Slashdot Mirror
Newzbin Usenet Indexer Liable For Copyright Infringement
An anonymous reader writes "The world's most popular Usenet indexing site, Newzbin, has been trounced in London's High Court by the movie studios. Held liable for the infringements of its users, later this week Newzbin will be subjected to an injunction which will force it to filter out illegal copies of movies from its NZB index. From the article: 'Newzbin’s help guides were referred to in the decision. They state that the site can help people find what they're looking for, "whether that be obscure music, tv shows, games or movies. Think of us as a TV guide, but we're a guide that applies to Usenet." ... Newzbin has members called "editors" who help to compile reports on material to be found on Usenet. Newzbin's own documentation was used to show that the site encouraged editors to post links to movies. The verdict notes that to assist editors useful links to IMDb and VCDQuality are provided, the latter being useful to provide information about "screeners."'"
The first rule of fight club is don't talk about fight club. Well, unless you're The Pirate Bay.
Time to migrate to a new protocol. What's next, FTP?
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Finally usenet showed up on the radar.
This is bad!
Time to look into p2p via i2p etc.
I always liked the social aspects of sharing via p2p.
1. Don't talk about Usenet.
2. Don't index Usenet.
This might lead to less people complaining about rar files in their torrents.
Isohunt is treading the same line, you can go to Isohunt's main page and read up on the legal fights. Much of it has to do with the perception that it is actively aiding users in finding or distributing illegal content. It's the equivalent, here in Chicago, to the old Maxwell Street market. Everybody knew if you lost your hubcaps, you went to Maxwell Street to buy them back. But as long as the street organizers themselves kept up some semblance of actual legit commerce, they city turned a blind eye.
http://home.netcom.com/~cowdery/maxwell/mamoser.html
In this case, Usenet contains what I affectionately call a "Rared Sale" (get it?) - where everything is less than a quarter. In fact, it's free! And as long as we all remember the First Rule of Usenet: Nobody talks about Usenet, then it's all fine. Apparently, these blokes forgot that rule.
But as usual the cart is put in front of the horse.
I could take my house off of every map in existence.. and you'll still be able to find my house if you've been there.
If you don't going to go after illegal content, go after ILLEGAL CONTENT! If the content is there it will be found.. no matter how many signs and arrows to it you remove.
Here we go again..
A: Someone should go after (insert_search_engine)!
B: No, that's silly. (insert_search_engine) is a common carrier!
C: Negative. Common carrier status applies to ISPs.
D: Well, fundamentally, search engines should be common carriers and get protection.
E: Who cares? You people at Slashdot make me sick. You cover for the pirates. Why don't you respect copyright.
F: Copyright is too long. Take it back to a reasonable time, then people won't pirate like this. 10-15 years max.
G: Streisand Effect.
There we go, got most of my bases covered.
Just because it's a movie doesn't mean the MPAA owns it. Did the help guides specifically say they help you find MPAA owned/copyrighted movies, or just movies in general? I'd hate to think the whole world has forgotten that a "movie" itself is an art form, not just an MPAA dropping subject to fees and copyrights.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Nice try, MPAA.
Please show me one non-MPAA owned/controlled movie company that has ever lobbied
or even attempted(*) to change the minds of politicians or those in power.
(*) using money as its the only language they care about.
The more you tighten your grip, Shapiro, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
Nice try, MPAA!
Splintering the internet by language(check) ban of proxies(in the works) usenet targeted for destruction (suspected)
Money and bought politicians will strive to plug any holes in the internet beyond government control.
This is why adhoc wireless is so important.
I switched to a paid Usenet service because it was more "private" than torrent. Does this mean I'm going to have to back to BitchX and CLI to get movies?
Loading...
We will get you pirates and prove that Global Warming is a hoax, once and for all!!!
Either that or we'll finally kill off Usenet - win-win, either way.
That is all.
What's your point? Lobbying is irrelevant to the ownership of rights to a movie.
so I need a replacement.
