired.

    Further, in some countries, fair use extends to copies for personal use. So while it may give you the warm and fuzzies to Repeat After Bill his every word, consider that the Internet is a global network and not just limited to your block.

    What is likely at the heart of the matter is the issue of whether decentralized communications networks shall be allowed by control-freaks in various companies or their subservient governments. If it's not centralized, it's hard to track or censor.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  15. Still guilty? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why does the court system care how the data is distributed? If I still point my web browser to TPB, search their website for Movie_HD_1080p, and then it gives me some sort of seed/value, then in the eyes of the law the are still providing the same service. Is this any different from a law standpoint if they switched from an ftp server to an http server to a https server? The basic premise being "still providing access to copyrighted material."

  16. Let's apply some p2p logic to this. by plasmacutter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Magnet link is an URI, your browser is supposed to send it to it directly.

    It's interesting that TPB takes this stance now when it has become too expensive and hard to keep their trackers working, and while having legal issues shot against them from everywhere. DHT and PEX have been around for years with no significant improvements. This isn't a change because "the technology is ready now", but because the ship is sinking.

    DHT and PEX support has been very slow to creep in to clients. It makes sense from a user popularity and user access perspective to resist switching fully to these systems until external pressure forces the issue, otherwise swaths of the community will get pissed and smear your site as refusing to conform to basic standards.

    This is basically how every major jump in p2p technology has been implemented. P2p is forever a reactionary technology.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:Let's apply some p2p logic to this. by Asmor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Funny. P2P reacts to pressure and changes, porn is frequently on the cutting edge, but traditional media just sticks its fingers in its ears and chants "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

    2. Re:Let's apply some p2p logic to this. by Asmor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're kidding, right? Porn is responsible for a lot of the innovation on the internet people take for granted today.

      The big thing that comes immediately to mind is video technology, and streaming video in particular. I'm not saying that Youtube wouldn't exist if not for porn, I'm just saying that Youtube would have come quite a bit later.

      See also: http://www.pcworld.com/article/155745/thank_you_porn_12_ways_the_sex_trade_has_changed_the_web.html

  17. Re:"Just as effective"? by Zerth · · Score: 3, Informative

    You may need to greatly reduce the length of time an entry is in your router's NAT table. Some badly-configured routers will keep an entry for a whole day.

    Also, as others have said, reduce the number of connections in your client, but that won't necessarily help if your node is popular, because denied connections still count.

  18. Re:"Just as effective"? by asdf7890 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the ISPs get their way and force NAT on everyone then P2P can be shut down pretty fast.

    Most NAT arrangements can be pushed through, at least of UDP traffic, using STUN and similar methods.

    Many ISPs are moving towards NAT more because that is the least-investment-now way to get around the supply of IP addresses being harder to come by, rather than any desire to break P2P applications anyway.

  19. posted this about 2 years ago by Danathar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I predicted this was going to happen (no torrents, just DHT hashes). Even posted it on slashdot. It will be interesting to see how the courts see it.

  20. End users by Hatta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, as an end user do I have re-add all my torrents into my client?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  21. mldonkey? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Oh oh that looks like the final death blow to mldonkey :(

    Why oh why must it die? It's the only bittorrent/edonkey/ftp/http download manager for headless/remote servers there is. And it’s freakin’ great software.

    Please, is there anyone who knows a replacement? Or who can write OCaml? We need to save it! Or at least have a replacement that can do the same things.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.