Anyone?
Why do you advocate whimsically breaking the law? Shouldn't you advocate pushing for change, instead?
Simple question:
And of those movies, how many are being downloaded that are not being distributed on your service without the permission of the copyright owner? What proportion? Would it be a majority?
That's all a lawyer has to think to ask.
As far as I can tell from the limited information available and still pending the final injunction details, this judgement only applies to movies and not any other content that may or may not be indexed on Usenet.
At least the judge showed sense in ruling that the MPA couldn't get an injection banning the publishing of content that they didn't hold the copyright to; I know they like to think that they control everything, but sometimes reality gets in the way.
Did the help guides specifically say they help you find MPAA owned/copyrighted movies, or just movies in general?
Which is a meaningless distinction when pretty all of them (I'm sure it would be safe to say 99.9+%) are from MPAA members. I can't tell if you're either extremely naive or just intentionally stupid. This is almost as laughable as when everyone tries to make it seem like bittorrent is only being used to transfer Linux ISOs and public domain movies/music.
But...but...they're just sharing Linux ISOs and public domain movies!! Pay no attention to the fact 99.9% of the listings are for movies from MPAA members!
Whats next? Rapidshare, megaupload etc... Funny how there are so many sites outside of those as well... What a waste of time and money... The best way to get people to do something is to tell them they can't...All this litigation is working well for piracy..
you know you can fry stuff putting things into things that dont like the things you put into it...
All of these responses are invalid. This has to do with the fact that Usenet indexing services are agnostic to the content being indexed (I.E. They are not biased toward copyrighted material vs. non-copyrighted material).
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Time to get our asses up out of our computer chairs and fight back!
Over throw the government! Over throw the corporations! Fuck these idiots!
Visit my Forums?
So they are invalid because it points out for all to see the huge whole in your argument? Besides, anyone who has been to Newzbin can clearly see that there is a huge bias towards indexing copyrighted material. Or do you actually have proof to the contrary?
or - why are people are so stupid.
If you write about breaking the law on your site, you are going to get nailed soon or later.
We've seen that again and again - its not that they are overlooking you, its that THEY are overworked and haven't gotten around to you yet.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Not all movies are illegal. Some don't contain "objectionable content". Some - mostly the kind I'm rediscovering - have elapsed the protection of copyright.
What sites like Newzbin do is provide a central repository for content owners to search for infringing content. If I had my book/movie/video game being pirated, believe me, I would find sites like this very helpful in shutting down the uploaders. At least, those within the relevant legal jurisdiction.
Even the police like an anonymous tip. It's almost as if the content cartels *WANT* you to pirate their content, so they can then sue you for ridiculous amounts of money. (Why get 99 cents a song, when you can get statutory damages of a few hundred thousand dollars?)
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
The wrong way to go about basing your business around illegal stuff would be to, say, have meetings about how everything you're doing is completely illegal and then sending your meeting minutes to the ISO auditors. That always leads to questions like "This bit here about where you're illegally benefiting from copyright infringement... what's that about?" It goes downhill from there.
If you're uncomfortable being compared to Bernie Madoff perhaps you should consider a career in something less illegal. The rest of you, only have meetings about your illegal stuff in the bathroom with the water running and don't keep minutes of those meetings! For fuck's sake... This isn't rocket science people!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
He's a whore, he's a whore
forever more a whore
he's a whore, he's a whore
slurping down MPAA semen with fervor
he's a whore, he's a whore
he wants to get with J-Lo
but instead he gets rush limbaugh
he's a whore, he's a whore, he's a whoooooore!
(sing it to any show tune you like)
So they are invalid because it points out for all to see the huge whole in your argument? Besides, anyone who has been to Newzbin can clearly see that there is a huge bias towards indexing copyrighted material. Or do you actually have proof to the contrary?
There would only be a bias towards indexing copyrighted material if the ratio of [copyrighted indexed]/[copyrighted available on usenet] is greater than [non-copyrighted indexed]/[non-copyrighted available on usenet]. Otherwise they are just faithfully indexing what is there.
Track your TV Shows with your iPhone - FREE
Thank you for the suddenoutbreakofcommonsense. +1
So they are invalid because it points out for all to see the huge whole in your argument? Besides, anyone who has been to Newzbin can clearly see that there is a huge bias towards indexing copyrighted material. Or do you actually have proof to the contrary?
1) No, they are invalid because the indexing services are UNBIASED. Stop trying to spin the argument. I'm being factual here, I'm not trying to persuade.
2) "...anyone who has been to Newzbin can clearly see that..." This is the same bullshit wordage I hear on the news. Again, I'm not trying to persuade your opinion of what content actually IS on Newzbin. I'm arguing that it isn't Newzbin's fault. They are an indexing service. It is the users themselves who upload the copyrighted material. The users are responsible for the law breaking. Not the medium.
---
If this was actually enforceable, why not go after TDK, Maxell and Sony for selling 100-CD/DVD-R spindles? I mean, seriously, who really uses 100 CDs/DVDs for anything BUT copying RIAA music and MPAA movies?
Right? Right??
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Defrauding people is and should always be illegal. Communicating ideas to another person should never be illegal, even if the ideas you are communicating to another person are not yours.
If these guys wanted to openly discuss something that should not be illegal, that's fine.
This whole copyright protection debate is just corporate-sponsored Prohibition for the 21st century. It's unenforceable without totalitarian government control.
The reason that NZB's even exist is that large files uploaded to Usenet get broken up into a ridiculous number of small fragments. It then becomes a chore to locate and reassemble all the pieces.
Bandwidth and storage capacities have increased tremendously over the years that Usenet has been around. Why do people who operate NNTP servers still impose such restrictive limits on file size?
"Hi, my name is Mark and I'm a member of the Noob foundation. I would really, really, really like a website that provides me with the Warez (War-rez). I have money for friends."
Are you for real AC? Who the hell under 50 writes like that? On Slashdot of all places?
Use a search engine, and scene release (whatever that is) indexing site. Newsbin was overrated.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
Because file transfers aren't absolutely reliable. With small file sizes, most of the parts make it from server to server, and people already have a bunch of ways of dealing with a little bit of missing data (use more than 1 provider, par2, etc.).
I imagine the fact that a change would favor new users and irritate (some/many?) established users is also a factor.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
"music, tv shows, games or movies"
public domain, creative commons, gnu gpl, etc.
why is there this presumption that everything out there is under a restrictive license. the big media monopolies are going the way of the dodo. who wants to watch a bunch of propaganda. instead people are focusing on liberally licensed art, documentaries, educational and historic materials, how-tos, important info on death camps of the NWO, etc.
Actually, I think that's an argument in favor of larger post lengths. The less pieces there are, the less filling in you have to do, and the less PAR file downloading you'll need to do to support it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Just because it's a movie doesn't mean the MPAA owns it.
The MPAA is a trade association. It doesn't "own" anything." Members are drawn form the "big six" studios"
20th Century Fox
Walt Disney
Sony Pictures
Paramount (Viacom)
Universal
Warner
But you'll most likely discover the independent studio has signed on to the MPAA's rating and title registration services. You can't copyright a title, but you can protect it by contract.
I guess it depends on how the servers handle a bad transfer; if they discard incomplete files, larger files will carry a larger penalty, if they just post the partial file, there shouldn't be much difference.
I suspect inertia is a primary factor.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Encouraging disrespect for an unjust law is an important stepping stone to abolishing it. You don't fight the system by working within the system.
Actually, you are spinning the argument by misrepresenting the parent's point.
You are arguing that the application software is completely agnostic. This is true, but ultimately irrelevant. The software wasn't sued, Newzbin (the company) was.
The parent is correctly arguing that while the application software is completely agnostic, the people running that software knew damned well what that software was indexing and, in fact, pointed it out explicitly in their user guides and marketing as a feature.
The
All anyone would need to do is simply encrypt header titles that are only viewable in specific programs correctly
Then they cant filter them.... and you know they dont want to filter them anyways ;)
First rule about Usenet... dont talk about Usenet.
Until now, I'd never heard of Newzbin. Now I know about this "usenet" thing you speak of, I will investigate.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
This is what instructions you'll get from anyone given that message:
1. Buy a gun
2. Point the gun at your head
3. Pull trigger
(Jneavat! Qb ABG ybnq gur tha.)
Bullshit. You're the type that violates the law only when it suits you. Have you ever publicly promoted something for the greater good? Have you ever mailed reasonable concerns to your representative or those in public office? Even PETA members do more for their cause than you. You're the type that gives us programmers/IT a bad name; thinking we are somehow innately gifted and more intelligent than those around us, our statements and actions never requiring an explanation because they are "just right."
So where is that response from your Congressman? Oh, that's right - you deleted it.
The Usenet? That thing still around?
Even if you get caught downloading copyrighted material this is equivalent to buying counterfeit copies from the street (well except you're not paying for it). In that case the MAFIAA can't get thousands of dollars from you as you only made one copy for yourself, unlike in torrenting where by downloading you also create copies for others.
So the worst case scenario is you get a fine plus a slap on the wrist, but nothing like the ridiculous settlements those college kids were forced into ...
Right?
Is it really the software makers' responsibility to make sure users only upload non-copyrighted material? Do you have any idea how much manpower that requires? Just ask Youtube. The USER is the one who 'pulls the trigger', not the indexing software maker.
Oh, and please reference where their user guides explicitly said they indexed copyrighted/illegal material.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
We are losing.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Oh, and please reference where their user guides explicitly said they indexed copyrighted/illegal material.
You mean other than when they had a category called "warez" which is a term for pirated software?
I'm a pretty big pirate, and I have spent money to pirate things before. I've bought Rapidshare accounts, and such, so clearly my pirating isn't derived from my lack of will to pay anything. However, due to ridiculously high prices, DRM, and other annoying things that occur during my purchase (or as someone wittily noted, my "rental"), I am encouraged to pirate. I spend roughly $100 a year on tickets to movies at various theaters. I LOVE going to the movies. But I'm a college student with somewhat limited funds. I can't afford to get a ticket whenever I want to see a movie. So for some movies, I pirate and stay home. Does this take away money from the studios? Maybe, but I suspect my piracy has lead to a net gain for many producers and artists. If a better method of seeing movies was introduced, I would pirate less and spend more money that would go towards the creators and publishers (movies are expensive to make!). I would like to see some sort of membership at movie theaters that would allow me to see more movies without depleting all my funds. I would be happy to spend much more on media if the experience was better. I remember downloading some tracks from iTunes years ago, and after noticing how long it took to download individual tracks, I pirated them instead. The iTunes tracks came encumbered with DRM. The pirated tracks were DRM free and higher quality. I don't care if the big music studios go under. A microphone, a guitar, etc don't need big studios to reach large audiences these days (hell, even in the past really). Movies, on the other hand, aren't easily produced (especially movies like Avatar) and are often costly. Instead of treating me like a criminal, treat me like a goddamn aggrieved customers and I'll open my wallet to you again, and more often.
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
If you don't like the law, change it! Feel free to start a career in politics to change the machine from the inside. I'm sure many political careers started that way!
If you don't want to do that, find some way to promote your ideas while working inside the status quo! Start a company that collects garage bands from around the world and presents them on the Internet, finding a way to pay those artists enough that they're happy, pay you enough that you can keep doing it and make their songs available to everyone for free or cheap. I'd sooner put $10 in a tip jar for a garage band in Japan, Germany or Zimbabwe than buy another song from the RIAA or go to another movie from the MPAA. Go on then, implement what they fear the most. Others have tried, but so far none of them have been successful.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?